RUSD Board of Education — February 11, 2025

The board authorized the first $100 million of Measure D borrowing without discussion at the table, then spent most of the night listening to a classroom flag policy that was not on its agenda.

President Rendler opened the regular session at 6:08 p.m. with all five board members present — Melissa Ayala-Quintero, Patty Holohan, Candy Olson, Michele Rendler and Jeannette Wilson — Student Trustee Aleena Jose leading the pledge, and Superintendent Juan Cabral and cabinet staff in attendance [1].

---

💵 The first $100 million of Measure D

The night's most consequential action drew no discussion at the table. The board adopted Resolution No. 31, 2024-2025, which the minutes record as "providing for the issuance and sale of Redlands Unified School District general obligation bonds, 2024 election, Series A, in the principal amount of not to exceed one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000)" and which goes on to prescribe the terms of the bonds and their sale, approve the form of the bonds, and authorize a bond purchase agreement, a preliminary official statement and an official statement [2]. The full title was read into the record [3], the chair asked "Any discussion? Okay, we'll call for the vote" [4], and the motion carried.

That wording is worth reading closely, because it is narrower than a claim that the board spent $100 million. Resolution No. 31 authorizes an issuance not to exceed $100 million and sets the machinery for selling it; it does not appropriate the proceeds to any project.

Series A is a slice of a much larger authorization. The agenda explains that the County Registrar of Voters designated the November 5, 2024 bond measure as Measure D, that voters approved it by more than the 55% required under Proposition 39, and that "Measure D authorizes the District to issue and sell up to $500,000,000 of general obligation bonds" [5]. What was before the board was a proposal "to issue and sell a portion of the bonds authorized by Measure D, in an amount not to exceed $100,000,000" [6]. The minutes record the board adopting that proposal in that form [2].

Immediately before it, the board adopted Resolution No. 30, 2024-2025, canvassing the results of that election [7] — a sequencing the agenda says state law requires: "the District must take action on the election certification (Resolution #30, 2024-2025) before taking action to issue and sell general obligation bonds authorized by Measure D" [5].

The district's own rule for what comes next is Board Policy 7214, which provides that where a general obligation bond passing on a 55 percent majority is approved, "the Board shall appoint an independent citizens' oversight committee to inform the public concerning the expenditure of bond revenues" under Education Code 15278 [8].

It did not go unchallenged. During comment on agendized items, Greg Britton told the board that repayment with interest would come to roughly double the amount borrowed, questioned the need for an issuance of that size given California's declining enrollment and rising per-pupil state spending, and argued the board should publish a specific list of projects justifying the borrowing before committing future taxpayers. He also noted that fees and attorney expenses associated with issuing bonds were not detailed in the agenda [9]. The agenda did address that last point: it stated that estimates of the costs of issuance were attached as an exhibit to Resolution No. 31, and that legal, financial-advisory and underwriting fees were "contingent upon the successful issuance and sale of the Series A Bonds" [10].

📌 Where it went. Those costs came back for their own action on April 22, 2025, when the board approved a "Costs of Issuance Statement related to the Redlands Unified School District General Obligation Bonds, 2024 Election, Series A, as authorized by Resolution No. 31, 2024-2025" on the business services consent calendar [11] [12]. That is April 22's own adopted minutes, not this meeting's record.

In her board comments, Melissa Ayala-Quintero returned to the bond, explaining that the district draws bond money in phases and will stop drawing once a project is complete, for the sake of financial prudence [13].

---

🏳️ The flag policy that was not on the agenda

The proposed classroom flag and observances policy was not an action item, a presentation, or even a discussion item on this agenda — the night's single discussion item was governing board member compensation [14]. It took over the meeting anyway.

Superintendent Juan Cabral used his report to update the board on the flag policy discussion from the previous meeting. A consensus had been reached to conduct a survey, but the district paused creating it after receiving notice from both the Redlands Teachers Association and the Redlands Education Support Professionals Association to bargain the effects of the policy. Human Resources had reached out to both associations to set negotiation dates, negotiations were under way, and a meeting was scheduled for the 27th [15] [16].

The January meeting that produced that consensus had filled the room. Community Forward Redlands reported that the proposal "drew a packed crowd to the school board meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 14" [17].

Both employee associations circled back to it. Stephen Caperton, for the Redlands Teachers Association, raised concerns about recent board-meeting conversations about test scores that implied the district and its teachers were failing students, said the district consistently outperforms county and state averages and that its AP scores are highly regarded in the Inland Empire, and highlighted the students who had spoken out against the proposed flag policy the previous month — commending them for taking on a challenge many adults would avoid [18] [19]. Liz Huerta, for the Redlands Education Support Professionals Association, also thanked those students, then urged the board to use savings from eliminated director positions to properly compensate paraprofessionals, noting that an MOU signed three years earlier had not fully restored what was lost and was taken away after a single year [19]. Kim Lium gave the Redlands Administrative Personnel Association report, covering an ACSA Women's Leadership Network event and a management breakfast on the impact of social media on students [19].

📌 Where it went. The district's policy manual records Board Policy 6115, Ceremonies and Observances, as adopted July 8, 2025. Its operative sentence: "No flag other than the United States of America and State of California may be displayed on school grounds or in classrooms, unless it is a country, state, or United States military flag used solely for educational purposes within the adopted curriculum" [20]. Nothing in February's record shows the board acting on the draft.

---

🗣️ Public comment

Twenty-two people addressed the board during general public participation, and the adopted minutes summarize each in turn [21]. Most spoke on the flag policy. One speaker told the board that "we dropped off 1,193 postcards, all urging the board to stop any consideration of the policy" [22]; the minutes do not record that figure, and the recording does not establish who said it.

Speakers urging the board to adopt a flag policy

• Joshua Hall urged the board to place the flag policy on the next agenda and adopt a policy limiting flags to the American and state flags, criticized LGBTQ+ pride flags in classrooms, opposed a survey on the question, and warned of possible federal funding repercussions [21].
• Dale Broome, a father and grandfather from Area 1, urged the board to adopt flag policy 6115, arguing that schools should not allow political or social agendas to be pushed through classroom flags, and citing legal precedents, taxpayer funding, parental opposition and the potential loss of federal funding [21].
• Douglas Hauser, a retired biomedical researcher, teacher and musician, urged a focus on reading, math, science and history, argued that race, politics and gender should be left to parents, and opposed calls to recall board members [23].
• Janice urged the board to avoid creating divisions through political, religious or ideological flags and condemned the use of divisive labels such as "fascist" [23].
• Greg Brottain — the spelling the minutes use for this speaker — argued that not having a flag for a specific group in the classroom does not equate to discrimination, defended board member Jeannette Wilson's understanding of the First Amendment on the ground that a forum once opened cannot discriminate by content, and urged a focus on core subjects [24].
• Jonathan Marcus said he respects alternative lifestyles but opposes the forced inclusion of gender-ideology topics in young children's education, and questioned the need for further focus on terms like "equity" [24].
• Heather Baeumel advocated that no special interest flags be flown in public school classrooms, describing the American flag as representing all citizens under one constitution and government [25].
• Daniel Tinajero objected to a statement he attributed to Mrs. Holohan at the previous meeting, cited the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and asked board members whether they believed in God and His teachings [25].

Speakers urging the board to drop it

• Pat Molnar expressed concerns about a board policy limiting freedom of speech and the celebration of diverse community voices, urging the board to weigh the community feedback it had already received, including postcards [21].
• Michael Paisner described personal connections to Holocaust survivors and criticized board members Jeannette Wilson and Candy Olson over their handling of the flag policy, accusing them of misrepresenting the community's views, spreading misinformation and promoting divisive rhetoric, and urged the board to end the debate [21].
• Samantha Trad, a leader of Together for Redlands, expressed strong opposition to the proposed flag and observances policy ban and called for Nazis and white supremacy to be clearly identified as hate groups in the district [23].
• Guadalupe Miranda, representing Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino counties, argued the proposed ban would limit freedom of expression, discriminate against marginalized groups and risk legal challenges [23].
• Monica Joseph urged the board to extend love and support to LGBTQ+ children, saying that displaying a pride flag does not diminish her identity as an American [23].
• Eriko Grossman, a district employee and parent, described concern over comments from board members implying LGBTQ+ individuals should be uncomfortable or disappear, and recounted receiving gratitude from students after wearing a pride flag herself [23].
• Bea, whom the minutes give no surname, spoke as a member of the transgender community and a district parent about visible support for LGBTQ+ students, arguing that banning such symbols would isolate students whose families are unsupportive [23].
• Anthony Dodd condemned a suggestion the minutes attribute to board member Jeannette Wilson that Neo-Nazi flags be allowed in Redlands classrooms, and called for unity against hate [24].
• Roux Whitmore opened on Black History Month, criticized board member Jeannette Wilson for what she described as supporting violent hate groups and Nazi rhetoric, and accused board member Candy Olson of blocking her on social media — a potential Brown Act violation, in her account [24].
• Valerie Taber criticized what she called the misleading use of election results to support the policy, noting that only a small fraction of the district's population voted for the current board members and that students had no say in the election at all [24].
• Kaia Yoshimitsu, a senior at Citrus Valley High School and president of its Gay-Straight Alliance, presented a petition signed by 171 students, staff, parents and graduates opposing the policy, and said she was disappointed to have to defend her identity before those who are supposed to represent her [25].

Speakers on other subjects

• Noah Rosen, a math, science and computer science teacher at Cope Middle School, thanked the district for supporting his C-STEM credential and described the Cope-Smile Tech Education Mentors program, which pairs older students with younger ones to teach programming and problem-solving [21].
• Ulysses, a field representative for Assembly Member Robert Garcia, outlined the member's committee assignments and legislative work, including language access programs, police training, and protecting classified school employee contracts [23].
• Raina Jetson raised the lack of focus on elementary students' needs — Universal Design for Learning, social-emotional learning, staff training in conflict resolution, and better communication with parents about advocating for children with learning disabilities [24].

Earlier, during comment on agendized items, a parent the minutes name only as Bea urged the board to increase its members' compensation, arguing that a lack of pay discourages middle- and lower-income families from seeking board seats, and describing a three-year effort to secure an IEP for their child [9]. Greg Britton used the same period to question the transparency of the student discipline list, arguing that families and the public cannot tell whether discipline is applied fairly and consistently [9].

---

🧭 Board comments

• Jeannette Wilson apologized to Emma Vara, a student who spoke at the previous meeting, acknowledging that her response may have seemed belittling. She condemned Nazi ideology as hateful and said her point about flags concerned the legal implications of allowing one flag, which could open the district to pressure to allow others [25].
• Patty Holohan reported on Civics Day, where students job-shadowed board members, along with the San Bernardino County School Board Association meeting and the Superintendent Awards [25].
• Student Trustee Aleena Jose raised a lack of awareness among students about how to use Sprigio for anonymous reporting, and suggested more be done to ensure students know they can report anonymously [25] [13].
• Candy Olson said her stance on maintaining a neutral flag policy is driven by a desire to respect and support all families and to foster unity under one flag while allowing for diverse beliefs; she also called for stronger and swifter consequences for bullying and fights [13].
• Melissa Ayala-Quintero said diversity, equity and inclusion is an ongoing effort rather than a finished one, citing sign language, IEPs and wheelchair access, and said the policy around flags protects students' rights to express themselves [13].
• Michele Rendler thanked everyone for sharing their viewpoints and congratulated a list of student and staff honorees [13].
• Juan Cabral said he was excited about Measure D, that every school site would be impacted, and that groundbreaking projects were on the horizon [13].

---

💼 Discussion item: what the board pays itself

The agenda's only discussion item was governing board member compensation [14], and it produced direction rather than a vote.

Melissa Ayala-Quintero opened it, referencing state guidelines that allow a $400 monthly stipend with a 5% raise each year — an allowance the district has not used. Had those raises been applied since 1973, she said, board members would be making $831 a month; members are underpaid given the time commitment of meetings, email and community outreach, and without proper pay the district risks losing quality candidates who cannot afford to dedicate unpaid time. She pointed to much higher compensation at districts such as LAUSD and San Diego [13] [26].

The board's own rule is short. Board Bylaw 9250 provides: "Each member of the Governing Board may receive the maximum monthly compensation as provided for by the law." Board members "are not required to accept payment for meetings attended" [27].

The rest of the board landed in different places:

• Patty Holohan recalled that a board member had raised the idea roughly three years earlier, producing only a small 3% increase since, and suggested examining compensation practices in districts similar to RUSD before making adjustments — expressing openness to change but emphasizing doing it thoughtfully [26].
• Candy Olson expressed support for a reasonable raise such as 5%, while saying she would not support a salary that could lead to corruption or draw candidates for the wrong reasons as in larger districts, and noted this was a discussion rather than a vote [26].
• Michele Rendler said she is against raising the pay, believes in serving as a public servant, and would donate her portion to causes such as special services or ROTC if a raise does pass, as she has in previous years [26].
• Jeannette Wilson acknowledged the civic duty but pointed to the time and personal expense involved, particularly travel and gas, and was open to reviewing what similar-sized districts do [26].

Patty Holohan closed the item by directing Superintendent Cabral to do a study of salaries and bring options back to the board [26] [28].

Redlands Community News covered the discussion, reporting that the board "may soon increase their compensation rates following a discussion at the last board meeting on Feb. 11" and that a board member described spending 23 hours in a month on board duties beyond meetings [29].

---

🎓 Presentations

Title IX and the Uniform Complaint Procedure. Assistant Superintendent of Compliance Dr. Rudy Wilson presented an overview of complaints received in 2024, explained that his position was created as part of a Department of Justice stipulation, and reinforced that students and families can file complaints through the district website, through Sprigio (an anonymous tool), or directly at schools [15] [30]. He reported no adult-to-student Title IX cases, described a climate survey administered to 11,000 students that drew about 8,000 responses, and said a committee of three parents and three students had reviewed the results and recommended student focus groups at Clement and CV High Schools; a revised survey was to go out in April [30].

CRY-ROP's American Sign Language pathway. The minutes list the presenters as Jason Angle, CRY-ROP's superintendent, and Daphne Hunter-Rakes, the American Sign Language teacher at Redlands High School, together with an ASL 2 student [30]. Hunter-Rakes has taught ASL 1 and ASL 2 in the CTE program there for eleven years; the presentation covered students interpreting live for 5,000 high school leaders — described as a first-time achievement — the annual Vow of Silence, and signing at rallies and community events. Nazira Syaifudin, an ASL 2 capstone student and CRY-ROP ambassador, was introduced to share her perspective on the program [31].

---

📋 Personnel, policy and routine business

In closed session the board appointed Todd Rossi Director of Special Services at Step 3 of the Management Team Salary Schedule, and approved terminating the temporary employment contract of a certificated employee effective February 12, 2025 under Education Code section 44954 [32]. Rossi introduced his family in open session and was welcomed to the position [18].

The calendars were long:

• Business services. Bid 6-25 for firewall services was awarded to Converge One at $483,437.20 after the apparent low bidder's $464,792.29 submission was withdrawn over a mathematical error, alongside a Rapidmooc software agreement not to exceed $6,932.81, crossing guard services at $28.00 an hour, and payment transmittals totaling $8,841,499.64 [7].
• Educational services. Nine policies and administrative regulations received second readings — most of them on special education, including BP 0430 on the comprehensive local plan and new BP 6159.1 on procedural safeguards, along with AR 5121 on grades and evaluation of student achievement. The board accepted the 2024-2025 LCAP Mid-Year Update and approved School Accountability Report Cards for 21 school sites, with the list of schools corrected on the floor [2] [33] [34].
• Student discipline. The board approved eight readmissions of previously expelled students, three panel expulsions and two stipulated expulsions, and adopted Resolution No. 32 recognizing National School Counseling Week [34] [35].
• Human resources. Roughly a dozen management titles were revised effective March 1, 2025, renaming Director I, Director III and Executive Director posts as directors of their functions [36] and retitling a Maintenance & Operations supervisor as a manager [37]. Several positions were established while others were eliminated — a Director of Facilities replacing a Coordinator II for Operations and Facilities Planning [37], and a Director of Special Projects and Senior Directors of TK-12 Education for elementary and secondary replacing Director II and Director III posts [38] — the same eliminated director positions the RESPA report had asked the board to redirect toward paraprofessional pay [19]. The board also approved the 2025-2026 Declaration of Need for Fully Qualified Educators and adopted Resolution No. 33, 2024-2025, pertaining to layoffs and/or reduction of classified positions [37].

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. [26].

---

This page is an independent summary of the Redlands Unified School District's own records. It is not an official district document. Every statement pairing a name with a comment, stance or action above is drawn from the adopted minutes; transcript citations supply timing, quotation and nameless detail only.