PBT, Episode 55; TVUSD Board Meeting, July 2025, ft. Cole

In this episode Danny sits down with Cole to discuss the July Board meeting, the conduct of the board members, and our perspective on how things are going as parents of the district and regular citizens in the community of Temecula California.

Episode Transcript

(00:04):
You ever wonder what is the truth?
Three things cannot be long hidden, the sun, the moon, and
the truth and the truth. All right, so we have some new

(00:35):
listeners now that we are on thelead network.
Same stuff, same content, same people.
We're going to be doing just video now and we're going to be
on YouTube. We're going to be on, what's the
other one, Rumble. We're going to be on Rumble much

(00:55):
more platforms, but you could still find us in audio only.
That's not a problem at all. To our new people that we may
have tuning in and wondering whowe are, I just want to give you
an introduction. My name's Danny Molina.
I live in Temecula. I'm a dad out here, and I'm an
advocate for parental rights. I started this platform because

(01:17):
I got involved in the school board and I felt like our school
board at the time wasn't being given a fair shake about what
exactly we were doing and what was going on.
So I wanted to originally start a platform to speak to the local
community, to really fill them in on what's going on.
I felt like I'm a dad, this stuff matters to me.
Why is it that KTLA can come in,spin a story on what happened

(01:41):
the next day that completely misrepresents what it is parents
and community members actually want?
So that kind of evolved into talking with people.
And I speak to people who I don't necessarily agree with.
This is a free speech platform. I'm a United States Marine.
I did nine years in the Marine Corps.

(02:02):
I believe in free speech wholeheartedly.
I sit across from people who saythings I don't agree with, and I
don't push back on their ideas much because it's not my place
to tell them how to think. Just like I don't believe it's
theirs to tell me how to think. And at the end of the day, I
think a podcast is intended for the listener to make that
decision. So that's what we do.

(02:23):
We sit here and we talk about local stuff, we talk about
cultural things, and we talk to anybody.
This is basically a free speech platform, which is where we came
up with the name Point Blank Truth.
So yeah. Danny Molina.
Hey, guys, this is my face. Good to see you.
If you've been with us, thanks for sticking around.

(02:43):
And if you're new, we hope that we can give you fun and engaging
and interesting content. Cole.
Hi, I'm Cole Everyman. I'm also a local parent here in
Temecula. I'm also a volunteer and an
advocate, special needs parent, to be more specific.
I am also a Marine Corps veteran's daughter, so we share

(03:06):
that in common as well. I've been a part of this
movement for a long time, mainlybehind the scenes.
When I see something, I say something, and it's just gotten
to a very polarizing setting here in an environment in our
community, and we're just pushing back against that.
And the biggest thing that I'm always going to stand for is

(03:26):
truth. So that's what we're here to do.
Hell yeah. All right, so today we're going
to talk about our July school board meeting, the regular
meeting. The Tuesday 22nd.
And you and I will be meeting once a month, preferably the
Thursday after the meeting to discuss the meeting, correct?

(03:49):
And then and then our content onthe lead network will be out
that following Friday, just so you guys know.
So Cole, I think you take extensive notes.
I loved having you on the last couple of episodes and I love
how you do things. So I want to let you run the
show here. Go ahead and tell us where you

(04:11):
want to start about TJ. Sure.
First and foremost, we want to congratulate Miss Melissa Chai
for being the first ever studentboard member in Temecula's
history. So congratulations to her.
She seems very articulate, very self controlled, very calm, and
it really feels like she's goingto be able to bring a voice for

(04:35):
the students and I think that that has been lacking and I
think it's going to also just change the decorum of the board
as a whole. So congratulations to her.
We're very much looking forward to hearing her perspective and
seeing how she can contribute toour community.
So she actually gave public comments at our board meeting
and I wanted to share that with you guys, so check it out.

(04:56):
Thank you all for supporting me here today.
If you guys see these three lovely women in the front, this
is my sister Annie, and that's my mom and that's my aunt.
And I couldn't have done this without the support of my family
and my friends, my educators, mymentors, and all of the
community members. I've received a lot of support
during my campaign and since I've been elected.

(05:18):
And I'm just really, really grateful for this experience.
And I hope that I make you all proud.
Thank you. Thank.
You, Melissa, welcome. I'm excited to hear your
perspective. You seem very articulate and I
fought for you to be up there because I think that students
deserve a voice and that's awesome that your parents were

(05:40):
able to be there for you. I'm sure that was a very proud
moment for you and congratulations.
You are the 1st and it looks like you're going to set the
tone for everyone after you, so I'm excited to see how
everything unfolds over the nextcouple of months.
Me too. Congratulations, history in the

(06:01):
making. It's awesome.
Let's see here. So one of the first orders of
business that got brought up that's kind of been somewhat of
an ongoing theme is the specificcontracted employee that used to
be a TVUSE employee on site. She's now remote because she's
the only one that has the expertise.

(06:22):
So Arsay was able to speak on itand so was Lash.
I just really appreciated more of the transparency and
explaining it more in depth so that we could kind of put that
to bed. She's the only one that can do
the job that they currently need, especially with this new
pilot that they've been working on with new data.
So she's the data expert essentially on being able to

(06:44):
handle the old way that they were doing it and what they're
trying to transition into. Otherwise, they would have to
pay a lot of overtime for employees that don't know how to
do it to begin with. So that wouldn't help anyone.
And then hiring somebody that doesn't understand the current
layout of how we deal with our data versus what they're trying
to convert it to with new software or something of that

(07:07):
nature. So I just appreciated that we
can kind of put that to to bed already.
She's an expert. It's not a permanent position.
She's remote. Obviously, she's out of state
now, she's in Texas. She's just with us until they
can fully transition everything.And then eventually her position
is not necessary anymore, but she's the only one that can do

(07:27):
it. So it just, it makes the most
sense. Why would we hire somebody on a
bizarre salary where they don't even have job security because
their job is in a permanent position to begin with?
And then why would we overload the current employees when they
also don't know how to handle the job to begin with?
So none of that makes sense. So I think that they're doing

(07:47):
exactly what they should be. One of the big topics at the
beginning was AI magic school that we have a contract with
after the fact. I've learned that a lot of
schools that get these AI programs and it's not, I don't
know if it's specific to magic school, but I know it does

(08:08):
happen with Dojo and a lot of the elementary parents probably
are aware of what that is. But essentially these schools
and these districts are signing these contracts as our kids
parent. So there's some sort of legal
loophole when they're signing off on the data privacy stuff.
So I'm very curious to know whatthat looks like for our district

(08:29):
because I'm not, I wasn't aware of that until recently.
So I would like to find out how we can have access to that or if
they can answer those questions for us because that's a bit
concerning as well. Because I know they were very
big on explaining and helping usunderstand that the data would
be protected. And that's why they were going
through certain companies and had certain contracts in place

(08:51):
to make sure there was no data mining going on or data sharing.
However, the other concern now is did you guys sign on our
behalf as their parent? Because you're not their parent.
You're not, you're not their guardian.
So I'm just curious to know whatthat loophole is and if it
applies to AI magic school or not.
I don't know. I wanna just like completely

(09:16):
blanket statement this. Everyone that spoke on this
topic is right. So everyone's opinions,
everyone's concerns, everyone isvalid in all of this because
it's, it's new technology as faras you know, how quickly it's
advancing, right? We've had AI for a while, but
the fact that it's been in the schools and that was something I

(09:37):
appreciated the transparency on with Doctor Velez and she made
it very clear, we've already hadAI, even something as simple as
a Google search, right, using that search engine, there's AI
capabilities, there's AI tools on that.
So our kids have already been exposed.
And that's, you know, when you're in public school, that's
going to happen. We can't stay away from it

(09:58):
because it's the future. And so I agree with people that
have said, hey, we're already behind.
We need to stay with the times and prepare our kids to be able
to use this technology so that they're not further behind for
careers or college or what have you.
Yeah, yeah, I agree. I I thought it was interesting
though how I like Doctor KS ideaand I didn't understand why that

(10:23):
got shut down. You know, I I don't think that
parents are against it. I don't think that parents would
have an issue with it, but giving us a voice on
implementing AI makes us feel like a stakeholder.
And I think that, like, Doctor Kran on parental rights and

(10:44):
that's part of it, right? Is like, make me feel like I'm a
stakeholder in this. Like, my opinion also matters.
And I just didn't like how he basically.
OK. For those of you who don't know,
Doctor Komarowski basically recommended that we put out a
survey for two weeks to parents.And as long as we got 51% of

(11:09):
parents on the survey saying, yes, they wanted it, then we
implement it, but we shouldn't expose it to the children until
we get with the parents. Like, I get, I get it.
Yeah. Like, people are just generally
exposed to it. But there are some parents who
who might not like it and I and,and like, I think again, I don't
have an issue with it. I think most parents won't.

(11:30):
But just letting them feel like,hey, I don't like it letting
them know, letting us know as parents that this is going to
happen. Like a couple years back when we
had the curriculum issue, the survey went out and the issue
was we didn't get a lot of feedback from the survey.
And I've talked about this before where, and I think this

(11:52):
is nationwide where parents are like, we want to be involved,
but like, we don't always look at everything and read
everything, you know? So seeing the board make a
decision to move in a direction where we're trying to empower
parents and we want to work withparents, it sends a really
strong message. So I think that voting that down

(12:16):
was more about we don't like Doctor K, so we don't want to go
with that. We, we don't ever want to let
him get a win up here. And that at least that's what it
seemed like to me. And I just didn't like it
because I it feels it. Hasn't hurt anything right.
So we should have just done it. It doesn't hurt anything.
It it shouldn't prevent the, thecontract.

(12:36):
And that was, I think essentially the point was
approving the contract so that they could move forward,
especially since they had piloted it with some of the
teachers. And that's mainly what it's
being used for. That's its main function is to
provide tools to the teachers tobe able to evaluate each
individual student in a way theycan't do on their own because
it's pulling in all this data asthey assign them these different

(13:00):
tasks, right? And then they can have rooms
where kids can participate with the AI in a controlled room and
controlled environment. But that is just like a side
piece to it. The main thing was it was for
teachers use only. It wasn't something that kids
could just be Willy nilly with and just start creating their
own whatever it is that they could be doing with it.

(13:22):
So I think that kind of shifted that conversation too because it
was like, well, it's not really for the students per SE.
It's more as a tool for the teachers who have already and
want it and feel like it's very necessary and it'll be much more
helpful for them because, again,most of the people that are
using this, it's in the Gen. Ed classrooms.
That's like 30 plus kids. Yeah.

(13:43):
How are they able to get a better picture of each
individual student on that levelto then hone in on, OK, this is
where you're struggling with math.
Now we know how to cater to whatyou're struggling with, right.
Whereas doing that one-on-one, that's not really possible.
Yeah. So I agree with with you, it
didn't hurt anything. So why not just do it as a heads

(14:05):
up to the parents? Hey, we're going to be using
this new technology. It's mainly for our teachers,
but kids can be exposed to it depending on how they do a
Lesson plan or if there's some sort of task that they're giving
them to pull in that data from, right?
So I think that it's it's kind of like a give and take thing.

(14:27):
Yeah, yeah. And, and there was a, there was
a staff member who made a comment that like, oh, I, I
don't think the teachers really like it.
So I don't think teachers would want to bring something in that
parents they didn't want. And it's like, that's a really
broad assumption. You're assuming that the
teachers are representing the the, the parents and they're

(14:48):
not. Yeah.
Well, you know, I like, I, I don't think our teachers are
bad, but I think that. But I think, you know, it's, you
can't assume that the teachers are acting in the best interest
of the parents. They're stakeholders here.
Parents and teachers, Those are not the same.
That's like saying one board member is acting in the best
interest of another board member.
We we already know that's not the case.

(15:09):
Yeah. So it's it's, I don't know.
It was just, it seemed like there were a lot of like loaded
discussions to just try to push this and be very dismissive of
Doctor K's idea. Like, you know, I've been an
advocate for parental rights. So I just when he was saying
that I'm like, yeah, I like thatand like.
Again, it doesn't hurt anything.It's getting more information.

(15:31):
It's putting it out there saying, hey, our teachers are
using this new technology. How do you feel about it?
Yeah, that's it. That's it.
Right. And that doesn't hurt anything.
It shouldn't prevent the contract from moving forward,
but Doctor K was very clear about that as well, and I will
give him credit for that. Hey, I approve it for the
teachers, but I do not approve it for the kids until I hear
from the parents, because that'swho I'm representing.

(15:53):
So I think that's a good compromise as well.
So move it forward, but with theunderstanding that our kids
shouldn't be exposed to it untilthe parents say that they're OK.
And again, I would like to pointout, because I'm in Doctor Day's
area, that it's that mindset in that perspective, I believe why
he got voted. Reelected.
Yeah, is because he says he's for a parent, right.

(16:16):
And then on the dais, he makes it very clear that parents are
stakeholders here. I want to know what they have to
say. So I appreciate that and I just,
you know, it was annoying that that got voted down.
Because, yeah, it wasn't necessary.
Yeah. I think then you're saying
there's this perception. Well, it's a valid assumption to
make at that point because it didn't harm anything.

(16:36):
It wasn't preventing the contract from going through.
It was simply just, again, having the stakeholders, the one
of the most important stakeholders, the parents just
being involved in the process. Yeah.
So I agree that it could have been handled better.
Yeah, I agreed with Jen's approach that it and at times it
can do more harm than good. But again, I think there was a

(16:58):
bit of a misunderstanding on what the AI is being used for.
So it's a tool for the teachers primarily with opportunities to
use the environment with the tool to collect more data on the
students. But again, it's controlled.
There's guardrails. They won't be able to just do
whatever they want. And Emil actually tested it out
himself and he was able to experience it as a student in

(17:20):
that controlled environment. So it's good that some of the
board members are also going andlooking at what they're voting
on, right, and making sure that they understand what it entails
and what it's capable of. I, I agree with Steve too,
mentioning that the teachers have given nothing but

(17:41):
phenomenal positive feedback. So we should trust that.
Of course we should, and also acknowledge that parents should
have input, as Doctor K tried tobring up.
So again, everybody was right, even the people making public
comments. Hey, I'm glad that you guys are
finally getting with the times. Also, yes, please be cautious,

(18:02):
but this is a good thing, right?I know we briefly went over the
guidelines for the Governing Handbook, and I actually wanted
to give my own personal shout out to Greg Langworthy for
helping with the civility policy.
That is exactly what we've all been trying to do, is have
stakeholder involvement. He gave his time, his expertise

(18:25):
to make things better for our community and for our students
and for our teachers. And so I just want to
acknowledge that because that's what this is all about, what
we're doing right now. It's involving the community,
keeping them informed, and also encouraging them to do the very
thing that Greg did, which is get involved wherever you can
serve, do that. And it's only going to make

(18:46):
everyone better for it. So I did want to give him a
shout out for that. I, again, I appreciated the, the
public comments on it of essentially just saying, hey,
this is a good compromise, editing it together, you know,
all of that. Again, that's what we've been.
That has been the goal since this re election process has

(19:07):
happened, is to get everyone to be collaborative and find
compromise, which I know is an icky word for some people, but
I'd rather have compromise than conflict.
Right? Solution.
Solution driven. Hey, hey, you're making too much
sense. Right, let's see.

(19:28):
Well, not gonna bring that up. What?
What is it just the whole, you know, CRT Mom got mentioned in
the comments during talking about the handbook.
Yeah. We didn't know it was her until
she came up later or shortly after, and then that became like

(19:50):
a smear campaign essentially on the podium.
You know, I mean, I don't want to.
I guess we'll talk about it now.We're talking about it.
I. Mean well, it's just who was to
know that then the next thing would happen so.
Yeah, for our viewers, if you don't know, we had somebody come

(20:12):
to our school board from Floridawho is an online person.
She's very active. She has a lawsuit in California
herself and she goes by CRT mom and David Sola went up there and
gave a public comment basically calling her out, saying she

(20:33):
doesn't live here, she doesn't belong.
And he threw some, he threw someaccusations at her that I still,
I haven't seen real any, you know, I, I don't know where
they're coming from besides him.Besides him saying.
That, and I'm not saying I don't, I don't believe it, but I
just, I don't wanna, I don't wanna talk about it because.

(20:55):
We're not here to spread misinformation until we have.
More right, right, right. And you know, and that lady's
not here to defend herself or whatever.
So, but I will say this, that one of the biggest things as far
as the CRT mom, Chelsea, is her name Chelsea.
Does she have a right to go to aschool board in a district that

(21:18):
she doesn't live in? Some people say no, you know, I
say yes. I think our school board, it's
public comments, not community comments, not parents only
comments, it's public comments. And it's my understanding that
during emails campaign he had reached out to her for help and

(21:40):
things like that. Yeah, that's what she alleged
and stated in her comments. And then and then you know, you
guys have seen this on TikTok, on Twitter, this.
This whole thing, yes. The infamous Yeah,
unfortunately. Where emails smiling at her.
I I think it's pretty clear. You see when he when she's up
there, like she kind of touched on it like, Oh yeah, you have
called me and you asked me for advice.

(22:02):
I think that that gives her evenmore of a unfortunately, yes,
because. She kind of was involved in some
sort of campaigning or advice or.
Whatever. Her role?
Was I scrolled through her social media and she actually
used the clip from our podcast with him.
Oh wow, in one of her posts and it was interesting because I

(22:24):
have to kind of agree with her. Like she she's making some good
points as far as like she she was contacted by e-mail for help
during his campaign. And then he put out that that
post about how the parental rights thing we should celebrate
this and she disagreed with it and she claims that e-mail

(22:47):
blocked her. She tried to reach out to him.
So she showed up here to like say, Hey, this is, this is
what's wrong with that, you know, And it's so it's like, you
know, if we're going to talk about like who's inviting this
lady, Well, I don't think anybody invited her.
I think that she felt like there's this guy who got elected
who's misleading his community, who's not representing what he

(23:07):
said he represents even to me personally, like from her
perspective. But again, I don't know, I think
it's, but the big discussion is like, you know, do outside
people get a voice in the district that they don't live in
that they don't have any stakeholding in?
And my argument is and always has been, yes, right.

(23:31):
Anybody can come and speak. Somebody tried to like check me
on that. They try to say like, oh, you
weren't saying that before and II just want to clarify.
Outside agitators is different than someone coming and making a
comment. Yeah I'm OK with our rights as
citizens whether we live in a place or not.
I don't know why you would want to do that, but at least her she

(23:51):
has more context and reason right?
It's reasonable to want to come and talk regardless of what her
her issues are with any board member.
Agitating is another so and threatening and all of those
things. So yes, anyone should be able to
come and speak on something thatthey feel needs to be public

(24:11):
knowledge or just simply to say yay or nay to something.
Yeah. I think when they're disruptive
or they're threatening or they're alleging things and
they're just causing chaos, thenyeah, that we need to mitigate
some of that. Yeah, yeah.
And, and, and just to clarify, when there was outside agitators
that were coming here to attack Jen and Joe and Danny Gonzalez

(24:35):
at the time, it's important to know that.
And I, and I had to clarify thiswith somebody is I was never
against that. I I simply am just pointing out
the double standard of you were OK with that, but there were
people who were OK with that andnow they have an issue with
that. Like, was I annoyed by it?
Yeah. Did I feel like it was
unnecessary? Yeah.
But did I ever feel like that person shouldn't be allowed to

(24:57):
speak? No, never.
No, because it's their right. Yeah, it's it exactly, 100%.
Yeah, it's their right. We don't have to like it, but.
Yeah, but you know the the and then she showed up the at the
next. Meeting the following.
Yeah. And and you know, I think that
one, the workshop, yeah, it was a workshop.
And then, you know, I don't really know if that was the

(25:18):
right time or place for her to continue her.
Her. Attempt, yeah, but I don't like
how her mic got. It was like cut off.
It was like, no, you have to stay on topic.
But I wasn't in the room. I watched it online, right.
When you cut someone's mic off, it's very difficult to hear them
right. So as like somebody who was
trying to watch it objectively, I have no idea what she was

(25:41):
saying. So I I don't agree that her
comments weren't on topic because she wasn't even given.
Yeah, she wasn't even given enough time for you to prove
that. And I think that like, cutting
her mic off and causing that scene and her leaving and like
just the, you know, it was more chaos than needed than it. 100%

(26:03):
because it was a workshop about business and moving the needle
and it was so productive and wonderful and then just yeah,
crap at the. End where where I like let her
go a little bit, let her talk and and this also leads and I
know we're we're kind of straying, but we you know, we're
touching on the special meeting that just happened, but we could

(26:23):
talk about that since we broughther up and I think that's the
only. Was there anything else on the?
Special. Genuinely no, because it was so
productive and wonderful and I was just like, gosh, finally
we're moving the needle. We have a plan, it's a 10 year
plan. And then it just kind of got
overshadowed by the very end. Right.

(26:44):
My thing is, Well, there was something Melinda Anderson
wasn't there, which. Kind of, yeah.
And I I would like to know why. Yeah, yeah, because normally
they she's. The president, she's supposed to
be running the meeting. Yeah, so that was the first time
e-mail was acting president, really.
And then he just cut that lady'smic off.
Like, I, I think back to when Joseph Komarowski was president

(27:07):
and he would just sit there and take it.
And people would go up there on agendized items and just barely
skirt the agendized item to be able to, to be able to bash Joe
and Jet. And they would just sit there
stone faced like, you know, and just, and just eat it.
And it's like, what I saw, what I saw this past Tuesday made me

(27:27):
appreciate Joseph more and made me go, man.
Like, you know, it's like he wasn't afraid to be told all
those things he was told where it seems like e-mail immediately
is like, no, stop. This has nothing to do with, you
know, And it just, yeah, I don'tknow, almost if you just let her
speak and then nobody claps and she sits down.

(27:50):
And then we move on to the next comment where that Lady had some
very nice things to say. It was like that would have been
a nothing. Nothing burger, Yeah.
Yeah, but, you know, Riley was in the room and I'm sure Riley
was recording. I'm sure they were looking for
some more viral content. Maybe I I don't really know.
I don't know. So yeah, I don't know how I feel

(28:12):
about that meeting. Yeah, I just, it was a very
productive meeting and it was just completely overshadowed and
crapped on by, you know, this whole public viral situation.
It just really took away from our Superintendent, all the

(28:33):
directors, all the hard work they've put into this plan.
I hope that people will actuallywatch the workshop, not just the
highlight reels and the viral clips, because it was a very
good plan and so many wonderful people that have had years and
years and years in this districtof experience have been able to

(28:56):
collaborate and that has been something that we haven't been
able to do in a long time. Yeah, one thing I, I think I, I
had notes on is at an hour 44 and 50 seconds they were talking
about the free speech stuff. Oh, OK.
Do you remember that? Yeah.
So we're, we're, we're back to the regular meeting, right?

(29:18):
Of the 22nd on. The 22nd, Yeah, they had a
discussion about about basicallyit was more kind of, it was more
kind of revolving around whetherstudents can protest and how the
district should deal with that. Correct.
Should parents be notified? Or are we putting staff in more
danger by making them like, oh, now you're putting your hands on

(29:40):
students, right? Oh, you have to do a permission
slip. Well, then that's like a school
sanctioning. Yeah.
So in that context, I don't think that they should get a
permission, permission slip because it's not the law.
Yeah. And that is the unfortunate part
of some of the major issues we've been dealing with for the
last several years is Californialaw versus what the parents of

(30:03):
those communities actually desire to have happen.
They're not In Sync. And that's a legislative issue,
not a school board issue. And so they have to find
workarounds. And this is what they did.
It was like, hey, we can't ask for permission slips because
that's violating the students rights as a civilian, right?
Whether they're a minor or not is irrelevant.

(30:23):
They still have rights. They were able to come to AI
feel a very decent compromise ofalerting the parents that they
have left the school site. And now it's up to the parent to
get in touch with their child and say, where on earth were
you? What were you doing?
And then for them to deal with that as a family at home.

(30:43):
But as far as putting teachers in danger or in a position where
they are violating those children's rights by saying you
cannot leave this school site, that's opening us up for
violence, for lawsuits, all kinds of chaos.
And you know, what's interestingis I've noticed that a lot of

(31:03):
times conversations like this, two different conversations are
being had. Correct.
And what it is, is parents are thinking about their young
child, their child that's in fifth grade, 6th grade.
Oh my goodness. And you know, Annalise is in
high school now. I've seen such a shift in her

(31:27):
become like a young lady and just becoming her own person.
So I see it differently now, youknow, like I, I respect the
board members who are like, no, parents need to know, you know,
and some people will say that children don't have rights, you
know, and if that's how people lead their household with that

(31:49):
philosophy, I mean, that's theirprerogative, right?
I definitely feel that way aboutmy 8 year old where it's like
but you don't really know life yet.
Like you're just a. Kid like.
You're not protesting nothing. Yeah, but if Annalise is like,
no, I feel strongly about this and here's why, Dad and I'm
going to do it like shit, do your thing baby, just.

(32:10):
Be safe, you know exactly. And there's consequences,
whether they're positive or negative.
Every action has a reaction. So it's instilling that and our
children, children too. Hey, in our house, we're not
leaving where we know you're safe.
But if you choose to do that, one, it better be for a damn
good reason. But two, you need to be able to
deal with the consequences. If you don't get in trouble with

(32:31):
the school, you're still going to be there's going to be
consequences at home because your safety is also an important
element to all of this. And I think that's one of the
biggest and main reasons why parents are so concerned because
it's like if they leave the school, my kids on their own.
Yeah, and. And that whole liability thing
too, because that got brought upas well.

(32:52):
And it's like, well, who's liable at that point?
Well, technically the parent because the parent was alerted
that their child left the. School site.
That's true. That's true.
So I appreciate that. Like the school lets me know,
but I know. Now it's on the parent I know.
In in my case, I like to think that, you know, my high school
kid who wants to do a student walk is going to tell you about
it. Yeah, I'm going to absolutely
want to do it. Yeah.
Just be safe. Do your thing.

(33:12):
I'll go pick you up and we'll skip school together.
Right. I'm coming with you passionate
about this as well. But one thing that did bother me
that I want to bring up is Stephen Schwartz was like,
haven't you guys skipped school before and gone out and
hopefully you didn't get caught.And like, you know, I have an
issue with a board member on thedais taking that perspective.

(33:35):
A lot of students do things thatthey shouldn't be doing and.
Because you can doesn't mean you.
Should like, that's like, you know, that's like a board member
being like, don't you guys remember doing cocaine?
In high school, who? Cares if if they do a little
bump it's like no. No, that's not appropriate, not
at all. And it's a risk.
Yeah, I don't think you should be encouraging that.
And, and the other thing it's funny is when that happened,

(33:57):
Melanie was like, I've never skipped school because she's
like. Me either I was like follow the
rules of flipping. See, maybe like you want to say,
heck no, I'm not, I'm going to six period.
So. So like, I I understand what
Stephen Schwartz was saying. Oh, totally.
But it's inappropriate and it's irrelevant.
Come on, dude. Like young kids are also when I

(34:20):
was in high school, kids were having sex in school, literally,
you know what I mean? Yeah.
So it's like, or is it OK for a board member to just go ahead
and and be dismissive of that? Like, no, it's no big deal.
Just let him do it. Like, no, dude.
Like, you know, like, and it's funny if you watch that part,
like he says it and the board members, like what?
Yeah, they're, they're like, alllike, OK, moving on.

(34:41):
He's like. Come on, dude, I get it.
I get where he was coming from. It just was not well received
and it wasn't appropriate. So they're all gonna have those
moments. But yeah, I definitely don't
agree. We shouldn't be skipping school
for any reason. They're there to get an
education. Right.
Right. But if you want to use your
right to protest, please make itworth your while and just be

(35:04):
careful. Totally because it's not even
about the other kids that are participating.
It's the adults that don't know what you're doing that are out
in the community that might haveI'll intentions.
And it's also like. There's no one there to protect.
You. Yeah, and also like a bunch of
kids protesting leaving campus, you know, they're young, you
know, there's testosterone flowing, mob mentality happens,

(35:28):
3 kids decide to block the road,and then you get into that group
thing, you know, You know what Imean?
It's yeah, yeah. It's just weird.
So yeah, I appreciate the district with their decision.
I do want to be notified, but I'm confident that I'll already
know. And again, that is something
that I've always harped on the most since the beginning of

(35:48):
time. It's the parents responsibility
to be involved with their children.
And that's where I do agree withSteve Schwarz.
I know it sounds like it's happening a lot because I don't
agree with that guy at all. But you know, sometimes you got
to give credit where it's due and it's like you need to be
involved parents. And I've said that from the
beginning. If you know your kids and you

(36:09):
know at least just what's going on in their classroom, maybe not
even the whole school, just withthem and their teachers, your
your kids going to tell you evenmaybe accidentally.
Yeah. Tomorrow after second period,
we're going to go and do it. Oh really?
All right, good to know. I'm going to put your Find My
iPhone and I'm going to track you and that better be where
you're at. You know our.

(36:30):
Kids going to find me in the parking lot like.
Yep, I knew it. Yep, I got.
To go back guys, got to go back to class.
Yeah. So if you are involved and you
know your kid, then hey, yeah, it it'll be a non issue for you.
Yeah. So.
Another thing, at an hour 55 and3 seconds around there, you

(36:52):
know, our, our, we've been pretty adamant and consistent
with our disappointment as far as the board's conduct with each
other. Oh, my gosh.
And here we thought that it was getting better.
Yeah, from our episode from March and April.
And it's gone to the worst. Yeah.
It's gotten. The decorum is just there isn't.

(37:13):
Any Yeah at this point it's crazy, you know, and it's so
funny is like the people who learn more left or like this is
the conservative board you wanted you know so it's like no,
it's yeah, but it they. I get it.
Yeah, yeah. Like they have an argument that
makes the conservatives who asked for this and.
Sola said this on the the episode that you just aired.

(37:33):
And I was like, he's not wrong. Yeah, we did ask for this, just
not this. Yeah.
Specific. Yeah, it's like.
We we wanted them there, but we didn't know they behaved this.
Way we didn't know, yeah. It's like, I didn't realize when
I got these dogs they'd fight. So yeah, right.
Can we bring him up? For a I know literally and I, I,
I did, I did have to say I agreed with maybe we just need 5

(37:57):
board members at this point. It'll get us out of the news.
We'll stop having crazy conflict.
We'll just have to start from scratch.
But so at the time stamp, I said, now we're 55, three.
Jen Weirsma was making a comment, and she's, like,
talking to Melinda Anderson, like, like expressing her

(38:21):
disappointment with what what was going on at the time.
And Melinda Anderson just leans over to the mill, starts, like
talking to him. And like, Jen Weir's on the
stops and just looks at her. Yeah.
It's like, come on, dude. Like, yeah.
Like, like, it's like, I get it.You don't like her.
You just showed everybody that and every time these, not just

(38:44):
her, they keep showing the worldon YouTube on every two one
Tuesday a month. It's just drama, you know?
So yeah, it's like, that's just bad that she's talking, she's
talking, let her finish. What do you what?
What could you have to say to e-mail?
That's so critical. Yeah, in the middle of her like
trying to address you, right. Like you, she was just, you

(39:07):
know, it's like I feel bad for Jen because she she constantly
keeps being just dismissed and it and it and it's happening on
the public stage and there are certain board members who have
no problem doing it at this point and it's.
And here's the thing, we talk about this a lot too, about how
it it should never be rules for the and not for me.

(39:28):
That goes for everybody. If we can just all have respect
and civility and professionalismregardless of our feelings.
Because hi, let's, let's be real, they've all disappointed
us at one point or another or continue to do so.
We're able to separate our feelings from not just their
conduct, but the business that they're conducting, right?

(39:49):
And it's like, why can't you guys just do that every time and
every interaction? I get it, you annoy each other.
It's insufferable at this point.I get it.
Because in a lot of ways, I feelthat way too.
Like you guys are insufferable. I hate to say that, but you are.
And it's like, just allow someone to speak.
We do it. We've done it on the podcast.

(40:11):
I don't agree with you, but I amnot going to interrupt you,
right. I'm not going to speak to
somebody that maybe came with meto the are.
You. Kidding like what on earth?
That is so disrespectful, you know, and you're.
Talking, I just they're. Going nodding off or just like
talking to the producer. Hey, so anyways, I'm not

(40:33):
agreeing with what they're just saying.
So what do you eat for lunch today?
Yeah, it's like we don't do that.
Have have some decency and some self respect, right?
Because it's only showing who you are, right.
When you are behaving that way, everyone else can do what
everyone else is going to do. We teach this to our kids.
But you are held to a higher standard and you should hold

(40:55):
yourself to a higher standard and always conduct yourself that
way regardless of what's going on.
And they cannot do that. Yeah, I totally expect the board
members who are elected officials to hold themselves and
be held by the community to a higher standard.
And you guys are missing the. Block.
Yeah, totally. When you're a regular
constituent, you want to get nasty and get ugly, you're

(41:18):
prerogative. But when you ask for people to
vote for you and then you're you're, you're when you act like
that on the dais with other people who were elected by other
community members, you're spitting in the face of those
community members. These there's a reason why
there's five of you is because this board member is supposed to

(41:42):
represent this community. So.
This trustee area wants them there.
When you shut them down and you dismiss their ideas and you
don't care what they have to say.
I know how the vote's gonna go, so let's just vote this.
It's like you are literally telling a large portion of the
community that I don't really care what you voted for and I

(42:03):
hope this lady resigns. I agree, and I don't know that
it's being thought out that far enough.
To. Remember.
That, but it's because they havetunnel vision.
They're all so mad at each other.
They all have an axe to grow in.Yeah.
You're not. You're not.
When you act like that on the dais, you're not considering the
community. You're considering your personal

(42:24):
feelings and you're not a good leader if that's how you
conduct. Yourself and it's not about self
preservation. You're there to represent an
entire group of the community. It's about preserving their
rights, preserving their voices,preserving their perspective and
what they expect out of the school district.

(42:46):
We take a back seat. People in those positions take a
back seat. It's not about you anymore.
That was the whole point. Yeah.
To get the that whole community behind you to, to represent
them. Yeah.
Not you represent yourself off of their backs and their hard
work of getting you in there. Yeah, right.
It's it's completely backwards. And that's not to say that was

(43:06):
the intent. That's just where we're at.
Right. Yeah, it's what's happening,
Yeah. I mean, you may not be intending
to do it. But we're here, guys, yeah.
And it's bad. Zoom out.
Yes, zoom out or just maybe watch one or two meetings after
they happen and then go, Oh my gosh, that was my face the whole
time. Oh yeah, too.
Many times I'm editing, I'm editing a podcast.

(43:27):
I'm like, oh geez. Wow, I gotta edit that out
horribly. Yeah, OK, all the time.
I've done it today, guys. You know, we have our flops and
that's OK, we're human. But to not be able to self
reflect when we're holding a, a position of quote UN quote
power, but also we're conductingbusiness.
So when you're on the dais, you're not Jane Doe, you're

(43:49):
representing trustee, Airy, whatever.
You're representing all the Jane's and all the Johns and all
their kids. It's not you anymore.
You're you're on the clock. For a better explanation or
analogy, you're on the clock. Yeah, you're not you anymore.
You're representing a community and you're supposed to be
conducting yourself professionally.

(44:10):
It's really that simple. I agree.
I understand emotions are high. Allegations are all over the
place and there's a lot of disrespect, but again, it starts
with all of us, each of us individually.
If they're acting out of pocket,it doesn't mean you join in on
that. Be above the fray.
Yeah, definitely. And you know what?

(44:31):
And we're on that topic. We said in a previous episode
about Jen Weirsman's body language.
She did much better this board meeting.
I feel like I don't, I don't see, I don't like she had more
self-control. She.
Yeah, like she was. More composed.
Cause another thing that happened that I got here is at
an hour, 5925 seconds when they were talking about the

(44:52):
Constitution stuff. And then right away Steven
Schwarz is like, well, and I just want to say that me and
Emil are going to work on this. We want to work on this.
And then Jen was like, well, I'mthe one who brought this
forward. Like, I wanted to be able to
work on this too, you know? And like, she kept herself very
composed, 'cause I would have been pissed.

(45:14):
And then Melinda Anderson's like, oh, well, you know, we'll
give you some task. And it's like, and you know, you
can see it in her face that she wasn't, she was frustrated.
She, she feels like it's belittling when you treat
somebody like that, dude, you, you don't treat people like
that. And and and they just don't have
any. And they're just forgetting that

(45:34):
they're not just before the audience that's there.
It's it's on the airwaves forever.
Forever. Right.
It's forever, guys. You're on camera and it's like
just pull back a little bit, like you said, zoom out and just
do a little bit of self reflection and just have a
little bit more composure. We're human, I get it.

(45:55):
We're all going to screw up. We've all done it.
But to consistently not meet thebar of your own standards that
you set at the beginning of all of this, you're just doing
yourself and everyone else a disservice at this point.
Yeah. And you know, there's a couple
other times in that meeting and in previous meetings.
I'm sure we'll continue to see it where I'm.

(46:17):
I'm trying to not, I'm trying tonot have this perspective where
I like these board members and Idon't like these board members.
I try to like, it's easier when I'm home watching it on the TV
because I'm just watching the meeting and they're conducting
business. And I keep seeing an attempt to

(46:40):
just shut down Jen and Joe. Like, no, we're not doing that.
Ah, this is dumb, you know. Unfortunately, it's become so
blatant that I don't. I think it's a very fair
assumption and if that is not the intent, that's why I'm
saying watch some of these. Zoom Outlook at what you're
doing. And go, whoa, it does look like
that. And I get that because we're

(47:00):
that way. Like I don't care what your
perception is. I know the truth.
God knows the truth. Like I know how I conduct myself
in my private life. But at some point, if there's a
consistent behavior that you're not intending for it to come off
that way, that's on you to fix and adjust to, right?
If you don't want that perception to continue being as

(47:22):
such, right? So it's like, yeah, if that
wasn't your intent, then stop behaving that way, right?
Because that's how it looks to the people that are not there or
that are not as involved. They're gonna just go and click
on it, a 15 second reel on Instagram, or they'll pull a
part of the meeting and go, oh, this they're a joke.
Yeah. Who behaves like this with no
context? Right, with no.

(47:42):
Because they only have your behavior on camera.
Yeah, and. It matters.
Yeah, like, yeah. And it's interesting because I
know now the next time we have like local politicians on and we
can talk to them, I'm going to ask different questions like I,
I don't care where you're from and who you are, like you.
Can do your elevator pitch later.
We need to know if you can handle.

(48:04):
Let me give you a scenario. What would you do in this
scenario you know? What I mean you?
Know. No.
What would you really do? Yeah, Yeah.
So we acted. Out but at least.
But at least we have something then.
To hold them accountable. If they're conducting themselves
different on the days would be like hey, do you remember this
clip correct. I asked you about this very
thing and look at what you're doing.
That's fair. Yeah, because you.
Were given an opportunity, have that in your mind too.

(48:26):
Yeah, well, hold on. What have I already committed
to? Because I am a public figure at
this point, whether you like it or not, you are right.
Right. Yeah.
What did I commit to? What standard do I want to hold
and then speak? It's this beautiful thing where
you can actually think before you start moving your mouth.
Can I, you know, it's like? I'm the worst.

(48:49):
At that, I'll tell you I'm the best at it.
So we're embellishing each otherout.
Fuck you in my mind. Like.
Do that in your mind. If you need to have your mother
effing moment, do it in your. Mind those and those are always.
With the. Professional face like where?
Where you can like. Uh huh.
But. OK.
You know, but you're not going to say it.

(49:10):
You don't say. It that's hilarious.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Alright, you want to get into public comments?
Yeah, alright. Who do you have notes on 1st
that you want to talk on the 1st?
I got the watchdog lady that went up there.
That's so funny cuz I just, I just flashed forwarded to her.
Did they have other ones? But like, they're not worth
mentioning. I just wrote notes on them.

(49:32):
So, yeah, we can totally talk about Mary Davis, all right.
Let's play for the listeners andthen we'll talk about it.
Check it out. Hi, good evening.
Mary Davis here. I'm a government watchdog in
Southern California and considerme your regional accountability
partner. I am not from this district, but
as an outside observer, I do specialize at the school board
oversight and I have watched andparticipated in numerous school

(49:55):
board meetings across a variety of districts.
So I have a comparative archivalknowledge that goes pretty deep.
I want to say I did watch last night's meeting, and I have to
say it was one of the worst thatI'd ever seen.
It was abominable on several fronts, including meeting
control, scatteredness, executing the items on the

(50:16):
agenda, and most of all, respecting the public's right to
be heard. And I will be blunt since,
Simply put, your current president is a liability to the
district. From comments tonight, like I
know how the vote is going to go, That gives rise to
speculation of either clairvoyance or collusion from a

(50:38):
poorly written draft letter to censoring speakers on a sentence
by sentence without giving rise to context or overarching
themes. Or two agenda items to be
dialed, put on the agenda only to be dialed back.
If that was some type of liability preservation, I have
to say it failed because you alluded to that others could

(51:00):
make the FPPC or grand jury complaints themselves.
I would direct you to the court case precedent of why run versus
RKO about duty of care and directing or couraging others to
take action. Next, regarding escalation to
the State Department and the Superintendent, that body has

(51:21):
previously shown market animus to two of your board members.
So as far from a neutral body, let's see.
Going forward, I would suggest maybe a lie detector to test.
Like let's just cut to the tape to the chase.
Truth loves the light. Who's willing to take a test who
is not? That would tell us a lot right

(51:42):
there. I would also say if you do
persist with the state Department of Education, I
encourage you that that would open the district and the state
up to potential discovery. I refer you back to the meeting
in July of 2023 where Trustee Barclay received a text on the
dais but later denied that it was district business.

(52:05):
Here's part of her recording. And didn't play it 'cause she
had it all locked up. Sorry, I have it on silent.
Anyway, I do have the recording where she said she got a text
and then they denied that that was.
Really. This Wait, Never mind.
Most of all, I would say let's just cut to the chase.
Instead of referring us to the State Department, let's go big.

(52:27):
Refer it to the US Department ofEducation.
Get the federal involved, especially if we have potential
Title 9 concerns. Go big or go home.
Thank you. Yeah.
Go big or go home, baby. I mean, normally I agree, but
let's let's back up a little bit.
So I think that she's totally valid on the decorum from the

(52:51):
night before. So real quick for the, the
listeners that don't know, right, we we're not talking
about the, this is a regular board meeting, regular July
board meeting on a Tuesday. The night before there was a
special board meeting that we haven't even talked about just
because it was a nightmare. And also there's still kind of
litigate. There's, there could still be

(53:12):
some pending litigation. I don't even want to touch it.
You know, it was yeah. But that's she's, I feel like
she's absolutely right with her analysis of that.
But so just for context, that's what she was talking about.
So please go. Call and I agree with her with
the context of the night before.I have to disagree with her a
little bit on how it had been, how the meetings had been

(53:33):
handled prior to that. I felt like there were some
hiccups here and there, but it was business was flowing.
They were able to get a lot accomplished.
So I don't want to totally validate that blanket statement
because it's not totally true. But the night before, 100%, it
was a train wreck to say the least.
She's extremely knowledgeable. She's giving some normally we

(53:55):
would have to pay for, but a lotof it is also common sense.
I don't know exactly what she meant.
Maybe when she said that the president was a liability, she
was referring to the whole people being able to speak or
not speak. I think maybe that's what the
context in what she was saying she was a liability.
Yeah. Well, because, and I kind of
agree with that. Because watching that meeting,

(54:17):
it was kind of like what we weretalking about with CRT mom,
where e-mail just straight cut her off.
Well, at the Monday meeting, it was like people were allowed to
go and then it's like, and then they weren't, well, you're not,
but they did. You're not really touching.
Yeah, they. Yeah, they did.
They didn't come back and let them come back.
Yeah, that that's true. And Emil actually was the one
that advocated for that. Yeah, because.
They were just going to kind of let it be.

(54:38):
And he was like, no, we, we needto take a second because they
took a recess and then they cameback and said everyone that
didn't get to finish speaking, go ahead and finish speaking.
Which also included Steve Schwartz daughter.
Yeah. Which who literally didn't get
like, more than a couple of words out.
Yeah. Before she was told to just sit
down. What was this good lady's name?
Mary, Is that right, Mary? Davis, Mary Davis.
Mary Davis, please. Keep.

(54:59):
Going She knows her stuff. I mean, thank you, I would be
thanking her for at least the unsolicited advice.
It was interesting that she quoted the meeting from two
years ago as an example, which Ithought was a little bit fishy
because she kind of only made itseem like she'd only seen a

(55:19):
couple of meetings this year. So how do we go from speaking to
this is the context I have for 2025 and then referring back to
something that happened in 2023?So that that's a good point.
That's a little fishy to me maybe.
I'm not. She was bringing.
Up a point that that was a big deal that we.
Still didn't get any answers on right.
Someone who's not a board memberanymore, right?

(55:41):
I'm getting. The text right now, right?
Exactly. So, and she's not wrong that.
Is what happened. But yeah, that does like, wait,
what? You're right, I didn't even
think. About that that does.
Elude to like. Somebody who is in the know out
here is kind of like feeding herthe for asking her to.
Exactly which? I mean, there's nothing wrong.
With that, it's the truth. I think it's a little extreme to

(56:04):
get the feds involved. I don't think it's that serious
because I'm all for go big or gohome.
I'm an all or nothing gal. But I think we need to just
backtrack a little bit. I don't know if that the feds
need to be involved, but we definitely I agree we have to
have investigations that are outside of our body of
administrators, the cabinet, theboard, people that are not tied

(56:26):
to our district or anyone in thedistrict.
It really does need to be something that has nothing to do
with us. Has no issue with it doesn't
take any issue with relationships because she did
mention one of the bodies that they want the investigation to
happen from favors other board members over others right and
past events experiences. So that's already a biased

(56:48):
investigation. She's not wrong, that's true.
So it's a mess. That's all I can.
It's just a mess. When she has to, when she feels
compelled, whether she was fed the information or she just felt
on her own volition, she's goingto come and just like try to
help this, help this situation, like great, good on you.

(57:11):
But like, holy smokes, it's so bad that this government
watchdog has to come and coach are bored.
Yeah, and she's got the camera on her.
She's. Legit she's like I'm covered on.
Social media. I think I have too.
She looks familiar. Yeah, yeah, I got her contact
info. Oh, right on.
Hey I'm I'll reach out to her and see if she.

(57:33):
Wants to marry a little bit. Miss Davis, I would love to
talk. To you, you're extremely
knowledgeable, so I would love to hear her insight not just
more context from that night, but but just overall, overall in
her experience that. She's seen Yeah, I think it's
free advice. Board members listen to the
podcast. If we can get her on, it's free
advice. Free Who else?

(57:53):
Who else? Who?
Else did you have I happen to? Like Kenneth Prado a lot, I've
been to events that he has in the past.
He, he's an amazing speaker. He's knowledgeable, he's an
advocate. We align on pretty much

(58:14):
everything when it comes to our morals and our beliefs and our
values and all that. I did appreciate that although
he was coming to kind of contribute to the chaotic back
and forth that's been happening between board members making
comments and then the public having to come and defend
whomever it is. In this case, it was Pastor Tim

(58:35):
Thompson. I will say I appreciate that
although he did come with his own agenda to defend and and to
give his point of view, he did it so respectfully, so
eloquently, so kindly and graciously.
And I think that's a great representation of Christianity.
And I'm not trying to make this like a religious thing, but he

(58:56):
just really represented what cuther mind, cut her mind, cut her
mind free. Speech, free speech.
You're violating my free. Speech.
But he just, he did it in such aprofessional, calm manner.
You can't help but respect whatever he was saying, whether
you agree with him or not or youshare his beliefs or not.
He came in so calm. That rarely happens when

(59:19):
someone's coming to defend a hottopic issue or hot button issue
or something that they feel really passionate about or
offended by, right? Because he made it clear, I'm
not cool with this. I am offended, but I am not
going to come at you in a way that's not going to be
productive. So I just want to shout out that
not necessarily the context of what he said, but just how he
said it. Yeah.

(59:40):
All right, let's. Let's check that out real quick.
Good evening. I'm here in my own capacity
tonight and not as a governing board, trustee or delegate for
CSPA, but on my own behalf. I want to pick it back off what
the gentleman had said earlier, that words do have consequences.
Believe me, I know I've had my I've had derogatory and

(01:00:00):
inflammatory comments against myself and my family, but I'm
here to hopefully bridge together a gap and I know that
in able to move forward, apologies need to happen.
What we said at last night's board meeting weighed heavy on
my heart, not just because of the words themselves, but
because of the spirit behind them.
A trustee made harsh personal comments about a local pastor, a

(01:00:20):
friend of mine who has served this community faithfully for
years. A man who is a walked alongside
families in their biggest celebration and the darkest
moments, including the passing of one of my biggest supporters
and a man who gave me wise counsel.
This pastor has stood firmly forparental rights, for protecting
the innocence of our children, and for holding institutions
accountable when needed. To speak against someone like

(01:00:41):
that publicly in a position of leadership was not just wrong,
it was hurtful not only to him and his family, but to the many
people in this community who love him, lean on him, and look
to him for spiritual guidance. Words can wound, and in today's
world world, words can also provoke harm of places that
worship, and we should be careful about that.
He also made remarks about two trustees, both friends and

(01:01:02):
colleagues of mine. Because of their conservative
values, you mock the public who supports them, calling these who
come to speak flying monkeys. I do understand the reference,
but there are some that maybe don't.
However, let me say this with the heart of reconciliation.
Those trustees are my friends. I stand with them.
And I asked you sincerely, were you calling the parents and the

(01:01:24):
neighbors who showed up here faithfully to speak truth into
space something less than human?Whether you meant it or that way
or not, the term stunk. And for many animal based
insults, Carrie, it's not out ofhate, but out of hope.
I've shared time with you, I've eaten with you at CSBA, and I've
spoken with you as you began your journey as a new trustee.
And I believe there was mutual respect.

(01:01:47):
We all fall short, but real leadership means being willing
to say I was wrong and I crossedthe line.
I truly believe that for this district and for this community
that true that there needs to betrue healing.
And I believe there this community needs an apology.
The pastor needs an apology. And it's not to say that you're

(01:02:08):
doing this out of shame, but youdo it out of love for unity and
healing and growth. And we all know that we are
better when we disagree with grace.
We are stronger when we speak with love and even in our
convictions. And to Mr. Schwartz, even though
we may see differently on different things, Sir, I thought
regardless of the situation lastnight, it was an honor to watch
your daughter be able to finish what she wanted to say about her

(01:02:30):
dad. Thank you everybody.
And that was so cool. It's so gracious like.
You can't help but respect it. Whether you agree with what he
was saying or not, he just, he came in so calm, so collected,
and it did genuinely sound like it was from a place of love.
Yeah, I do agree with him that we all fall short.
We've seen that time and time again since this is all played

(01:02:50):
out for the last couple of years.
And I do believe that there doesneed to be true healing.
That's what we've been advocating for this entire time,
is to get to a place where we can collaborate even if we don't
see eye to eye on everything. So I agree with him on that
front. As far as everything else, I
understand. You know, when you go to defend

(01:03:12):
somebody that you you believe inand they're being attacked, he
has a right to come in and speakon that.
Yeah. Yeah.
No. A couple things on his comments.
I've had conversations. With e-mail.
Where he he talks to me about Tim Thompson, where where he

(01:03:34):
said, like he's a pastor and he uses his platform a lot of time
to talk politics and he's like, what are you doing?
And I agree with that. I don't know Tim Thompson like
that. He's had me on his podcast.
Oh, I didn't know that. Yeah, I was on, I was on an R
watch episode with Derek. And you know, I've said it

(01:03:56):
before that like I'm not his biggest fan and I don't even, I
don't even think that that's fair.
I don't know him. He's had me on his podcast.
I've seen him from a distance. He's always been cordial and
respectful to me. You know, I just don't know him.
I hear a lot of negative things from people.

(01:04:16):
So that's my perspective. But I do agree with the e-mail
where it's like, yeah, yeah. I don't I don't know how I feel
about pastors, priests getting political, you know, but that
was email's perspective towards me.
And then e-mail used his closingcomments to give him air time on

(01:04:40):
the dais of our school board. And I'm like, dude, you're doing
the exact thing you told me you had an issue with this guy
about. And it's like, you know, so I
don't, I agree with Kenneth because I don't even think that
shouldn't should have been said.I don't even know why you're
it's like if I gave air time on our podcast to every person that

(01:05:07):
has said bad things about me, nobody would listen, right?
You know what I mean? Because it becomes so personal
at that point and it's. It's it's distracting and it's
taking away from what is supposed to be happening, right.
So there's a few things I want to unpack with that.
Yeah, 1. Emil has a right.

(01:05:30):
Just like all of us do to say whatever he wants.
Again, what I always say, just because you can doesn't mean
that you should, right? But he does have that right.
So if he wants to come out and air certain grievances on a
public platform, he has the right to do it.
Is it in poor taste? Of course.

(01:05:50):
Could it have been done differently?
Sure. Yeah.
There's a lot of different ways.But I think because everything
has played out so publicly, he just felt comfortable that that
was the next best step because he did mention in those comments
that he tried to do it privately, but he wasn't getting
a response. Again, that doesn't necessarily
give you a good enough reason todo it publicly, but I completely

(01:06:13):
understand that viewpoint. Priests.
Pastors. Bishops, whatever, getting
political. I do want to make a statement
about that because technically that is exactly what men of God
are called to do. They do have to get political
sometimes. In the Bible, we're taught to

(01:06:34):
obey the laws of the land, right?
And obviously there's a lot of stuff going on in California
that none of us agree, whether we're religious or not.
But we have to go and fight legislation to change those laws
and in the meantime obey them, right?
So that becomes a political thing because it is political.
So I get people like the whole term of separating church and

(01:06:57):
state and religious people shouldn't be involved in
politics and vice versa. That's actually what we're
called to do because it's about doing what is right.
And unfortunately, that means having to go into a really dirty
arena like politics, which is very nasty.
We've seen that just on a local level with our school board and
the City Council, right? So we are called to do that.

(01:07:20):
And it's specific to men of God.Women too can help, you know,
advocate and help change legislation, of course, but but
men specifically like pastors, bishops, priests, they're
actually called to do that. Not all of them.
It doesn't mean every single if the Lord is calling you to do

(01:07:41):
that and you have a platform andyou have the ability to do so,
then do so. That's not to be taken out of
context either, though that doesn't mean then feed into what
ultimately happens when you're in those arenas.
Your ego power trips your connections.

(01:08:04):
You're still human, right? So you're still operating in the
flesh while trying to do a holy thing, and we're all gonna fall
short on that. I don't care who you are.
And so that's where it gets sticky and it gets messy.
And I think that's where all those opinions can come from
because a lot of people are like, Hey, if you, if you're a
religious person, like stay in your lane.
And it's like, well, The thing is, is some of us are called to

(01:08:25):
do that, but there's a fine lineon how we walk that.
And that doesn't excuse bad behavior or, you know, this back
and forth of making things public, airing out dirty
laundry, like that's not godly, that's not biblical.
But men of God, specifically pastors, bishops, priests, they
are called to get political if it's, if it's necessary, if need

(01:08:50):
be. No, I, I so it's, it's one of
those like where like. I get it because I agreed.
To a point, but then also, well,we're actually called to do
that. So I totally appreciate that and
I and like to like. You're you're you're much more
religious than I am, you know, and, you know, I never looked at
it from that perspective. I didn't, I, I because you do

(01:09:10):
it. Yeah.
You just do it on this platform.Yeah, yeah.
No, totally. I just know that that is his
sentiment. And I get where he's coming from
if it's. If it's being abused or it's
being mishandled, because everyone ends up doing that at
some point, they just, we can't help ourselves.
Yeah. So that's where it gets messy.
And and another thing that I talked to.

(01:09:31):
Republicans a lot about, you know, whenever they wanna hear,
whenever they are listening to me, I, I say it where I think in
California we keep losing a lot.The Democrats win because a lot
of the Republicans do get preachy.
They, they almost are absolutely.
But that's what I'm saying, right?

(01:09:52):
We mishandle. It yeah, yeah, and and and again
I get if you're. Called to do that and and and
this doesn't apply to Tim Thompson.
No, this is this is across the board.
I'm not. I'm not even gonna.
Address Tim Thompson I I appreciate what you said with
that that makes. Sense but I think that the point
you made there are people who feel called by God to run for

(01:10:13):
office and then that is what their platform is about and then
their message gets lost in translation to the moderate in
California. If we were in Texas, it'll work.
If we were in Arkansas, it. But you got to know your
audience. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I. Think don't abandoned.
Your beliefs don't abandoned what you.

(01:10:33):
Believe is right, but you need to know your audience.
Tailor your message a little better to.
The demographic that while stillbeing truthful and transparent.
Don't bullshit them, right, right, right, right.
You know, don't bamboozle. Them like.
Some people are talking about right now on this climate that
we're dealing with, with our talent.
There's a way to do it. Yeah.

(01:10:54):
You got to know your audience totally without abandoning who
you are because that's people are voting you in because of who
you are, right, but know your audience and and another thing
on Kenneth Prado. I that last comment makes me
emotional every time when he talked to Schwartz about like,
hey, dude, your daughter being able to speak on your behalf,

(01:11:14):
like that's so true regardless of the situation, you know,
like, that was a beautiful moment that she was allowed to
defend her dad, you know, and it's like every little girl that
loves their dad would feel the same way.
Like, how, how dare you. That's my father.
That's my dad. Like he's human.
He's like he has a daughter. And now I want to look you in

(01:11:35):
the face and tell you how I feelabout it.
You know, so so it props to Kenneth.
It's funny is he messaged me after I put out episode 50s,
Like, hey, dude, here's my number.
Give me a call. I want to talk to you.
And I called and was like, oh, OK.
And he was like, I heard your episode, dude.
And like, props to you, man. Like he was almost also checking

(01:11:58):
in on me and like, because you were very vulnerable and open.
And he was like, this isn't yourfault, man, It's politics, this.
Is what happened like but like you know so.
Kenneth. Is he's a solid guy.
He really is solid guy. It's genuine.
I don't. Know him that well, but anytime
I've ever seen him or had any brief interactions or just been

(01:12:18):
at an event with him, he's neverswitched up.
So I have to believe that this is who he truly is.
He's the type of dude you want in your corner.
Absolutely. Especially because he's so calm
and. Collected.
He's somebody that thinks beforehe speaks.
We all have impulsive thoughts. We don't act on them.
You know, we don't act on them. And I get.

(01:12:40):
It. But that's the thing.
Though like he already said thatwe all fall short, myself
included. I've had my moments, trust me.
And I'm going to. I'm sure that's not foolproof or
anything. Like, well, from here forward,
no, I'm gonna screw up. But it'll come from a genuine
place, right? Cuz impulsivity is still,
there's still genuineness behindthat.

(01:13:01):
It's just maybe filter it a little bit, right?
And it's it's lacking the filterevery single time.
So to have people like that, even just to come and give
another perspective, but also how to have the decorum.
Let's look to Kenneth. He's got it right.
So. Maybe take some pointers from

(01:13:22):
him. Do you have anything else I do
appreciate? Josh mentioning.
The budget again. Did we forget that we have to
figure out how to get rid of 3 million in our budget in the
midst of all this chaos? Yeah, dude.
I agree. Did we forget about that 'cause
we still gotta get rid of $3,000,000 worth of our budget

(01:13:44):
that we need because we're at a freaking deficit?
Do you want to play that clip and just talk about it or no?
Yeah. I forgot to put my name on the
top so I'm so. Incompetent I do I?
Do that's why I didn't work that.
I feel like a broken record talking about decorum and how we

(01:14:04):
treat each other, how this couldhave been handled.
This is this is kind of embarrassing.
I actually think the reason why tonight's gone so much better.
I actually chalk it up to Miss Chai.
I think her presence is a solidifying.
I think we're we don't want to be embarrassed next to the high
score. That's a good one.
What we should be? Discussing what we should be
talking. About is, I remember during

(01:14:25):
Nicole's presentation like a means ago, we need to cut
$3,000,000 out of the budget. When you look at I just saw Acbs
headline that said because of the ICE raids in California that
California's going to lose $278 billion of revenue.
What do you think that's going to do to the tax revenue of the

(01:14:46):
state, do you think? It's going to be better.
We need to be discussing do we cut people or we do we cut
programs. Those are you 2 options and both
of them hurt a lot. And instead of discussing trying
to do the least amount of harm when trying to make the

(01:15:09):
financial ends meet, we're having what are the actually,
what do you call it? It was a conflict of
credibility. Who do you believe?
Whose story do you believe? Well, it comes down to who do
you vote for? That's what it comes down to in
this case. But frankly, I believe Jen, but

(01:15:30):
I think the way it has. Progressed.
Once you got lawyers involved, once it became public, it took a
hard nosedive off the Cliff. I would just really love to put
this behind us. Apologies to where?
Apologies. Need to be made.
And then let's just get to the business.

(01:15:51):
Of the district. Of being financially
responsible, the good of the students, and making the job as
easy as we can for the teachers and the staff of the district.
That's what we should be focusedon.
Thank you. I feel like this is the perfect
plug for Point Blank. Truth, Josh, Because yes.
That's exactly right. We.
Need to focus on how to manage this budget.

(01:16:13):
We're conducting business. We need to have physical
responsibility. And instead we're having this
credibility game, this credibility chaos of just
fighting and going back and forth.
This he said, she said, he's right.
We need to put all of this nonsense behind us and get back
to board business. And he's right.

(01:16:34):
Are we cutting people? Are we cutting programs?
That's the reality we're living in right now because of where
the state is, where the nation is and where our school board is
with the budget. And he's right.
We shouldn't lose sight of that because those have very real
consequences, and we have to getit figured out.
So I feel like that's the perfect way to end it because

(01:16:56):
that's what we keep talking about is are we being physically
responsible? Are we doing what we need to do
for the teachers and the kids? Yes or no?
And right now, everything is about this spectacle instead of
what's most important, which is the kids, the teachers and how
to use our money properly. Yeah, I'm not shocked by his
comments. I love Josh.

(01:17:18):
We had him on the podcast when we were very young and we get we
get his family's Christmas cards.
I love that. Yeah.
Yeah, I'm not surprised at all. So good comments from him.
But yeah, all right guys. Thanks for tuning in.
If you're new to us, we hope youenjoy our content and understand

(01:17:41):
that what's going on in our district and what's happening
over here could also be going onin your district.
And if you don't even know the name of your board members, I
recommend that you step up and get involved.
If you're worried about federal government, let me tell you
something, local politics effects you way more.

(01:18:02):
You know, we shouldn't be arguing about Donald Trump and
he did this. And, you know, Kamala Harris,
Joe Biden, like, get involved inyour local politics.
I'm a huge advocate for that. Step up, Say something.
The person who is going to be the president when your kids are

(01:18:22):
of age and adults is a school board member somewhere, is a
City Council member somewhere. And we keep talking about drain
the swamp. Drain the swamp.
Well, we should. If we were really engaged in
local politics, we would make that white belt level entry into
politics the hardest point of entry and we would weed out the

(01:18:46):
bad leaders, the liars, the manipulators and and the bad
politicians early. So I'm a huge advocate.
Step up, get involved. You got any questions about
anything, reach out to us. We're here for you.
Absolutely. All right.
See you guys later. Till next.
Time bye.