Part 3: The Myth of CRT in Temecula

This post is part of a multi-part series examining the failed leadership, legal defeats, and misinformation campaigns led by TVUSD trustees Jen Wiersma and Joseph Komrosky. Over $300,000 in legal costs, multiple overturned policies, and continued public misstatements have defined their tenure. Temecula deserves better.

How a Manufactured Crisis Hijacked a School Board and Cost the Community Dearly

1TVPAC Team

When Jen Wiersma and Joseph Komrosky were sworn into the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) Board of Education in December 2022, they wasted no time declaring war on something that didn’t exist: Critical Race Theory (CRT) in local classrooms.

With no evidence, no consultation, and no normal process, they pushed through a hastily copied CRT resolution on their first night in office. What followed was a year of chaos—lawsuits, court losses, legal fees, national embarrassment, and a fractured community.

So let’s ask the obvious question: Was CRT ever being taught in TVUSD?

The answer, supported by court records and public testimony, is unequivocally: No.

🎓 What Is CRT? And Why Was It Never an Issue in Temecula?

Critical Race Theory is a legal framework taught in some law schools and graduate programs. It is not, never has never been, and is not expected to be a part of California’s K–12 curriculum.

Despite this, Wiersma and Komrosky framed CRT as an existential threat to local students. They painted teachers as ideological infiltrators and accused the district of pushing a “socialist agenda.” These accusations had no basis in fact, but they served a clear political purpose: to inflame, divide, and distract.

And it worked—for a while.

📜 The Resolution: Unconstitutional and Unfounded

The resolution Wiersma and Komrosky passed was lifted from another district (Paso Robles), with no vetting from TVUSD legal counsel, district staff, or education experts.

It was so poorly written and vague that when it was challenged in court:

• The district’s own defense team could not provide a single example of CRT being taught in any classroom.

• A three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeal ruled the resolution unconstitutionally vague, stating that it created confusion and chilled lawful instruction.

• The court emphasized that there was no factual basis for the resolution’s claims.

This wasn’t just a legal defeat. It was a full-throated rejection of Wiersma’s and Komrosky’s entire narrative.

💸 A Costly Lie: The Financial Fallout of Fiction

Even as the legal case collapsed, Wiersma and Komrosky continued to claim victory in the court of public opinion. In a recent Instagram video, Wiersma falsely claimed the district’s legal representation was “pro bono”—despite public records showing at least $50,000 in payments to Advocates for Faith and Freedom.

She also alleged that “some teachers have promoted CRT”—a claim debunked by the court and unsupported by any district evidence. Repeating lies doesn’t make them true. 

TVUSD has now paid:

• $50,000 to terminate the AFF contract

• Salaries for countless hours of staff time

• Immeasurable amounts in lost public trust

All to defend a policy written to solve a problem that never existed.

🔥 Culture War at the Expense of Students

By focusing on CRT, Wiersma and Komrosky diverted attention and resources away from:

• Academic recovery after COVID

• Mental health supports

• Teacher recruitment and retention

• Campus safety

• Classroom upgrades

Instead of addressing real challenges facing students, they chose to chase ghosts—ghosts that just happened to align with national talking points from cable news.

🎭 The Manufactured Crisis Playbook

Wiersma and Komrosky’s CRT campaign followed a now-familiar pattern in school districts targeted by political operatives:

• Invent a threat (CRT, “woke” curriculum, etc.)

• Pass vague policies with no legal review (or against legal advice)

• Demonize teachers and unions

• Attack colleagues who object

• Cry censorship when held accountable

It’s not leadership—it’s performance politics.

And it’s students, teachers, and families who suffer the consequences.

🧾 Courts, Not Instagram, Determine Constitutionality

Let’s not forget: the final word on the CRT resolution came not from social media but from the California Court of Appeal. A panel of respected judges reviewed the evidence, considered the law, and ruled clearly: the resolution violated constitutional standards and interfered with education.

Wiersma and Komrosky may try to discredit the judiciary with phrases like “activist bench,” but the facts—and the law—don’t care about their spin.

📢 What the Community Needs to Know

Wiersma and Komrosky want the public to believe they’re protecting students. But the record shows otherwise:

• They created a false crisis.

• They lost in court.

• They misled the public about costs.

• They accomplished nothing for students.

This is the opposite of good trustee oversight. 

👀 Coming Next:

Part 4: Attacks Over Accountability—How Wiersma and Komrosky Turned Board Meetings Into Blame Games