Examining the TVUSD School Board's “Parental Rights” Campaign
A look at the unintended consequences
In November 2022, the Temecula Valley Unified School Board underwent a significant shift in Trustees, as newly elected members Komrosky, Wiersma, and Gonzalez formed a majority on the Board. All three campaigned on promises to expand “parental rights” in education.
Like many other School Boards across the United States, these campaigns invoked the idea of giving parents greater control over their children's education.
The Promises
Empowering Parents: The newly elected Board members campaigned on empowering parents by giving them a more significant say in what their children learn at school. They argued that parents should have the right to shape their children's education in alignment with their own values and beliefs.
Transparency and Communication: Their campaigns emphasized transparency and communication between schools and parents. They said that parents should be well-informed about what their children are learning and have a say in curriculum choices.
Parental Involvement: Their campaigns also expressed a desire for increased parent involvement in school decisions, proposing parent advisory committees to ensure that parents' voices were heard.
The Reality
How have Komrosky, Wiersma, and Gonzalez delivered on these campaign promises?
The reality is that parents in our Temecula public schools already had significant rights and opportunities for involvement: reviewing curriculum, reviewing their child’s records and instructional materials, volunteering in classrooms, serving on advisory committees, and so on.
The policies enacted by these three Trustees since December 2022 have not delivered on their campaign promise of increasing parental rights, communication, or involvement. In fact, many parents are concerned that these policies have led to unintended consequences, including less choice for both students and parents.
Curricular restrictions
Some policies enacted by the Board majority have restricted curriculum. For example, the Board majority refused to approve textbooks for kindergarten through grade 5 in the district until forced to by the Governor’s threat of $1.5 million in fines. Even at approval they stated they intend to remove a section in the supplemental materials.
They have also proposed and passed new district policies, such as the ban on teaching CRT, that restrict educational content that does not align with their personal religious or political views.
While parental input in education is essential, there is a fine line between providing input and censorship. Komrosky, Wiersma, and Gonzalez have often stated that they want to ban books and limit specific curriculum content. As a result, parents are concerned they will undermine a well-rounded education that exposes students to diverse perspectives.
These Trustees consistently express their intention to oust district leaders who do not share their objectives or enforce policies that align with their convictions. But ethical School Board Trustees represent the varied interests of all parents and students within their community. And as a public school district, the TVUSD must provide an education that conforms to California State law and specific curriculum requirements in the State Education Code.
Failure to meet diverse community needs
Temecula Valley Unified School District is home to diverse populations with varying values, beliefs, and educational priorities. Policies enacted to satisfy one group of parents may not align with the desires and needs of other parents or students within the district. Prioritizing the preferences of some parents over others limits parent and student choices. Instead of fostering unity and shared educational goals, the Board majority’s changes have led to polarization within the community.
The School Board Trustee position is non-partisan. But Komrosky’s, Wiersma’s, and Gonzalez’s public statements, media presence, and actions often show a biased political and religious affiliation. These Board members violate the fundamental principle of separation of Church and State as they use their position not only to promote their religious beliefs, but also to mandate policies that eliminate educational material and supports for students.
Trustee Wiersma has indicated that her purpose is to exclude cultural studies, anthropology, government, social issues, and current events from Social Studies curriculum, “going back” to a limited history and civic education that only expresses belief in American exceptionalism. But removing contentious subject matter, especially at the middle and high school levels, restricts comprehension and stifles critical thinking. This is no way to produce good citizens and thoughtful voters.
Legal and ethical challenges
Some of Komrosky’s, Wiersma’s, and Gonzalez’s policies that target specific educational topics, like the resolution banning CRT, face legal challenges. Lawsuits mean the courts have to determine whether these policies infringe on academic freedom, equal protection, or the rights of students to access a full education. The new Board members have also been investigated for violating the Brown Act, the law that specifies how local legislative bodies and their members must behave (for example, by doing all public business in public, not behind closed doors).
Unfortunately the investigations and lawsuits against TVUSD since these Board members started changing policies are already producing significant costs for the district. While cost is not the focus of this article, these Trustees’ actions reduce district funding for essential materials and programs, increase tax burdens for residents, and restrict the district’s ability to hire and pay excellent teachers and administrators. We need Board members who follow law and ethics to prevent harm to the district and our community.
Educational impact
Restrictive policies impact the quality and breadth of education that students receive, potentially affecting their future opportunities for college and life. A prime example is the concern that Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses may not be available due to curriculum restrictions.
Komrosky’s, Wiersma’s, and Gonzalez’s actions have imposed unnecessary burdens on teachers, administrators, and district staff. Perhaps the worst was their refusal to approve K-5 social studies curriculum until just before school started, leaving teachers not fully trained and staff rushing to make sure textbooks were available in time.
Teachers and administrators are directly impacted by the Board majority’s sweeping but vague policies. Teachers were looking forward to getting back to normal teaching after the pandemic disrupted learning. But now they hear the Board majority and their supporters call teachers “groomers” and “pedophiles.” They don’t know what they can and cannot discuss in their classrooms. They express fear that the majority may try to “catch them” or “set them up” for not following the vaguely worded new policies.
For excellent education, teachers need respect, timely training, and sensible guidance.
Striking the balance
The campaign for ”parental rights” in the TVUSD sounded promising to many voters, especially those unfamiliar with the rights and opportunities parents already had. But striking a good balance between individual parents’ values and the broader educational mission of public schools is a difficult task requiring collaboration, not arbitrary decisions.
Instead of assuming that their own restrictive policies are what all parents want, the Board majority could have actually empowered parents. Policies that encourage interaction between parents and schools, improve communication so that parents understand the rights they have, and foster cooperation rather than division, are what we need.