OK, Class, Let’s Review
What have TVUSD Trustees done since November, and what does the future look like for our students?
Hello. It’s been quite a while since we posted, and much has happened since then. Let’s take a look at local developments since November 2024.
November school board election
November’s election did not go the way we wanted: three of our four preferred candidates for Temecula School Board Trustee were defeated. Fortunately Steve Schwartz, our most experienced trustee, was reelected.
In Trustee Area (TA) 4, recalled trustee Joseph Komrosky was put back on the board by a margin of just 227 votes out of 16,241 votes cast.
In TA2, a third candidate split the vote, and Emil Barham was elected with just 41% of total votes.
In TA1, unknown newcomer Dr. Melinda Anderson replaced an effective, knowledgeable incumbent.
So our current TVUSD trustees are:
Melinda Anderson (email: manderson@tvusd.us), TA1, term expires 2028
Emil Barham (ebarham@tvusd.us), TA2, term expires 2026
Jen Wiersma (jwiersma@tvusd.us), TA3, term expires 2026
Joseph Komrosky (jkomrosky@tvusd.us), TA4, term expires 2026
Steve Schwarz (sschwartz@tvusd.us), TA5, term expires 2028
We wondered: Would the newly elected board return to the money-wasting, teacher-bashing, community-dividing actions of the last two years? Would Trustees Wiersma and Komrosky be joined in putting politics over education?
December board meeting
The TVUSD board’s first meeting, their organizational meeting, was held December 13, 2024 (watch video). Elected trustees were sworn into office and the board went into closed session (where, judging by later comments, new trustees Anderson and Barham learned that the previous board majority had passed policies against district attorneys’ advice).
In open session the board chose a President, Clerk, and meeting schedule for the year. Dr. Anderson was elected President by a vote of 3-2, with Komrosky and Wiersma voting against (both argued that one of them should be President). Mr. Barham was elected Clerk.
Dr. Anderson stated that as President she would follow parliamentary procedure and keep meetings on track and civil.
Mr. Barham noted that the past two years had been contentious and produced “very low accomplishments,” and thought Wiersma and Komrosky should take some responsibility for that.
Both said that Wiersma incited community members to threaten them if they didn’t “toe the line.”
Random public comments included a statement by one person that One Temecula Valley PAC (a local political action committee that supported school board candidates) is composed of “satanists and pedophiles.” Another person said that “as a Christian” he was “baffled” and “kind of disgusted” by support for Schwartz, who is Jewish. Note: Since some of us are members of 1TVPAC, we know that slur to be false; and a public school trustee’s religion is irrelevant to the job.
The board was forced to rescind two policies, the parental notification policy (BP 5020.01) and the flag policy (AR 6115), because the Public Employees Relations Board (PERB) ruled that they must be negotiated with local staff unions before being passed. PERB rulings have the force of law. Both policies were passed abruptly by the previous board majority without normal input from teachers, staff, parents, and students.
The board heard and approved the first interim report on the district’s budget. They discussed an attorney firm that Wiersma and Komrosky fired and now wanted to rehire for negotiations; this item was postponed.
January Board Meeting
January’s meeting (see video) also showed a 3-2 split between Anderson, Barham, and Schwartz on one side and Komrosky and Wiersma on the other. In keeping with Dr. Anderson’s desire for a professional, business-focused board, agenda items included:
Time limits on board discussion and board final comments
Restrictions on when individual trustees can contact attorneys and a record of these contacts
Protocol and conduct standards for trustees visiting school sites
Less draconian definitions of meeting disruption
Moving general public comments to the end of the meeting
NOTE: Public comments regarding any item on the agenda are still heard when the item comes up. It’s only comments on non-agendized items that are moved to the end. In the last two years, these more general comments have often been contentious, insulting, and unrelated to education (like the two cited above from the December meeting). The new TVUSD Director of Safety & Security, Bryan Pastor, suggested this change.
The trustees discussed these and other items and took 40 minutes to approve the meeting agenda, a task that typically takes less than 5 minutes. All five of these suggestions were adopted, some 3-2 and some 5-0 with reasonable amendments.
A few other notable items:
Proposed new board policy 4119.24, Staff Conduct Regarding Sensitive Topics with Students, concerning student-initiated discussions of gender identity or sexuality (intended to replace the rescinded parental notification policy)—By a 3-2 vote, the new policy was referred to a subcommittee of Anderson, Barham, Superintendent Dr. Woods, Ms. Lash (Asst Sup, Business Support Services), and Mr. Arce (Asst Sup, Human Resources). Komrosky and Wiersma voted against the subcommittee referral.
Information item on a new “neutral classrooms” policy (a replacement for the flag policy)—The board agreed to have staff pursue this idea in negotiations.
Information item to discuss a different board meeting location—Dr. Komrosky has often expressed a desire for a board meeting room with a raised dais, electronic voting, and more “bling.” Mr. Schwartz objected to using district funds for unnecessary expenses. Ms. Lash noted that there is currently no place for a permanent, single-use board meeting room and no budget for changes. All possible locations are used for multiple purposes, such as CTE classes and staff training. This item was referred to a subcommittee of Komrosky, Schwartz, Ms. Lash, and Security Director Pastor.
Future Expectations
Overall, we found these first two meetings positive. New trustees Dr. Anderson and Mr. Barham appear to be:
Interested in following the law and working with district teachers and staff, instead of arbitrarily imposing policies
Aware that they don’t know everything about our district or about being a trustee, and taking the time to learn
Willing to observe teachers and curriculum objectively, instead of assuming that Temecula teachers are “indoctrinating” students
Interested in limiting unnecessary expenses like attorney fees and “bling”
In short, they seem supportive of public schools and willing to do their job with integrity. Together with Mr. Schwartz, they’re attempting to stop the chaos of the last two years.
However, we still see a lot of attention being paid to non-educational items, such as replacements for the parental notification and flag policies. Yes, teachers and students may need some clarification, but all this takes so much staff time and energy away from education—as do the continuing lawsuits.
What we want to see is a laser focus on student learning. When our Temecula trustees spend their time on things like improving math scores, finding ways to support Special Education teachers, and combating student absenteeism, we’ll know we have a better future.
Stay tuned.