Last week on a 3-1 vote with Bob Poppenga in dissent, the DJUSD School Board appointed Joy Klineberg to fill the School Board position held by Cindy Pickett, who stepped down on June 30 to take a position at DePaul University in Chicago. Many in the community were unhappy with the School Board’s choice, believing that the selection did not reflect the need for diversity and inclusion of marginalized communities.
On Tuesday, Yolo Committee for Diverse and Inclusive Elections (YCDIE), a committee that emerged in response to recent national events surrounding issues of racial injustice, announced that their first initiative is going to be a petition for a special election to fill the seat on the school board.
“The Davis Joint Unified School District is approximately 50 percent people of color and the current board does not reflect the District’s diversity,” the group said in a statement. “The Yolo Committee for Diverse and Inclusive Elections believes strongly in the importance of representation and of allowing the public to select their representatives through a democratic process.
“Marginalized communities have been historically disenfranchised through the appointment of governing officials, and thus YCDIE feels that it is important to protect the voters’ right to choose their representatives.”
Peggy Kao Enderle told the Vanguard that the group is in the process of organizing, and expects to collect about 800 signatures within a week.
In order to overturn an appointment by the board, state law requires 1.5 percent of registered voters at the last regular election. In the November 6, 2018 Measure H election there were 44,682 registered voters, 35,925 of whom voted. In the March 3, 2020 Measure G election there were 43,803 registered voters, 26,257 of whom voted. A threshold of 1.5% of 44,682 is 670 signatures. 800 signatures would exceed that amount by a healthy margin.
The following is the relevant section of the Education Code:
“I think the Davis community really values the opportunity to really elect their representatives and to have representatives that they feel adequately understand and represent their concerns and needs,” Enderle said. “We wanted to put that to a vote of the community.”
She added, “We have a desire to see our elections represents the diversity of Davis more than they do now.”
This is a tough time to think about children’s education – the COVID pandemic, schools going to distance learning, the economy faltering and long-quiet issues of the legacy of systemic racism have come back to the forefront of national political discourse.
“We’re hoping for board members that can think broadly about all the communities,” Peggy Kao Enderle told the Vanguard.
“There are a lot of concerns that brought us together,” she said. “We’re in a unique situation.”
Rijin Sahakian added, “I believe our school board should be reflecting the desires of the public.”
She said, “The majority of the public comments indicated that diversity of the board was very important to the public. That seems to have been disregarded.”
Sahakian also said noted the ongoing crisis in public education – issues of funding, diversity and inclusion, and issues relating to science and the defunding of science programs – “COVID is exacerbating that” but the issue is was present even before hand.
Sahakian noted that Vigis Asmundson had over 20 years of teaching experience “was not selected” despite her expertise and ties to the community. She said, “I don’t know that that reflects the value of community members.” She said, “This is someone who has taught 20 years internationally and in Davis and in the Fairfield-Suisun District in the area of science.”
She added, “She helped included girls and women in the school in Somaliland which she was one of the founding teachers of.”
“There’s a number of issues here,” Sahakian said. “The public interest, the democratic process here of selection and what happened. Diversity on the board and the fact that these major issues that we’re facing in terms of representation, science and public health are not necessarily reflected on the school board at this time and the selection was not made to strengthen that.”
Joe DiNunzio, now the president of the board with Pickett’s resignation, said, “Following the DJUSD board meeting on July 2nd, a required notice ran on Sunday, July 5th, in the Davis Enterprise. It is also posted in three public locations: the DJUSD District Office, the DJUSD Operations Center, and the Mary L. Stephens Davis Library. The notice informs the public that there has been a trustee resignation, a provisional appointment has been made, and that absent a certified petition calling for a special election, the provisional appointment will take effect on August 3rd. “
He said, “If a certified petition is submitted by the deadline, then the District will work with the Yolo Elections Office to take the steps needed for an at-large election.”
Cindy Pickett last week told the Vanguard, “I think we operate in a system that gives opportunities to certain people.”
She said, “I think that’s an area of disappointment too for some residents—there was not a recognition of the system, the systemic injustice.”
She cited a quote from the poet Maya Angelou, “Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.”
“There’s no blame or ill-will,” she said. “It should be a learning experience.”
Her colleagues need to understand the circumstances of this moment in time and hopefully learn from those circumstances.
But the possibility of redress seems to have settled some of this for Cindy Pickett.
If the group gets the needed signatures, the voters will then have their say.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Where will the petition be available for signature?
Sad that its come to this during a pandemic.
They are going to apparently have online petitions and central drop off locations to avoid contact. I forgot to put that into the article.
Forgot? Are you now “forgetting” to provide a link to their on-line effort? Did you ‘forget’ that you raised the issue?
Early “old-timers”?
Evidently it’s a good thing I did not print that part because they cannot do it
As Cindy has pointed out…
Better to err by not including info, than to err by putting out incorrect info…
I’m still not up on all of this…I’m still trying to catch up. But it seems to me that the criteria for selection is what is in question. I think some transparency in the reasoning behind the selection would go a long way…..sort of like how the Supreme Court Justices write about why they ruled (with or against the final decision) the way they did.
So what is the criteria for selection?
Is it straight up years of experience? What kind of experience? Is there a mandatory racial/cultural component taken into consideration? And if so how does that match up with experience? So if someone with 15 years of experience goes up against someone with 10 years of experience and is a non-white person and/or has experience in multi-cultural studies….how is that all weighted in the final decision? Should there be an affirmative action type of structure to the school board to guarantee a (or some percentage of) non-white person is on the board? I guess ideally the racial mix of the school board should reflect racial mix of the population. But then you also have to weigh all this against simply getting the best people in with the best credentials.
I’ve heard (and I don’t know the specifics) that there were better qualified racially diverse candidates that were passed over. If that was the case (and again, this is where a transparent selection criteria and report from the rest of the board would be needed) then yeah…I’d be outraged and up in arms about overturning this decision. On the other hand I wouldn’t want to get rid of the best qualified candidate simply because they’re not racially diverse (unless being racially diverse or having educational experience in multiculturalism is a primary part of the selection criteria….again what is the selection criteria?).
Anyone with more knowledge about all this want to help me out here?
“So what is the criteria for selection?”
There is no criteria for selection. There a means of selection. The means of selection is either four board members or the public. Everyone votes their preference regardless.
Which I guess gets to the point of the problem. A chaotic free for all in the selection process. But weather it’s a selection by the board or the public…there should still be some sort of criteria for selection. IMO…the criteria should be approved by the voters. Then the board votes on the selection based on which candidate meets the criteria set up by the voters.
The criteria behind this effort is that the selectee cannot have white skin, and perhaps not a penis. Other than that, those behind this effort seem to have no objections to the person who was selected. (The person who was selected did meet one of those criteria.)
Regardless of what one thinks of this effort, that’s a fact – not an opinion.
(Not sure if Asians would be “o.k.”)
I suspect that voters may ultimately have a broader set of criteria.
Are you intentionally trying to demonstrate that you don’t get it?
What part? Those are facts – I didn’t put forth an opinion.
But now that it’s been brought up, do Asians meet the criteria in this scenario? And, what “types” of Asians would?
For example, is Mr. Fernandes now “o.k.” (in reference to your earlier misunderstanding), but perhaps a Chinese person “isn’t”? If such a person was selected, would another effort to overturn then be launched?
What’s odd is that you not only believe those are “facts” rather than your opinion of the situation but you completely missed one of the people quoted arguing for Asmundson.
You should probably explain the relevance of this, rather than assuming that I know.
And, how it relates to this effort.
You asked the Asian question and Asmundson is Asian
I’d also suggest that (in the future), you refrain from intended insults (e.g., “Are you intentionally trying to demonstrate that you don’t get it?”). You’re not winning any “friends” from these type of comments.
Are you referring to the former council member (who is of Philippine decent, as I recall)? And if so, is this one of the few Asian descents that is acceptable as the criteria behind this effort?
Again, let’s just get the facts out there, without the snide comments. Put it out there, regarding what background meets the criteria. Why hide it?
I assume that having a penis is not a deal-breaker, but not sure. (See Alan Fernandes, for example.)
Her daughter was the runner up for the appointment
Well, it sounds like she (the daughter of Asmundson) meets the criteria for this selection (e.g., the “right” type of Asian, with a bonus of not having a penis). Though I’m not sure what color her father is, and if that might be a disqualifying factor.
Now, if only there was a daughter for Sue Greenwald running as well, it might be more interesting. (Perhaps would be the wrong color, though.)
Though in all fairness, I realize that the complaint is that the process (for whatever reason) does not reflect the will of the voters, and is therefore “shutting out” some groups. Then again, perhaps Cindy wouldn’t have won in the first place, had voters known she would leave. (I suspect that Cindy didn’t know that at the time, either.) Could be that the voters would have elected someone “white”, had they known.
I’m sure that some do vote based upon skin color/gender (or other attributes such as disability, LGBT status, etc.). Some will tell you that without hesitation, directly. (Probably most of the people behind this effort.)
David,
I don’t have enough info to form an opinion yet.
But I have to say that from the outside looking in it does appear that the primary objection by the public to the person selected is based on race.
On the other hand I have heard (again, I do not know if this is true or what the specifics are) that better qualified racially diverse women were passed over?
Can you provide more specifics about what was being considered when the vote took place? Is there an issue of qualifications vs. racial diversity among the school board candidates? How did the top candidates qualifications stack up?
The vote that took place was by four board members. I don’t think I can shed a lot of light on their criteria. I do think that the people who are launching this initiative are primarily objecting to the fact that a relatively undiverse board of people made a selecton they thought did not reflect the need for diversity on the board. The threshold for putting it on the ballot is relatively low – 660 or so signatures, plus some cushion to get to 800, and therefore they would rather the community weigh in. At the end of the day, there are no guarantees but they believe that would be a better process and hope it leads to a better outcome.
David, what would be a better outcome?
From their perspective, someone of color getting elected.
I have to say , I’m having a hard time with this.
Again, this all goes back to criteria. Without some sort of racial diversity mandate for the Board, I assume the Board will choose the most qualified applicant based on their achievements and experience. To simply remove someone because they’re not the right color or gender doesn’t seem right to me. I don’t think I’d want to be chosen to replace a person based solely on my race or gender.
Like I said, I’ve heard people say that better qualified racially diverse candidates were passed over. If that’s the case, I’d like to know about it and then I would fully support a voter supported overturning of the board’s decision.
Keith – you’re trying to quantify this a bit too much.
What happens is this:
1. Women of color, Cindy Pickett leaves the board
2. National climate on race explodes
3. Board has appointment process
4. Board receives several hundred comments most of them pushing for either Fulp-Cooke or Asmundson
5. Board choose Joy who they had appointed in 2018.
6. Community activists who wanted a woman of color cry foul
7. Community activists have recourse and are attempting to use it
Better qualified? They are different. Eye of the beholder. Reasonable people can disagree. Given all of that, putting this to a vote and letting the voters decide seems like a good option.
Perhaps the process (for the future) should be that anytime a board member leaves (with XX amount of time left on their appointment), the selection should go to the voters (in a cost-effective manner).
Otherwise, there’s always going to be some dissatisfaction with the “appointment” process.
From what I understand, some are willing to “overlook” the potential $100K cost, in this case. Perhaps the “optics” of that doesn’t look too good during this time of school district budgetary concerns. And, so soon after giving teachers a “raise” via yet another parcel tax.
This was odd because in 2014, Nancy Peterson resigned in March. They appointed Alan Fernandes to the board, and then in November he was up for a two year term. I’m not exactly sure why in this case the appointment would be for 2 and a half years. And it’s not even $100K, it’s more like $30,000 because it’s on the November election.
DG: “They appointed Alan Fernandes to the board, and then in November he was up for a two year term. I’m not exactly sure why in this case the appointment would be for 2 and a half years.”
Alan ran unopposed for the two year term that year, so his name didn’t even appear on the ballot. I think Fernandes made the argument to the board(if I remember it all correctly), in discussing how they would find a replacement for Pickett’s seat, that the appointment process would bring in the most community participation, and that a November election for a 2-year for a districtwide election (plus COVID-19) wouldn’t likely bring in many candidates or maybe not even a competitive election. I think Fernandes cited his own situation in 2014.
Ironically I think it’s gonna prove to be correct, but not in the way he envisioned it
Klineberg could step aside. All over the country people have been stepping aside in an attempt to advance racial harmony.
By stepping aside it would end the acrimony and end the need to run a referendum petition drive during a pandemic.
Also by stepping aside it would allow the school board to pick another candidate and save the district the cost of an election.
AKA, “white ‘persons’ burden”…
Some strong cultures focus on “guilt”… most psychiatrists/psychologists, others, realize that is destructive… but, it’s real, and Irish-Catholics, others, grew up in such cultures/religious backgrounds…
Guess that’s why I love Billy Joel’s, “Innocent Man”… and why I resent folk trying to hang the guilt albatross on me…
I would suggest reading Ibram Kendi’s “How to be An Anti-Racist” for a lot of people it is not about guilt. Maybe Alan Miller understands this, but I think a lot of white Jews born in the shadow of the holocaust, it is less about feeling guilty and more about feeling a responsibility for “never again”
I agree with David’s interpretation. As the daughter of European immigrants who arrived well into the Jim Crow era and were themselves discriminated against, I feel zero guilt for slavery or the confiscation of Native American lands or their attempted genocide. However, as a member of the dominant group that benefitted from those injustices, I am not absolved from attempting to heal the persistent effects of those injustices. To the extent that I do not engage in this activity, I become culpable through my own actions or lack thereof.
Online signature collection is unfortunately not allowed. There will be a central site though that people can go to to sign the petition. It will be outside, with distance between the signer and the witness. Sterilized pens will be available and masks will be worn. YCDIE is finalizing the location and times of operation this evening and will share that information ASAP.
A team of volunteers will also be going out to collect signatures within the community.
Technically correct info, but useless… where can one go to sign? Simple question…
Hi Bill — Sorry, I should have added that I will post back here after we have finalized our location and times of operation this evening!
THAT would be useful! Thanks…
OK David, you have opened up a can of …
Questions:
Who is a “person of color”?
Ms Picket apparently ‘qualifies’ from both sides of her parentage.
I have a brother-in-law… half Asian, half white… is he a ‘person-of-color”? He married a person who is definitely “white”… have a son… is he a ‘person of color’ (1/4 Asian)…
If he marries his white girlfriend, will their child be “a person of color”?
Or, do you only think of ‘persons of color’ as “thoroughbreds” (100% ‘of color’) … you have brought this up…
What is the criteria? 100%? 50%? 25%? 12.5%? Elizabeth Warren?
Now, the big question… why does it matter?
Am 99.9% certain your answerve will completely ignore the %-age part… that is fully expected…
First of all and to be very clear, I am explaining here what is going on.
You’ve touched on a topic that I have been avoiding the issue of “passing”
Those percentages don’t matter a whole lot. In Nazi Germany if you had one grandparent who was Jewish, that was enough for them to gas you, if they could find it. Same thing was largely true in the south, one ancesestor was black was enough to enslave again if they could figure it out. People who were able to pass could live as white people. Some people will argue that people of color who “pass” for white, are actually just white and have full white privilege.
Why does it matter? What is being talked about is representation. People living the experience of a person of color. People coming from disadvantaged backgrounds who therefore understand issues differently from white Americans.
There are clear color lines still in this country, but there are now a lot of gray areas. You’re asking questions on where lines are drawn in gray areas and not surprisingly the lines drawn are not bright. Bottom line for a lot of people is really experience and empathy.
On that statement, we agree…
Where we may differ (likely) is that whites can have experience and empathy (across gender/color/socio-economic ‘lines’)… regardless…
Assuming that only one of your gender, your ethnicity, can be experienced, and have empathy towards your situation, needs… well that sniffs of sexism and/or racism. Pretty explicit bias…
How effective was Adam Clayton Powell, Jr in representing the interests of Harlem Blacks or Hispanics? How empathetic was he? But he said or did anything to make sure he could spend most of his time, and lack of effort, in Bimini…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Clayton_Powell_Jr.
Really…
Powell was the author of Title vi of the Civil Rights Act. He was instrumental in supporting Kennedy’s New Frontier and Johnson’s War on Poverty. In 1956 he backed Eisenhower because of the poor platform on civil right of the Democrats at that time. Ike was the last GOP President to carry the black vote.
Whatever his personal failings Powell did great things for the people he represented. Make no mistake about it.
I can simplify this for you. If somebody says they are X believe them.
If anyone would like to sign the petition, there will be a petition circulator at the cement picnic tables nearest to the Solidarity Space in Central Park (Davis) from 5 pm – 9 pm today, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday. To sign the petition you must be registered to vote within the DJUSD boundaries (Davis, El Macero).
If you would like a petition circulator to come to you, please send an email to ycdiedavis@gmail.com.
Actually includes “old Willowbank”, Royal Oaks MHP, Binning Tract, other residences in the unincorporated areas in the vicinity of Davis, as well!
That said, thank you Cindy for that info… is the “Solidarity Space” near the sycamore grove? Am a newbie, only having been in Davis since 1972, and have not heard of “the Solidarity Space”… perhaps others haven’t, either…
One way or the other, I plan to sign, and there may be two other voters in this household prepared to do the same…
Its sad that people need to do this in a pandemic. It feels like Davis is a Wisconsin Mini Me. It would be so much simpler if Klineberg would step aside.
Simpler, perhaps, but not likely a ‘happening thing’…
And, I don’t know Ms Klineberg… but I defend her interest in serving… no evidence that she engineered the decision to go to appointment, rather than election… she did not direct the votes in the final round.
But, that said, I support an election, and if Ms Klineberg runs, I will consider her without thinking about how we got here… a true “do-over”…
I will not consider Mr Fernandes in any election. By his actions…
“It feels like Davis is a Wisconsin Mini Me.”
But doesn’t everyone get to vote by mail for November in California? That didn’t happen in the Wisconsin primary.
I’m not blaming Klineberg. I’m simply suggesting that in the interest of the community she could step aside.
Fernandes deserves credit for leading on the parcel tax to support teachers. Yes, he got this one wrong, but, I wouldn’t blame him too much because of what happened when the board appointed Klineberg to replace Sunder two years ago.
They were deadlocked two to two with Adams and Archer refusing to go with any other candidate besides Klineberg. Unwilling to compromise, after many rounds of votes, Fernandes gave them what they wanted so the board could move on. It was hardball politics at the school board. My guess is he didn’t want to go through that again and anticipated the writing on the wall.
“I’m not blaming Klineberg. I’m simply suggesting that in the interest of the community she could step aside.”
If she were to step aside this very moment, I think the school board would be obligated to start either the appointment or election process all over again, and then Pickett’s seat would remain vacant. In the meantime, ongoing business would be decided by four men, until maybe November, or later if the November election deadline were missed. Is that preferable to having Klineberg on the board in the meantime?
The district is just about to decide how schools will open in August, and there’s a lot of anxiety in play from parents, district staff, and community members.
I’m not a lawyer but I don’t see why they would not be able to choose from the remainder of the list. As far as I know she hasn’t been sworn in so it would be a situation where they offered it to the first choice who declined to accept. They could then go back to the list and make a second choice.
As for there being four men there will be four men until at least November anyway.
This thing is going to drag on anyway and is a huge distraction. Not only that but people are going out in a pandemic to collect signatures potentially putting peoples health at risk.
By not accepting the position Klineberg could help avoid putting people at risk to collect signatures.
Even under your scenario its 4 months until the election. The district filled the seat in much less time than that the first time around.
“As far as I know she hasn’t been sworn in…”
She was sworn in.
Leave the damn issue alone, then (for now).
Cripes – don’t people have other things to worry about?
Whoever is in there isn’t likely to make much difference right now, regarding board decisions. Or – “any” difference, for that matter.
Save $30,000, at least.
By the way, what is the salary for this appointment? Zero?
No, no, it’s OK. Our God, “Chris, the Gender-Neutral, Raceless, Progressive God” protects both protestors and signature gatherers who are on the correct side of politics.
“By the way, what is the salary for this appointment? Zero?”
I understand there is a monthly stipend. Maybe ~$150?
Hiram, would you have a problem with four men deciding ongoing business?
My implied point was why insist a seat go vacant when there is at least diverse perspective with respect to gender?
Pickett announced on May 14 the seat was filled on July 2. That is seven weeks.
“But doesn’t everyone get to vote by mail for November in California? That didn’t happen in the Wisconsin primary.”
I was referring to people feeling compelled to go out to collect signatures in the middle of a pandemic. Its not exactly the same hence the Mini Me tag.
Also, with a do over, the cost of an election could be saved by the district if Klineberg stepped aside before the petitions were turned in.
Well, there’s this (from another commenter):
Who would?
That’s progressives today Ron, everything is based on race and gender.
There were many qualified candidates of various races and genders.
Honestly, I don’t know what a “progressive” is. Or any of the other labels. Can’t we (individually) think for ourselves? 😉
Probably so. I don’t view the result here as all that important.
“She was sworn in.”
Thanks for the clarification. I didn’t know.
The district is fortunate to have a candidate apply who has prior experience. My guess is that the trustees felt that Joy’s past service meant that she could figuratively hit the ground running, wouldn’t need to get up to speed on budget and facilities issues. DJUSD is facing issues that are almost existential: drastic budget impacts, and ensuring the safety of students, faculty, and staff as they make crucial decisions about reopening, about extracurricular and group activities, about whether their facilities will enable them to meet CDC guidelines, and much more. The suggestion that she should resign would, in my opinion, hobble the board as they face these problems.
I think much of this discussion is bordering on being disrespectful of Joy Klineberg. I suggest that concerns about process might better focus on using the regular election cycle to get greater diversity on the board. It’s July, school should be opening in about seven weeks. This board has a lot to do. This is not a distraction the trustees, parents, students, or staff need right now.
If I were a parent, my overriding concern right now would be whether the doors of the schools are going to be open in the fall, and whether the district is ensuring that it would be safe for my children to return.
Best wishes to the new trustee as she starts to work on behalf of all Davis students and their families and teachers.
In related matters, there’s also this:
Candidate filing period for three education-related posts begins Monday
Thank you for sharing that, Hiram… timely, pertinent… greatly appreciated…
No matter what the outcome of the petition is, I whole-heartily agree to that!
This is not about any individual, nor ‘criteria’ (although some seem to be doing serious ‘back-pedaling’ on that!)… it is about the process, now, and moving forward (precedent), for filling a vacancy with half a term remaining, and an election opportunity readily available.
Said as someone inclined to sign the petition, based on the process, and how that came to be… the original motion for ‘appointment’ failed to get a second… the motion for an ‘election’ got a second, but failed on the vote… the person who failed to second the original motion, failed to support the second motion…
Something still “sniffs” as to process… which inclines me to sign the petition…
The time between the public seeing who the candidates were, and seeing their CV/applications was a matter of days…
and . . .
’nuff said . . .