Tensions, Trust, and Calls for Unity: Inside TVUSD’s Contentious Governance Workshop

Joel Shapiro speaks during the school board’s Governance Workshop on Feb. 11.

1TVPAC Team

Temecula, CA – The Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) board’s Governance Workshop on February 11 was intended to review and approve changes to the board’s Governance Handbook. Instead, it turned into an emotionally charged forum, filled with accusations, personal grievances, and some glimpses of potential unity.

Led by governance expert Joel Shapiro, the meeting spent time on improving board norms, trust, and collaboration, but often veered into heated political and personal conflicts.

“Is This Board Salvageable?” – Trustees Confront Division

Early in the workshop, Joe Komrosky set the tone by acknowledging community concerns over the board’s dysfunction.

"One community member asked me, ‘Is this board salvageable?’ And I don’t know, but I hope I can find out today," Komrosky stated.

New trustee Emil Barham echoed the need for shared purpose, saying, "We have not established our unified purpose, and that’s something I would like to talk about today."

Board President Melinda Anderson admitted that division on the board had become a growing embarrassment in the community.

"I had someone from another board call me and say, ‘We’re a disgrace right now.’ We need to be less divided, and I believe we have more in common than differences," Anderson stated.

However, trustee Jennifer Wiersma framed the issue differently, arguing that division stemmed from betrayal by new board members.

"Dr. Anderson and Mr. Barham campaigned as candidates aligned with the values of Dr. Komrosky and myself. But after they were elected, they formed an alliance with Mr. Schwartz, who has opposed many of those policies. That was a shock," Wiersma said.

She further accused them of rushing through major policy changes without collaboration.

"They stripped me from working on a policy that I’ve dedicated 15 months to for parents. That’s not unity, that’s exclusion," Wiersma charged.

Schwartz, the longest-serving board member, pushed back against the idea that shifting alliances were the problem.

"For two years, Allison Barclay and I sat on this board while we were bullied, made fun of, and ignored,” Schwartz shot back. “Now, the same people who pushed their agenda then are suddenly upset that they’re in the minority. That’s how it goes sometimes.”

Debate Over Trust, Transparency, and Policy Decisions

The debate over trust escalated when Barham and Wiersma clashed over past board decisions, particularly controversial legal battles over parental notification policies and flag restrictions.

Barham accused Wiersma and Komrosky of ignoring legal advice and cease-and-desist orders, leading to costly legal fees.

"The decisions you made cost the district over $100,000 because you ignored legal warnings," Barham argued.

Wiersma defended her actions, claiming “alternative legal counsel” supported their stance and that the board was under attack.

"We were told we could appeal it. We didn’t know Danny would suddenly leave the state. We have always done what we felt was best to protect kids," she said.

The argument became particularly personal when Wiersma accused Barham of trying to manipulate his vote on board leadership by using religious influence.

"You specifically went after my prayer life on the dais in a very personal way. That was extremely unprofessional," Wiersma said, demanding a public apology.

Barham apologized but continued to press for accountability.

"I was with you up until the very end [of the campaign in November]. But when I saw that you weren’t willing to take accountability for those legal decisions, that’s where I drew the line," he stated.

Finding Common Ground: Students, Fiscal Responsibility, and Professionalism

Despite the heated exchanges, some areas of agreement emerged.

Barham and Schwartz emphasized that student achievement and fiscal responsibility must be the board’s focus.

"If our policies don’t work for kids, schools, and saving taxpayer money, then I’m against them. Everything else is irrelevant," he stated.

Anderson admitted she had contributed to division by venting frustrations in the community and pledged to change her approach.

"I want to take accountability. I think we’ve all contributed to this dysfunction," she said.

Komrosky proposed that all trustees attend California’s “Masters in Governance” training to improve their understanding of board responsibilities.

"I attended this last year, and I sat with a board that wasn’t politically aligned, but they respected each other. That’s what we need," he argued.

In a rare moment of consensus, the board agreed on three minor governance changes:

• No eating on the dais during meetings – deemed unprofessional.

• Regular meeting breaks – to avoid exhaustion during long sessions.

• Restrictions on texting during meetings – to prevent distraction and maintain professionalism.

Looking Forward: Will Words Lead to Action?

While the workshop exposed deep wounds, it also provided a rare opportunity for direct dialogue. Shapiro urged the board to stop personalizing disagreements and focus on district priorities.

"There have been wounds and judgments made in the past, but moving forward, you need to assume that each of you is here with the right intent," Shapiro advised.

Komrosky expressed hope that the conversation signaled a shift, saying, "Even this roundabout exchange gives me more hope that this board is salvageable."

Still, significant divides remain, particularly regarding past policy decisions and political influence.

"I’ll be watching to see how you vote on parental rights and the flag policy in the future," Komrosky told Barham.

Schwartz remained cautiously optimistic, concluding, "We don’t need to agree on every policy, but we can find a way to work together. If we don’t, the past will just repeat itself."

Wiersma continues to personally attack fellow board members

“Mr. Schwartz, in the past, in public you have labeled me or Dr. Komrosky and I as white Christian nationalists,” she said. “I know there have been people that have spoken to it so just just let me finish because we can get past this.”

She then accused Schwartz of an inappropriate comment made while taking a group photo at a recent CSBA event and tried to drag Dr. Anderson into it as well. 

“This is a civil matter,” Anderson said. “There's going to be a lot of problems if you keep going. I'm going to ask right now, point of order, this is not regarding the governance handbook and there's already attorneys involved.

“I think you're digging your own grave and I'm trying to help you by saying ‘point of order.’ You need to stop talking about it right now. I'm doing you a favor.”

Wiersma continued to attack Schwartz, talking over Anderson, as Schwartz listened. 

“Excuse me, if I called you a Christian nationalist, I don't recall doing that. I sincerely apologize if I did that,” Schwartz responded. 

Komrosky then chimed in. 

“It was in your CSBA application, Christian nationalism is something that you wanted to fight against,” he said. 

“I'm sorry, did I call you a Christian nationalist?” Schwartz responded. 

Komrosky relented, “You did not.”

Schwartz then addressed Wiersma’s accusation. 

“I tried to disregard what you said, and I have an attorney, and he told me I should contact all the people who were there at the Christmas tree and get written statements from each of them,” he said. “To see if each of them heard what you said you heard. And I have five written statements from the five people who were there and none of them heard what you just accused me of now.

“My attorney will be filing suit in civil court for slandering me at this point.”

Schwartz got up from his chair and left the workshop, and the board took a recess. 

Upon return, Schwartz offered Wiersma an opportunity to retract her accusation. 

“I just want to give you a chance, Jen, to retract what you said, because you know it's a lie,” he said. “I'm giving you a chance publicly to retract.”

Wiersma did not retract her accusation but instead asked Schwartz to apologize to her. 

Whether this workshop leads to genuine collaboration is debatable. Instead it may remain another flashpoint in an already divisive board, as Wiersma and Komrosky continue to look for avenues to attack fellow board members for political gain. 

While making accusations in one sentence, they attempt to salvage the rhetoric with “oh sure, we can get along,” in the next. 

So which is it?

The coming months will test whether TVUSD’s board can turn rhetoric into action.

Watch the workshop in full at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WChICWFGU80&t=426s