TT: . . .  When students have the chance to learn about those who look like them, have access to resources and support that protect our LBGQT+ students, they do better. Simply put.

At the same time, we know that students who feel threatened and bullied, and that many of our LBGQT+ who identify that way, feel suicidal. Four out ten students in our state who identify as LBGQT+ feel, think about, and have had suicidal thoughts.

I came here today because I was called by many students in this District who shared with me that they have been threatened, they have been bullied, they’ve been intimidated on social media, in the Boardroom, and that they feel threatened by this policy that is being debated here today before the Board.

We believe that the policies articulated today by this Board fall outside the laws of California - fall outside of what is guaranteed in state and federal law to protect students in their privacy and their safety.

We’ve already put out guidance that speaks to what we believe the law represents in terms of protecting safety and privacy for our students.

But beyond that, we believe that if you  force staff to essentially ‘out’ students about their sexual orientation, you create a system and an environment that can be unsafe for many of our students. And we simply think that the Board needs to consider a more balanced approach to addressing the things that they have articulated today.

We’ve put out a number of policies to address some of these concerns. We’ve put out guidance that students should not be mistreated because they are LBGQT+ students or students of color. We are sponsoring legislation that would say if you ban a book for discriminatory purposes against students of color or LBGQT+ students, that you will, in fact, be charged a fee for those actions. That bill is in the legislature. It’s AB 1078, as we speak.

We will continue to stand for our students because we believe that inclusive education benefits all students.

And I am happy to take questions you might have at this time.

—--------------------------------------------

Amy Powell, ABC: Can we talk about what just happened in that room where you just made some comments - and you were cut off and escorted out. What’s your reaction to that?

TT: You know - I was a Board member. I've served as a School Board member. I know what the rules of protocol are. When someone is speaking in public, they are allowed to speak. And you don’t engage them from the Board - you don’t engage across the dais to all the speakers. And so, I was shocked that the Board President started to dress me down as a public speaker who stayed within the one minute limit. And so, because she was doing that, I returned to the podium. If she wants to engage in a discussion, in a debate, I’m more than happy to do that. I respected the rules as they articulated tonight. And, as a public speaker, as a citizen, I expect to be treated with the same respect. 

______________________

Speaker Frank (inaudible):  Given that the CDC, the APA, the Nat’l Library of Medicine say in order to combat LBGQT+ suicide mortality rates, family acceptance is a number one way to do that.

TT: That’s right.

Frank: Why would you be opposed to incorporating the parents in this discussion considering that the overwhelming majority of parents DO support their kids and we want to target that? . . . And I’m a part of the LBGQT+ community.

TT: Actually, I don’t want to oppose parent involvement or parent rights and I was trying to establish that tonight. I support parent rights. My encouragement to this District is that they should find a more balanced way to show their respect for parental rights in a way that doesn’t trample on the safety and rights of our students.

Many of our students simply cannot identify their orientation in certain environments. It might be unsafe. And I was simply trying to deliver a message tonight that the District has a responsibility to approach this conversation in a way where they balance the safety of our students with the rights of our parents.

I’ve reached out to the Board President prior to this meeting to speak with her, to let her know that - and to the Superintendent - I’ve offered to work with them if they want to have sincere conversations about trying to find balance between the safety of our students and their right to be safe and the rights of the parents.

But what I saw here tonight was just catering to a mob mentality that has disregard for the safety of many of our students who are vulnerable and are at-risk, and have been bullied and mistreated in that very chamber. And we are here to say, on behalf of our students, we will stand with them and ensure they are safe every time.

Frank: Can you say what your idea of a more balanced approach entails?

TT: Simply offering that we are willing to work with those who want to engage in these conversations. Many of these are new concepts that have not been discussed before - brand new legislation, brand new Board policies. But it is clear that this policy puts many of our students at risk.

Frank: Sir, that doesn’t answer the question. Do you have any actual ideas about the more balanced approach you keep describing?

Moderator interrupts:  One question at a time and your affiliation, please. I believe you have asked your question. 

Frank: Can you answer the question? He just walked around the question.

Moderator: Sir, I believe you’ve asked your question and you’ve had your response. And (turning to the next person) where is your next question and what is your affiliation?

_________________________________

Rachel Manata, KTLA: What are the next steps? We are obviously awaiting a vote. But what are the next steps from here? Where do we go from here?

TT:  Yes. Well, as I said, we have guidance that we think  these kinds of practices fall outside of the law. We will continue to monitor and see what actions the Board takes tonight. The Bill that I mention, AB 1078, that is a Bill that is a bill that is deeply focused on protecting our students from being discriminated against. It  is a bill that is now being  actively heard in the legislature. That bill has an urgency clause in it that says it can be implemented into law before this legislative session is over. You may have seen that, this week, the Governor and myself put out a communication to another District that has banned a curricula that we believe is based on discriminatory reasons -  that AB 1078 - once that Bill is approved, if it is approved, that Bill will assess a fine directly on that District. And so . . . we’re engaging in these conversations and we will continue to look into the items that we think are coming forward based on what the Board may act on tonight.

Moderator: Thank you so much. Next question.

__________________________________

Tyler (inaudible):  I am wondering about the Temecula Valley School District in the recent fine and banning of textbooks in that District.What is the legality, what does the legal code allow the state to fine?

TT: Well, AB1078 would actually establish this process - and that Bill is being heard in the legislature. And it does have an urgency clause, and so we are waiting to see what happens with that Bill. I would just say that we are currently investigating the Temecula Valley School District based on complaints that have come to our office, complaints about discrimination against students that are based on discrimination around LBGQT+ student needs. 

Tyler: Can I ask another question?

_______________________________________

Moderator: We need to make sure that everyone has an opportunity to ask one question. Your affiliation?

My name is Lisa, I’m a concerned citizen.  (inaudible) political Action: 

My concern is we talk about safety, we talk about autonomy . . .

What about our female students, our daughters, our sisters? What about their safety? It is apparent that they are getting assaulted - just like in Riverside - that do not agree with this ideology . . . 

What about the cancel culture, the bullying, the social? The  ideology (inaudible)

We elected our Board. You don’t agree with it, BUT you have NO right to come in and say that you have to purchase these books or we are going to fine you a million and a half dollars.

TT: Thank you for your question. Let me be clear - I don’t support anyone being mistreated regardless of the perspective they take -  everyone has a right to be respected. And everyone in this state has the right to their viewpoint. As you heard there - I am simply saying that there should be civil discussion.

I am only here tonight because students in this very District asked me to come because they have been mistreated, because they have been threatened on social media - and in meetings. These are difficult conversations and they warrant discussion, and I’m happy to engage on every level. And I’m also happy to ensure the safety of all individuals regardless of their perspective.

I take no issue with who you have elected. I was very respectful to your Board. I am simply here holding up my right to speak and to encourage this Board to reconsider their actions.

Thank you.

_______________________________________________

Moderator: We have one last question.

Speaker (name and affiliation inaudible):

By doing so, everything you just said . . . You are technically overriding the election process - the local election process of local government. And you keep using the words, such as banned books. Our elected officials did not ban any books. Is there a reason why  (inaudible) . . .?

TT: Actually, I have met with the School Board President and members of the Board of Temecula Valley USD and I am going to continue to do that.

Those Board members have made statements that are not only offensive to the LBGQT+ community, but I have heard directly from the students in that District - they feel attacked and bullied. Students of color . . .

Speaker Interrupts (much is inaudible):  Harvey Milk comments . . . the pornographic play . . .

TT: May I continue? May I please continue? We can have a debate. I am happy to talk with you offline. If we can disagree, but agree to not interrupt each other.

Speaker: I’m just wondering what comments you are referring to . . .

TT: I actually met with some of your students who said that they felt threatened by many of the actions that this Board has taken vis a vis this curriculum. And many of the students say they have been threatened and intimidated by adults and other students in the District. And we won’t stand for that.

I am here tonight to protect the students of this District . . . because inclusive education helps ALL of our kids. You know, people like to talk about it, and say these things about it,  but inclusive education has proven that students of color do well, our LBGQT+ students do well, and students of all backgrounds do well.

I love this country. As I pointed out tonight, my father is a Vietnam veteran - here, he is buried in the Riverside Cemetery. He served his country. I was born on an army base. I believe this country is big enough for us to have discussion and debate about things that we may not all agree upon.

It is a fact that inclusive education benefits all of our kids.

It is a fact that our LBGQT+ students have suicidal thoughts at a high rate, at a disproportional rate than most other students. And that policies like the one being discussed tonight threaten many of our students and make them feel suicidal. And that we, as a country, have to work together, and work from our hearts, and find ways to have policies that will balance the needs and rights of our parents and balance the needs and rights of safety of our students.

Thank you so much for being here.