|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Editor’s note: This article has been updated to address school board candidate Ingrid Campos’ social media posts.
——
Palo Alto parent Ingrid Campos is running for a seat on the school board this fall, saying she would work to build bridges between the school district and families and that parents need to know that they can have a voice in their children’s education.
Campos, who has two daughters in high school in Palo Alto Unified, said that some parents feel a disconnect between themselves and the school district.
“I just want to make sure to remind parents that they have to be vigilant with regards to what’s going on with their children’s education,” Campos said. “You have a voice. If you don’t like it, say something about it. Opt out. Inform yourself. Advocate on your behalf and your children’s behalf.”
Two seats are up for a vote this November on Palo Alto Unified’s five-member board. Incumbent Ken Dauber doesn’t plan to run again. Fellow incumbent Shounak Dharap is campaigning to keep his seat. Nicole Chiu-Wang and Shana Segal are also running.
In an interview, Campos said that part of the reason she wanted to run is because she has a strong sense of family values.
“Most people have traditional family values and most people want to live by those values within their school community,” Campos said.
When asked how these values would impact the decisions she would make if elected, Campos said that she has heard from parents about what they feel is the “oversexualization” of sex eduation. Although Campos said she wouldn’t necessarily change the curriculum, she said that there are parts that are objectionable to her and that she wants parents to know that their students can opt out of the class.
She also said she was concerned about the directions that school districts can take with social-emotional learning (SEL) programs — which aim to help students develop communication and interpersonal skills — though she said this wasn’t necessarily happening in Palo Alto.
When asked what directions would be worrisome, she replied that she was “concerned with the LGBQT literature that’s starting as early as pre-K. I’m really concerned about that because that is a sexualized movement, rather than an individual.”
At the same time, Campos said that this is her own opinion and she hasn’t found any actions the Palo Alto school board has taken that she disagrees with nor is she proposing any changes if elected to the board.
After the initial publication of this article, some readers raised concerns about various posts on Campos’ social media accounts, some of which spread false information.
These include posts that seem to question the legitimacy of President Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election and a video Campos shared about COVID-19 that claims “viruses are fictional, make-believe organisms.”
In response to questions from the Weekly, Campos said that these posts are irrelevant to the school board race and instead that people are trying to discredit her.
“People will look for things to tear you down, to discredit you or to villainize you,” Campos said. “So if that’s what’s happening, I’ve got a pretty thick skin.”
In one Twitter post from July 2022, Campos appeared to refer to Biden’s presidency as a “coup complete.” When asked, Campos wouldn’t say whether she believes Biden won the 2020 presidential election, which has been widely established.
“That’s irrelevant to the race; this is a nonpartisan position,” Campos said.
Campos has also retweeted a photo of pallets of bricks left near the Cannon House Office Building in Washington D.C. and wrote “Making sure Antifa and any other domestic terrorists have deadly weapons handy for assault.” A fact check by Reuters determined that the bricks had actually been left there for restoration work on a nearby alley.
When asked what evidence she had that the bricks had been left there purposefully, Campos began laughing and asked why it matters.
“Is everything on social media supposed to be taken (as) dire truth? I think people are putting a lot of emphasis and weight on things. Everyone has a right to a viewpoint and to an opinion,” Campos said.
On her campaign website, Campos lists her areas of focus as student well-being, parental participation, academic excellence, merit-based grading, student advocacy, differentiated learning, transparency, community engagement, parental rights and fiscal accountability.
The California Parents Union and California Parents Unified have both endorsed her campaign, according to Campos’ website. The groups advocate and lobby for parental rights in education.
“Parental rights are the fundamental right in deciding what is best for your children in their education environment,” Campos writes on her website.
In an interview, she said she hasn’t identified any particular areas in which she believes parents’ voices aren’t being heard by the Palo Alto board.
When it comes to the COVID-19 pandemic, Campos believes the mask mandate lasted far too long in Santa Clara County and that face coverings made it difficult for children to read each other’s faces and connect with one another. Palo Alto Unified dropped its face covering requirement in March, when the state mandate was lifted. Campos opposes reinstating mask requirements.
With board President Ken Dauber not seeking reelection, the window for candidates to file will close on Aug. 17.
To truly get a sense of exactly who this candidate is and what she stands for go check out her Twitter and FB feeds. Truly ugly, full MAGA. This article just touches the surface.
Why is PA Online burying the lede here? This campaign is obviously part of the recent conservative culture war push to radicalize school boards. Uncritically describing this as a traditional family values campaign and talking about the “oversexualization” of minors is just playing into the absurd framing of the right. The complete erasure of lgbt people, and by extension kids, is in full force in Granbury and Jamestown. Now we see it pop up here, and this newspaper is afraid to name it.
Just look at California Parents United’s website, it’s obviously partisan: there’s covid misinformation, folks wearing “big gov sucks” t-shirts, and creepy signs held by kids that say “my body, my parent’s choice.” I understand that folks wish the lockdowns were handled differently, but this is not the “I’m just asking questions” campaign that Ms Campos is pretending it is.
Thanks to Campos for being willing to spend time and energy on the school board. I hope people will listen to what she has to say rather than listening to comments made by people who are assuming things that may be totally opposite to what she actually thinks and wishes to do.
It is good to hear family values as something our school board should consider. It is true to say that the schools are to educate our children, not to make political careers or teachers professional careers. Putting children and families first will make a pleasant change.
RE: “When it comes to the COVID-19 pandemic, Campos believes the mask mandate lasted far too long in Santa Clara County.”
Amen! So glad to hear you’re running for the School Board Ingrid Campos. We need covid policy sanity.
The PAUSD School Board’s decision to keep grades 6-12 schools closed, and activities banned from campus, in Aug 2020 when they were not required to was a travesty and total fail. In Aug 2020 schools across the US were open, and there was plenty of data supporting this decision from Europe (with Sweden that never closed, and others that closed only for one month and reopened spring 2020). The data was available in Aug 2020 and PAUSD ignored it, voting to keep grades 6-12 remote Aug 2020 – March 2021 (a full year!)! Students in Europe and the UK NEVER wore masks in school!
Countries like Sweden view our policies as absurd and highly destructive to kids. This is not a conservative stance; it’s a smart stance. And it’s why the ENTIRE SF School Board was recently recalled by a Democratic constituency in SF! Parents have had it with liberal school boards using their kids as a grand (failed) experiment during covid.
Dr. Tracy Hoeg
“Sacrificing children’s health in the name of Health
A look at the US’s Counterproductive Covid Policies and why Scandinavia did Better”
https://sensiblemed.substack.com/p/sacrificing-childrens-health-in-the?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
PAUSD Board members responsible for the terrible choice to keep 6-12 schools closed Aug 2020 are now deflecting, trying to blame SCC (WEAK), claiming SCC required them to stay closed. Completely FALSE! SCC did NOT require K-12 to be remote for a full school year! There was return to school guidance, and grades 6-12 could’ve returned in person in Aug 2020 — like Marin County schools did! PAUSD Board had 5 months to prepare after being closed March – Aug 2020 and did NOTHING. The PAUSD Board completely failed our secondary students. Vote them out!
Who’s family values?
Every family has a set of their own; and pushing a heteronormative WASPy “morals” on the rest of the school district is not right.
Ms. Campos, based on a quick search, believes in a full flurry of conspiracy theories, and is anti-science. Not a good candidate at all.
Not to mention the “over sexualization” of minors as part of the sex ed. Seriously? Have she ever seen the curriculum on that? On the other hand, I had a mother – in our school district – once complain about the “puberty talk” that our kids get in 5th grade because – believe it or not – she did not want her 12 year old son to learn that females get periods. She felt it was entirely inappropriate for boys to learn that.
CT resident is right – we need the PA Weekly to do a bigger story on the conservatives’ strategy to take over local school boards. Ms. Campos is likely to promote divisiveness and bring out angry, disrespectful, vocal conspiracy theorists/anti-science rabblerousers (who may or may not live in town) to candidate forums. Will she and other candidates agree to a code of conduct this election system?
The framing of this story is irresponsible. Look at her twitter (agreeing with Candace Owens, retweeting MAGA / QANON conspiracy theories, etc). This is about more than just family values; this is about a person with dangerous political views who is jumping on the wave of white supremacist & homophobic censorship in schools. I’m sure our superintendent is a fan, but Palo Alto has a responsibility to stand against her and people like her to keep our students and staff members safe.
I would not vote for Ms. Campos. I was at the end of her nasty comments because I disagreed with her on a California Senate vote. She is hateful and definitely not open to listening to others opinions.
Oooookay then. Why is it so hard to find a sane candidate with some actual experience in education…
Let’s look at what we’ve got:
1. Ingrid, who is obviously nutty
2. Dharap, the incumbent. He’ll probably win just because he’s the incumbent
3. Nicole Chiu-Wang, who is clearly running just because she wants to run for office. (She essentially says this on her Instagram.) No experience in education. Just moved to Palo Alto in May — 3 months ago. Her kids aren’t even in elementary school yet. Literally no relevant experience. Despite all this, she was endorsed by most of the board in June. That’s right. They endorsed a candidate with zero experience, a month after moving here, before they knew who else was running. (I’d love to get a straight answer about why.)
4. Shana Segal. The full package: teacher, kids in the district, school consultant, PAUSD alum. Obviously cares about education and knows it well.
She is the only qualified candidate. There’s not even a competition.
But will she win? Probably not. Nicole Chiu-Wang has money. Shana Segal doesn’t. In the end, that’s what matters, right?
Not surprising since candidates like this are part of a national trend. Today’s SF Chronicle reported a similar candidate is running unopposed in Morgan Hill without burying the lede “He’s anti-gay and a race extremist. He’s running unopposed for a Bay Area school board seat”
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/A-Bay-Area-school-board-candidate-holds-extremist-17370172.php?utm_campaign=premiumsfgate_breakingnews_20220812&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email
Taking over local school boards and city councils has long been a stated aim of the dark money” networks described by Jane Mayer in her book https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Money-History-Billionaires-Radical/dp/0307947904 entitled Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right Paperback – Illustrated, January 24, 2017
When she spoke to a standing-room-only crowd at Stanford Business School years ago, she projected slides onto THREE auditorium walls showing the all of their lobbying tentacles and focus including — climate disinformation, “traditional values” aka banning gay marriage, birth control, book banning etc — penetrating governments at all levels moving down from the federal to the local level aka libraries, school boards, etc. etc. It was memorable.
They started DECADES ago with the Texas Textbook Commission whose few members influence the content of the NATIONAL textbook market because the Texas budget is so big publishers don’t want to issue multiple editions.
Their Citizen United initiative — aka Romney’s “Corporations are people, my friend” – won unlimited campaign contributions by business, PACs and lobbyists —while working to limit personal contributions.
Ingrid Campos has interesting notions about “traditional family values”.
A preoccupation with sex seems primary – who knows about it when, and who’s doing it with whom.
Very odd given all the serious issues PAUSD must deal with.
Also see in the article the web link to her website of endorsers – United Parents Union and another similar group. There you will read that the hope is for a huge mass movement to get its people into office at all levels of government (such as Campos).
United Parents Union speakers are hosted on right wing radio – take a listen.
There is a vast difference between parents having input into their children’s education versus being manipulated for a candidates larger partisan, non-transparent political agenda.
“A preoccupation with sex seems primary – who knows about it when, and who’s doing it with whom.”
As the late great Ann Richards (former Texas governor) famously said back in the 1980s “Nothing gets conservatives more excited and frothing at the mouth quicker than what’s going on in other folk’s bedrooms.”
Jess C: Thank you for your concise summary :), and have hope for Shana Segal!
Not knowing the insider machinations of school boards, it seems unprofessional to endorse any candidate, especially before candidates have all submitted their applications. Although anyone–regardless of extreme views I don’t agree with–has the right to voice opinions,* it is abundantly clear that Shana is the only reasonable candidate with commitment to education and the experience to back it up. Could we keep the egos and $$$ out of this race please?
*[“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” attributed to Voltaire but reportedly originated with an English author Evelyn Beatrice Hall in 1906]
Online Name invariably comes up with the most interesting details. Not to mention arcane information. And links. And quotes like the one above by Ann Richards.
I’ve lived in this town a long time and it seems to me PAUSD has been riddled with controversy and disagreement more in the past 5 – 10 years than 25 – 30 years prior. I hope voters with children pay close attention to the School Board race and elect informed, rational people who will do their best by Palo Alto students and teachers.
@Annette, thanks. And childless voters like me who usually ignore school board elections. I knew something was up when I started seeing yard signs popping up for her opponent Shana Segal https://www.voteshanasegal.com/endorsements
When I checked the exact wording of the Ann Richards quote, I was reminded that Richards used the quote “If you give us (women) a chance, we can perform. After all, Ginger Rogers did everything that Fred Astaire did. She just did it backwards and in high heels” in her 1988 address to the Democratic National Convention.
That was before the “traditional values” crowd united to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment, equal pay protection, undermine sex discrimination laws, repeal the Violence Against Women Act and broaden anti-abortion laws to include fertility treatments and plain old contraception they insist is abortion although doctors / scientists disagree… while protecting child marriage, forcing young girls to drop out of school to bear their rapists’ babies, banning books, intimidating librarians who disagree…
CT and BL amuse me with “Republican takeover” myth. 94% of teachers’ unions donation go to Democrats. Who has more influence day-to-day?
School Boards can only mitigate so much. And, why is there so much fear of pulling K-12 education back to actual education? American schools notoriously lag in competing worldwide. Churning out STEM students is far easier when you’re not faced with wasted hours on specious “social studies.”
What is “actual” education when kids no longer learn Civics and are clueless that the US has 3 branches of govenment? Do we want candidates who post that people don’t believe Biden is an actual dictator are “sheeple” as per this post onn Twitter https://twitter.com/HowardKushlan/status/1558179228868231169/photo/
“Social studies” usually means studying history and civics and government. They’d learn about how foounders built in checks and balance to try to protect against demagogues. And you know the old saying that those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.
Re the “conservative takeover,” do your homework. Did you miss all the articles on gerrymandering districts? Do you know what that means? The takeover has been well-documented for decades (see reference above to Jane Mayer’s award-winning book “Dark Money,” Listen the folks who screamed “Locker her up” about Hillary and who thratened to hang a vice president for not dishonestly installing Trump who are bow threatening war and violence while tolerating the FBI trying to recover LEGALLLY highly classified documebts that Trump might sell to Putin, the Saudi’s and every other autocrat in the world who’ll pay him to sell out his country.
Teaching critical thinking to view events like this would be a plus. Knowing enough science to be able to understand, for example, how disease spreads would be a real plus.
No, not everyone should be a STEM student but everyone should have a basic understanding of our history and structure of government the laws that are supposed to apply to everyone.
I’m for having a diversity of voices on the school board.
I also want focus on growth and achievement in reading, writing, arithmetics.
This state is currently dumbing down, fast, in public education.
I’ll vote for her.
Palo Alto Online, thank you for updating the article with more information about her social media posts.
I think the fact that she refused to answer the question about President Biden being legitimately elected speaks volumes.
We need diversity of voices on the school board, however, what we do not need is someone delusional.
She is not interested in improving standards of education for our children; she is interested in shoving her personal religious believes down the throats of these around her.
Yes, thanks Palo Alto Online for updating the article. I’d also like to know what she thinks about teaching about religion and to know how how her views align with those of other school board candidate recruited by the Santa Clara GOP as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/A-Bay-Area-school-board-candidate-holds-extremist-17370172.php?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headlines&utm_campaign=sfc_politicalpunch&sid=55ea2fcd18ff43611e9029c8
“A candidate running unopposed for one of the seats on the Morgan Hill school board wrote that modern descendants of slaves are “so much better off” than if their ancestors “had been left in the country that they came from.”
Dennis Delisle also opposes homosexuality and gay marriage, according to a self-published book he wrote in 2012, and likes to quote a founding father who believed “the number one purpose of public schools is to teach youth, young people, the Word of God.”
“When asked how these values would impact the decisions she would make if elected, Campos said that she has heard from parents about what they feel is the “oversexualization” of sex education.”
Uh, isn’t sex education supposed to be about sex education? What’s her stance on sex ed teaching about rape and birth control?
“When asked what directions would be worrisome, she replied that she was “concerned with the LGBQT literature that’s starting as early as pre-K. I’m really concerned about that because that is a sexualized movement, rather than an individual.”
That’s the same logic similar candidates are using across the country to shut down libraries that have under 0.1% books on gender issues. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/gop-llibraries-culture-war_n_62ed58cfe4b09fecea4defc3
Once again, thanks for the updates in the article.
I tend to agree that her opinions on federal matters do not matter for a school board candidate or her views on antifa. In fact, I would go as far as saying that it seems open minded opinions are not necessarily a bad thing and will leave that alone.
Her views on sex education curriculum are however important as this is an area where I would imagine that most parents do not know what their children are being taught and at what age. Who is choosing this curriculum and can it be viewed by parents is a worthy question to ask all 3 candidates. Certain things would not be relevant to teach at PreK and parents should be aware that there is a sex ed curriculum for the early grades, what the curriculum teaches, and that there is the facility to remove a child from those classes if the parents so desire. Is that something that most parents know, I don’t know.
Additionally, anecdotally and from Nextdoor, it seems that bathrooms in elementary schools are gender neutral and that everyone uses the same bathroom. Is this now the case for the multi-stall bathrooms or just the single occupancy bathrooms? Specifically, if campus visitors (parents, volunteers, any other campus visitor) are able to use bathrooms, can we be guaranteed that the children are safe while using them? These are not unreasonable questions to be asked on any campus including elementary campuses.
Lastly, family values are different for each family and should be taken into account. San Francisco has reportedly given EID as a school holiday. At one time, Palo Alto gave jewish holidays as school holidays. Presumably this goes under the heading of knowing what family values are for a particular district. Listening to family concerns is something any good board member should do as a matter of course. If enough families hold a similar value, then the district should be acting on that value.
There is a huge difference between having an open mind and being delusional and subscribing to conspiracy theories. The latter os indicative of inability to think critically and rationally which are qualities necessary for being in the school board.
There is no secret about the curriculum, including that of sex education. It’s openly available and parents can opt their children out if they so choose. It’s a favorite dog whistle of conservatives because it Carries such emotional response from most people.
Re “her views on antifa,” I think those views are important because history’s important as is knowing what “fascism” means. It means knowing about World War II during which the US and our fought AGAINST fascism and knowing that American soldier died fighting fascism — aka Nazi Germany — ended the holocaust ans Nazi Germany’s takeover of Europe.
So When did being antifascist become negative? When the Holocaust deniers and the White Supremacists didn’t like being called out for being fascists, neo-Nazi’s, bigots, anti-Semites and racists — many of the same views as the fascists.
Remember that Trump kept Hitler’s speeches at his bedside and said he wished the US were more like Nazi Germany and other authoritarian regimes — aka dictatorships.
Also remember that the Nazis excelled at propaganda aka “alternative facts” — something critical thinking helps students detect and understand.
First, “over-sexualizing” is not the same thing as explaining different types of attraction, some people are attracted to males, some to females, some to both, some to neither, some don’t care at all, some don’t know, etc. Whatever it is, it’s not about sex. I’m someone who is incredibly uncomfortable in puberty talks or sex ed talks. But I am NEVER UNCOMFORTABLE when we talk about the LGBTQ+ community. Whether I am included in the community or not, it has always (since I was 9 when it started being in the curriculum more and mentioned more) something that I felt glad to have.
A way that everyone can have representation and know “wait, this isn’t weird, I’m not a horrible human, there’s nothing wrong with me, this just means that I’m not interested in heterosexual relationships or that I don’t like being a “woman” or feeling or looking “feminine”, whatever that may mean to them, etc.
We don’t need to have someone on the school board having a say that does not represent the 11,000+ kids in the district. So what if your TK-age kid learns what the word ‘gay’ means? Is the world really going to end? No. Is your kid gay? We don’t know, you don’t know, let it go.
If your kid is gay, does it really matter? No.
If your kid is trans, does it really matter? No.
If you care about your kids and their wellbeing, then listen to how they feel and what they need from you. Just give them a hug and tell them it’s okay. They don’t need to hide their pain alone. Take it out on themselves or feel like they’re alone.
So seriously, please don’t ever say that making every kid feel included is “oversexualizing something”. Also like we’ve been learning about straight relationships since we were babies, have some of us turned out gay or bi, yep.
If we talk about all of the possibilities, will some kids turn out straight, yep, gay, yep, bi, yep, ace, yep, not sure about it, yep. You don’t need to understand, you just need to accept.
It’s great to see these comments calling out The Weekly for originally missing crucial info about Campos. It’s good they finally updated the article. Her views are ignorant and disturbing, not “diverse”. I wish you all the best of luck in defeating her. It’s important to be aware of the political movement for people like her to insert themselves in local politics and get elected.
Yes, thanks for updating the article but if we didn’t read these comments, we wouldn’t know there was an article update.
Perhaps you should reissue it under a new headline so people read it?
Given the national political climate with people jumping to conclusions, name-calling, doxing ans threatening FBI agents, attacking each other, threatening to kill politicians and judges etc. etc., facts matter.
Regardless of any polarity, the PAUSD needs a member who reflects the views and will serve as a constructive voice for conservative Palo Alto parents who are devoutly respectful God and his infinite teachings pertaining to proper a human existence.
We do not need any more ‘woke’ candidates who blindly embrace political correctness and who condone deviant, abhorent human behavior.
It seems there is a lack of diversity in opinion among our civic leaders. If we want diversity then we need to have diverse thoughts discussed. Everyone seems to think diversity is a good thing when it comes to race and gender, but why not opinion? Do we really want to have carbon copies and like minded people teaming up together to make the decisions that affect us all and our children? Or do we want intelligent people who are able to discuss issues like adults and see other points of view. We talk about critical thinking, but it seems to me that we prefer to be critical than to actually think. Thinking involves hearing more that one side to an issue and then independently coming to a conclusion based on what is heard.
The Weekly is doing its job when it digs deep into all of our candidates. I have no problem with that provided it digs deep into all of the candidates and not just the ones who appear to go against the grain when it comes to thinking independently. Would I want all the members of our BoE or Council to think the same? No, and that means regardless of whether I agree with them or not, I still like to see diverse opinion.
Various other States are seeing influxes of people arriving from California due to the CalExit. They are saying “Don’t Californiarise our State”. From that, I take it they don’t like narrow minded California idealogies which are unable to see any other point of view.
There is strength when intelligent people with different opinions can work together. We need to learn how to think and to teach our children how to think not what to think. That is indeed critical thinking.
Bystander, I think you are entirely missing the point here.
We are not talking about difference of opinion between intelligent adults. We are talking about delusional thinking of someone who is in a cult. Ms. Campos believes in the fairy tale of stolen election (something that has been proven to be a lie over and over again), she does not believe that Covid is real, she does not believe in vaccinations, she believes more conspiracy theories about our children getting groomed. NONE OF THIS IS REAL, as I am sure you know. This is not a difference of opinion, this is delusional thinking.
On the same subject, CalExit? Here is a good article on that. People have been screaming about people leaving in droves from California since 1920s. And its never been real.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/09/leaving-california-exodus-evidence-myth
“she does not believe that Covid is real, she does not believe in vaccinations, she believes more conspiracy theories about our children getting groomed. NONE OF THIS IS REAL,”
Not believing in Covid or vaccinations should be enough to disqualify her since she’d presumably let the infected go unmasked and freely infect everyone else.
As for “grooming,” remember the ridiculous rumors that Hillary was “grooming” children in her “pedophile ring” run out of a Washington pizza parlor basement? The pizza parlor owner was harassed and threatened. Some heavily armed guy from the South to drive up up to free the children. SWAT teams were called out and the guy arrested.
The pizza place didn’t HAVE a basement. That guy at least was embarrassed.
Facts are irrelevant to the conspiracy theory folks who keep selling all sorts of nonsense for HUGE amounts of money to people who’ll believe anything — which makes critical thinking so critical.
Reading through the majority of comments above, Ingrid Campos has really have struck a chord with those who do not want the best for our children and their parents. There should be diverse views on the school board and everything that is taught in school should be transparent to the parents – aren’t these obvious points?
@Father of Gunn Graduates. Thank you for stating what so many parents are thinking, but don’t feel comfortable vocalizing lest they be labeled MAGA, QANON, and a bunch of other crazy negative names that don’t apply, etc. just for wanting differentiated instruction that serves all students and transparency in education.
The silent majority who can’t speak up lest they be labeled needs to vote. The most vocal members of this community put endless energy and virtue signaling around “diversity”, but in reality folks who oppose Campos don’t want any diversity. They want only Board reps who think exactly the way they do. That’s not diversity, that’s hypocrisy.
And here’s the ultimate hypocrisy. Campos is a woman of color, first gen student, first in her family to graduate from college or a four year university, UCLA no less. Impressive. Did any of you opposing and labeling her even bother to look at her background? Many in this community put their heart and soul into efforts to support first gen students of color, yet now that she is running for office, and can represent that experience first hand for our Palo Alto students of color who might be the first going to college, the same people who feel so strongly that these students should be represented in our universities are actively bashing Campos and don’t want her on the Board. Take a look in the mirror people. You’re not the do-gooders you pretend to be when it comes right down to it.
“Did any of you opposing and labeling her even bother to look at her background?”
Many of us did, as well as the reports of similar candidates launching bids to be elected to school boards all over the state and the county.
In his recent publisher letter to subscribers, Bill Johnson issued a rare apology for not reporting on her extremist earlier “rather than waiting to see if got traction” as a disservice to readers and voters.
Since the later correction wasn’t issued as a separate “correction notice” to the original, many readers missed the later update because the article’s headline wasn’t changed to reflect the update and people rarely reread the same article.