At last week’s union meeting for DJUSD classified employees, significant information regarding the ongoing administratorship was revealed. Under an administratorship, elected representatives are removed from their positions, and the appointed administrator assumes total authority and control over chapter operations. That authority includes the power to appoint individuals to union board seats, steward positions, site representative roles, and negotiations committees — positions that are in part ordinarily filled through a democratic vote of the membership.
During the meeting, members learned that the administrator had appointed new board members and an entirely new negotiations committee. Several of those appointments immediately raised concerns among members.
Some of the individuals appointed were former chapter officers who had previously been removed as part of the administratorship process. Members questioned why individuals connected to the circumstances surrounding the administratorship were being reinstated to leadership roles, particularly given the continued lack of transparency regarding the investigation into the chapter and the reasons the administratorship was imposed in the first place.
As previously stated in an earlier write-up, the only explanations provided to membership from CSEA as a whole, which included the chapter’s administrator, as to why the administratorship came about, was due to “a few concerning emails” and “too many pizzas ordered” for a chapter meeting.
Additional concerns arose over appointments involving individuals who had previously run for these same positions but ultimately were not elected by membership. In May 2025, an open negotiations committee seat prompted a chapter election. I was one of three candidates who ran for the position. On the night of the vote, the meeting room was filled to capacity with classified staff from across the district exercising their democratic right to vote.
When the votes were counted, I won the seat by a substantial margin — what I viewed as a clear statement from membership regarding who they believed was best suited to represent them. However, despite winning the election, I was ultimately prevented from serving on that year’s negotiations team due to what I believe was a loophole utilized by the union board and labor representative. I was informed that I would not be permitted to serve until negotiations for 2026 began, but my right to that seat was thrown out when the administratorship took control.. While broader details will be addressed fully at a later time, these key points provide important context to the current situation.
During a conversation with the administrator last month, the possibility of appointing me to the negotiations committee was briefly discussed after I raised concerns about being excluded from the position the previous year. However, I was never contacted further regarding the matter. When the final appointments were announced, my name was absent, while another individual who had lost the election for that same seat was appointed instead.
To be clear, I would not have accepted an appointed position even if it had been offered. First, I firmly believe the chapter should never have lost its democratic processes, and I would only serve on negotiations through a fair vote of the membership. Second, negotiation team members are restricted in what they can publicly discuss. Given the current climate and ongoing concerns within the chapter, I believe I can presently be more effective as an active chapter member speaking openly on these issues.
During the “Good of the Order” portion of the meeting, where members may ask questions, I asked the administrator why an individual who had not been elected by membership, did not regularly attend union meetings, and had shown limited involvement in chapter business was appointed over someone who had been elected by membership, maintained consistent attendance for two years, extensively studied collective bargaining agreements, and actively communicated with and organized membership.
The administrator responded by stating that he “didn’t want people who were mixed up in all of the commotion from the past” and “people who caused the administratorship in the first place.”
That response was particularly surprising given that another former board member and negotiator had also been reappointed to both the board and negotiations committee, after removing themselves just months prior to the administratorship when members were pushing back against what many believed to be unfair and questionable representation during negotiations with the district. To many members, that appeared inconsistent with the stated goal of “moving on” from prior conflicts.
After hearing the administrator’s comments, I asked him to repeat his statement to ensure I had heard correctly. His response was, “I think you heard what I said.” I then attempted to clarify whether he was directly accusing me of wrongdoing related to the administratorship. At that point, I was informed that my speaking time had expired, and the meeting moved on to other questions, withholding from me any opportunity to clarify his statements or defend myself against his claims.
I want to publicly state that these allegations carry no publicly presented evidence and are not factual. Although I was elected to serve on negotiations, I was never permitted to occupy the seat. Additionally, while I was running for Chief Union Steward last fall, the administratorship was imposed three days before the election, effectively halting the democratic process before voting could occur.
Throughout my employment with DJUSD, I have never served in an official leadership capacity for CSEA Chapter 572. I remain, and have always remained, a dues-paying union member. As a member, I maintain the legal right to speak publicly about my opinions regarding union representation, to communicate openly with fellow members, and to advocate for fair representation. Those rights are protected under the law.
Even if evidence supporting the administratorship were ultimately presented — which has yet to occur publicly — the stated concerns have consistently centered around alleged conflicts among board members. As a rank-and-file member with no governing authority within the chapter, I cannot reasonably be held responsible for those internal disputes.
Unions exist to serve and protect their members. That responsibility does not disappear during an administratorship. Many members are now asking an important question: how does a union become adversarial toward the very people it is meant to represent?
In addition to the accusations raised during the meeting, many members who asked questions were met with what several attendees perceived as dismissive or condescending responses from the administratorship. As the evening continued, additional members attempted to participate by raising questions of their own, but were denied the opportunity to speak after being told they had “already had their turn.” At several points during the meeting, individuals who continued raising their hands were passed over entirely, even when no other members were waiting to speak.
For many attendees, these interactions only heightened the frustration and tension that had steadily spread throughout the room over the course of the meeting.
My involvement has always stemmed from one goal — to advocate for positive change on behalf of educators and classified staff within our district. Like any institution, unions are made up of people, and people are fallible beings. Positions of power can sometimes lead organizations away from transparency, accountability, and democratic principles. Even when politicians enter the political landscape with good intent, influences can complicate things. Even in unions, these same complications can show up.
From the beginning, I have stated that the issues within DJUSD are nuanced and complex. I intend to continue addressing these concerns carefully and thoughtfully in the weeks ahead to bring more information to light.
In the meantime, I encourage classified employees to remain engaged and informed, because meaningful change only happens when members exercise their rights and participate in the process. Community members, parents, and district stakeholders also have a role to play. Attend school board meetings, ask questions, and stay informed about the environment in which our schools and employees are operating.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
