March 25 TVUSD Board Meeting Recap
Board Mired in Dysfunction, Meaningless Politically-Motivated Issues, and Bickering
1TVPAC Team
TEMECULA — The Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) Board of Trustees on Tuesday, March 25 stretched over four and a half hours, but little progress was made on student-centered issues. Instead, the session was marked by infighting, accusations of mistrust, political posturing, and confusion over basic governance procedures.
Though the meeting was formally structured to address subcommittee reports and district business, more than three hours were consumed by arguments over ideological grievances, board protocol, and legal consultations — prompting concerns from both trustees and community members about the board’s priorities and effectiveness.
It was a full three hours before the mere mention of “educating students” and the work of subcommittees working on the subject took place.
Culture Wars Overshadow Student Success
Early portions of the meeting were dominated by culture war discussions and revisiting previously settled matters. Trustees Joseph Komrosky and Jen Wiersma placed agenda items that critics say had little relevance to district operations or student outcomes.
The board ultimately voted unanimously to support a resolution presented by Komrosky and Wiersma to send a letter of support for Assembly Bill 89, which bans “a pupil whose sex was assigned male at birth from participating on a girls interscholastic sports team.”
“We have no business doing this at this local level, Schwartz said. “Are we now going to discuss every bill in the state Senate and Assembly?
“Last week was CSBA Legislative Action Week. I was on the call with both State Senator Kelly Sayardo and a representative from Kate Sanchez's office. That was the time to share our opinions on legislation for CSBA Legislative Week.
“I participated, I don't recall any of my other fellow board members being there. We're spending time, money and energy to send a letter nobody will read or consider in Sacramento. At the end of the day, it does nothing for the students of TVUSD.”
Schwartz said he voted yes for ideological reasons, while protesting the political performative nature of the resolution put before the board.
Both Wiersma and Komrosky wore t-shirts supporting the Assembly Bill, adding to the theatrical performance.
Ironically, while Trustee Wiersma criticized Board President Melinda Anderson for raising an “unagendized” item, she later introduced multiple off-topic issues herself, many of which had already been addressed in prior meetings, as she has done multiple times in the past.
Board observers noted that Trustees Komrosky and Wiersma arrived unprepared, offered no updates on subcommittee work, and were mostly silent once the meeting shifted to operational matters.
Observers noticed that Wiersma appeared to doze off at times during the meeting while Schwartz and Barham spoke about educationally-based subcommittee activities.
Komrosky Pushes for Legal Counsel at District Expense
A flashpoint came when Komrosky asked the district to pay for what appeared to be personal legal counsel. At approximately 2:55:00 into the meeting, he requested general legal advice both for the board and for himself. Anderson responded firmly: “The attorney doesn’t represent you. Get your own attorney.”
Komrosky insisted his request wasn’t for “private” counsel, but Anderson held her ground.
“I’m not gonna have the district pay for private legal counsel,” she said.
Anderson further revealed that she has denied approximately 30 requests to speak with attorneys, citing cost concerns and the need to respect the district’s limited legal resources.
Despite Anderson’s efforts to establish a clear, cost-conscious process — developing policies internally before consulting legal experts — Komrosky repeatedly returned to the refrain, “Can we talk to general legal counsel?” focusing on one attorney in particular, repeatedly.
Board Behavior Called “Dysfunctional”
Trustees openly questioned one another’s integrity and judgment. Komrosky accused Anderson of bias and targeting a fellow board member’s relative for potential disciplinary action.
When asked to clarify his concerns in writing, Komrosky refused, stating, “I do not wanna share it with the board because I don't trust the judgment of one board member.”
Trustee Emil Barham expressed confusion and concern over the dysfunction.
“I am very confused,” he said, summing up the general tone of the meeting.
Throughout the evening, trustees engaged in back-and-forth bickering, struggled to follow procedure, and interpreted one another’s actions through a lens of suspicion and hostility.
Observers say the behavior raises questions about the board’s ability to govern effectively.
“I am not surprised why the students don't want to come,” resident Eduardo Humeres said during public comment. “It's too much drama. This is sometimes like a telenovela.
”If you're familiar with telenovelas from Mexico, it's a telenovela sometimes that you just can't follow it. … It's really, there's some, it's terrible.”
Fiscal Responsibility — or Lack Thereof
Concerns about financial stewardship were also prominent. Wiersma was the only trustee to vote in favor of increasing board stipends — a motion that failed 4–1. Her colleagues argued that given the current dysfunction on the board, a raise would be inappropriate.
Komrosky’s eagerness to consult attorneys early and often — before policy ideas are even formed — was flagged by Anderson as wasteful. She recommended a structured approach: research and build policy as a board first, then seek legal review only as a final step.
Spending on electronic voting systems and a hired parliamentarian also drew scrutiny, with critics citing it as further evidence of fiscal irresponsibility.
Further complicating the fiscal situation, Komrosky’s inability to understand how the district manages paying its bills was on full display. After spending a year as the board president before being recalled, Komrosky apparently never learned how the district makes payment for things such as water bills, which came up during this meeting.
Komrosky questioned a water bill for Crowne Hill Elementary School.
Nicole Lash, Assistant Superintendent Business Support Services (Head of finance for the district) explained to Komrosky how purchase orders work for planned, predictable district expenditures, like water bills. She reminded him the money is authorized during the July meeting (start of the fiscal year) via purchase order, and adjustments are made at subsequent meetings (like this one). That allows the district to pay bills as they come up, without delay.
The explanation of the process, which is standard practice for governmental agencies, didn’t seem to stick with Komrosky.
“I don't feel comfortable voting on the water until I see more of a breakdown,” he said. “I would like to pull it.”
“I just wanna get clarification,” Lash asked. “Are you asking me to not pay the water bills? Or can I pay them without a purchase order to pay them against?”
The board ultimately voted to approve the amount asked to pay the water bill, though it laid bare the lack of understanding of basic government fiscal procedure by Komrosky, even at this late stage.
Discussions were had about purchasing an electronic voting system (Komrosky) and paying for a parliamentarian for the board (Komrosky, Wiersma, and Anderson).
Not a single proposal was brought forth by the board for money to support student learning.
However, both Schwartz and Barham expressed distaste for continued spending requests.
“From a budget perspective, we are experiencing a state of deficit spending,” Barham said. “This means we are spending more than we are taking in.
“At some point, deficit spending becomes unsustainable. Our rainy day funds and our reserves for economic uncertainties whittle away.”
Staff Competency vs. Trustee Confusion
While trustees debated and stumbled, district staff appeared consistently prepared. Cabinet members and administrators answered questions thoroughly — even on issues that trustees had failed to bring to them in advance.
Their competence highlighted the disparity between professional staff and certain board members’ understanding of their roles.
A revealing moment came when Anderson admitted she still did not understand how to properly propose a policy or navigate sunshine laws, despite being board president.
“How does it work? Because I don’t know,” she said. “How does it work if we want to create a policy?”
A Call for Change
In his closing remarks at 4:34:27, Trustee Barham delivered a heartfelt plea for the board to change course, based on reports that TVUSD students expressed hesitancy to serve as a student representative on the board, something Schwartz has been working on for more than a year.
“If we cannot inspire our students to engage with governance and take an interest in the work of this board, then we have failed,” Barham said. “Though we often say it's all about the students, the culture in this boardroom over the past two and a half years suggests otherwise.”
He emphasized the importance of professionalism, respect, and a focus on student outcomes.
“It is time for healing” Barham continued.
“We have incredible students, many of whom are going on to attend top universities across the world, but I often wonder when they look back on their time in TVUSD, will they feel a sense of pride in their education and community?
“As a district, we struggle to attract experienced talent because of politics and our reputation. Professionals in a variety of areas, accounting, purchasing, teaching, et cetera, say no thanks to our networking efforts. As a result, our students are not supported optimally.”
Unfortunately, as evidenced by the behavior of Komrosky and Wiersma for the majority of the meeting, those pleas fell on deaf ears. Combined with the fact that instead of respectfully listening to their fellow trustee, they were busy on their cell phones and packing up to go home.
Looking Ahead
The meeting ended with few tangible achievements, leaving many in the community frustrated by yet another night of political drama and procedural stumbles.
As TVUSD faces pressing challenges — from student performance to staff retention — observers are questioning whether this board has the discipline or cohesion needed to lead the district forward.
WATCH THE FULL MEETING AT: https://www.youtube.com/live/yZ6LF6swRcE?si=H8EPEuCLVKpw0siz
