Redlands Board of Education — July 21, 2026

Two contested policies were pushed toward an August first read without a vote, a phased K-12 artificial-intelligence framework got its first full public airing, and 31 turns at the podium made public comment the longest stretch of a meeting that ran to 10:30 p.m.

---

⚖️ Parental Notification and "No Deception": direction, not decision

Neither the Parental Notification policy (Board Policy / Administrative Regulation 5010) nor the proposed "No Deception" policy came to a vote. Both were discussion items. What the official record shows is direction to staff 1:

• Seek a legal opinion on whether BP 5010 and AR 5010 violate AB 1955 or any other applicable state or federal law, and whether they conflict with the district's own AR 5145.3.
• Identify options for streamlining the parent-notification process, should the policy ultimately be adopted.
• Place BP 5010 and AR 5010 on the August 11 agenda as first reads.

On No Deception the direction was different in kind: rather than create a new standalone policy, staff were to identify an existing RUSD board policy that could be amended to carry the proposal's intent, and bring that back August 11 as a first read 1. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. 1.

The draft No Deception language would have committed the district and its employees to "at all times be truthful and honest and not misrepresent, either directly or by omission, to any parent or guardian any school-related undertakings and information that affects their child's education and well-being" 9.

---

🤖 A phased K-12 AI framework

Deputy Superintendent Jason Hill presented on Artificial Intelligence in Redlands Unified 2. He framed it around a gap: in a national survey about 86% of students used AI whether or not their school allowed it, while only about 40% had an adult talking with them about safe use — roughly 16,000 and 6,000 RUSD students by his own arithmetic 3.

The progression is staged: learn about AI in K-5 with no student access; teacher-mediated AI tools in grades 6-8; student-facing chat agents only at the high school level. Alongside it sit five "AI use levels" giving teachers and students a shared vocabulary for how much AI an assignment permits, a defined list of academic-integrity violations, and a four-stage due-process sequence built on human evidence-gathering rather than AI-detection software, which Hill said produces too many false positives. A newly adopted web filter scans chat feeds for inappropriate use or self-harm, and a parent can switch a student's AI access off entirely 3. Regional coverage described the same cautious, grade-banded model 4.

---

🗣️ Public comment on the agenda items

Twenty-one people spoke during the agendized comment period, most on the two policy discussions.

In favor of the policies

• Peter Hall argued the policy does not "out" students because everyone at school already knows except parents, and said a no-deception rule should be self-evident 2.
• Joshua Hall claimed that without "outside interference" most children become heterosexual, and advocated purging LGBTQ educators and officials from schools 2.
• Dale Broome urged passage of both policies, citing four years of community requests and appellate rulings he said affirm parental rights as potentially inalienable 2.
• Greg Brittain cited ten years of statistics tying parental involvement to better outcomes, arguing that students' fear of their parents is the real issue to address 5.
• David Bolog gave a detailed legal analysis of a federal parental-rights case and the Supreme Court's ruling in it, and cited a March 6 California School Boards Association report directing districts to refrain from maintaining confidential information about student gender presentation 5.
• John Berry said the courts now require parental notification, and argued enacting the policies reminds bureaucrats that the elected board runs the district. Quoting the No Deception draft aloud, he asked: "Why do we need a policy to enact what is common sense?" 58
• Kevin O'Connor, a pastor, argued parents hold the primary constitutional right to raise children and criticized "shared responsibility" language as demoting them — then, bridging the night's two topics, proposed using AI to automate parent notification 5.
• Greg Abdouch commended the board for "protecting parents," citing decade-long statistics on parental engagement, and urged the district to keep its focus on the quality of education 6.

Against

• Abigail J said the No Deception draft quotes only a fragment of Education Code 51101, argued Obergefell v. Hodges does not require outing students, and called item 20A a Brown Act violation 2.
• Jennifer J described the notification policy as designed to put vulnerable students in unsafe situations, saying schools should not be informants 2.
• Eriko Grossman questioned why new policies are needed at all, and warned of students withholding information, worsening chronic absenteeism, and risks of abuse or homelessness 5.
• Aya F., a Redlands High School senior, called the discussion a "farce" orchestrated by far-right activists and said it threatens the stability of roughly 23% of her generation 5.
• Mark Laird told the board about a partner forcibly outed at 16 who became homeless, citing data that fewer than one in three transgender youth have gender-affirming homes 5.
• Michael Paisner labeled parental notification a "culture war policy based on lies" designed to normalize outing transgender students, and condemned the No Deception policy as creating a villain where none exists 5. On AI he was warmer, calling the framework "a great start" while warning about bias and answer quality 7.
• Jeff Poggi argued the policy turns the classroom into a "pulpit" and a "police state," drawing on years teaching in juvenile hall 5.
• Pat Molnar, a 31-year Redlands High School teacher, argued knowledge should come from parent-child relationships rather than legislation turning teachers into informers, and noted district legal fees doubled in the past year 5.
• Valerie Taber opposed AI in classrooms on literacy, critical-thinking and environmental grounds, and argued the notification policy disproportionately targets LGBTQ students 6.
• Margaret Paul called the topic "disingenuous" and a "thinly veiled attempt to promote a false narrative," then pivoted to AI-driven phishing and voice-mimicry as the threat worth teaching 6.

Mixed or item-specific

• Katherine Appleby backed the Smiley Heritage Tours item but urged it acknowledge Highland and Mentone heritage; separately she called the No Deception draft "written at a level that showcases incompetence in writing and illiteracy when it comes to reading the cited codes" and said item 20A should be tabled as a Brown Act violation 510.
• Rachel Eugley cited FERPA's transfer of rights at age 18, demanded immediate rather than three-day notification where harm is suspected, and faulted the board for taking so long to agendize the policies 5.
• Bea suggested using document track-changes to watch a student write an essay as a way to detect AI plagiarism 6.

---

💬 The board's discussion

The minutes record the direction but not the exchange that produced it. The transcript shows a discussion running well over an hour, turning on three practical problems.

Legal footing. The board was told plainly that the Supreme Court limited AB 1955 but did not strike it down — that as of July 21, 2026 California law still lets a transgender student disclose to a teacher and ask that parents not be told, and that BP/AR 5010 as drafted could therefore conflict both with AB 1955 and with the district's own AR 5145.3. The board also heard that Redlands is unlike neighboring districts with similar policies because it operates under a stipulated judgment requiring monthly meetings with the Attorney General's office 16.

Official versus unofficial records. Much of the drafting problem sat in one distinction: official records such as transcripts and cumulative files already cannot be changed without parent involvement, while an "unofficial" record might be a teacher jotting a preferred name on a seating chart 16.

Scale. Automating notifications ran into arithmetic. On that single summer day, 15,727 changes had been made in the district's ARIES permanent-records system — which, spread across a summer-school population, would have meant roughly 150 notifications per family in one day 17.

Staff closed by restating the direction on the record: the most updated versions go to legal counsel, another district's notification practice gets investigated, and both items return August 11 as first reads 18.

---

🗨️ General public comment

Ten speakers returned later in the evening 11.

• Peter Hall backed the notification policy, arguing opponents deliberately equate common nicknames with gender-identity name changes, and calling their arguments "outright lies" 11.
• Joshua Hall presented a theory on "the death of the political moderate," dating it to November 4, 2008, and said he has urged the Conservative Party to embrace "far-right extremism" 11.
• Eriko Grossman raised concerns about student screen time from her work as a substitute teacher, and said parents are more worried about recent staff layoffs than about the notification policy 11.
• Rachel Eugley expressed dismay that many in the room did not acknowledge the Pledge of Allegiance, and argued for respecting opposing viewpoints 11.
• Michael Paisner filed a formal complaint against a board member, accusing her of harassment and bullying by posting videos of him online, and demanded the board president censure her under the governance handbook 1213.
• Greg Brittain presented state test-score analysis showing minimal year-over-year gains in reading and math, called the results unacceptable, and urged greater urgency 12.
• Katherine Appleby commended Educational Services for the AI guidance plan and proposed the superintendent work with San Bernardino and Riverside counties on a consortium to replace the Compass database access being eliminated in summer 2027 12.
• David raised data-privacy concerns about the new Google Forms speaker sign-up, urged a return to physical cards, and recommended keeping students at "level one, no AI assistant" 12.
• Mark Laird warned that tech-savvy students bypass monitoring software on standard browsers, and asked what the plan is to give devices to students who lack them at home if AI skills are to be embedded in the curriculum 12.
• Dale Broome argued the district must not drive a wedge between parents and children, spoke against AB 1955 as a "secrecy policy," and framed AI as part of a larger "control grid" 12.

---

🏛️ Board and superintendent comments

• Candy Olson said she had not posted anything about the person who had falsely accused her and did not appreciate being falsely accused. She acknowledged the math and ELA score gains are small but said the district has a plan — professional learning communities, heavy teacher-training investment last year, and a new universal Monday minimum day for grade-level collaboration to identify and re-teach struggling students 1214.
• Jeannette Wilson asked the superintendent to arrange a presentation from staff who have actually attended the PLC trainings, then walked parents through three places to make informed choices: the Aeries data confirmation window opening Friday, July 31, 2026, the Mahmoud v. Taylor opt-out form under the website's Family tab, and the Title IX notification emails that arrive through the year 1215.
• Melissa Ayala-Quintero and Patty Holohan offered no board comments; Michele Rendler closed briefly, welcoming everyone back to school 1.
• Superintendent Juan Cabral congratulated his cabinet on contract extensions through 2029 and thanked the board for a week off during which, he reported, nobody texted, called or emailed him 1.

---

📋 Personnel and routine business

Appointments. Out of closed session the board approved appointing Caleb Rothe as Assistant Principal of Crafton and Mariposa Elementary Schools, Entropy Mond as Assistant Principal of Lugonia Elementary School, and Patricia Velasquez as Assistant to the Superintendent 1920.

The superintendent's contract was pulled. Item 16G — the amendment to Juan Cabral's employment agreement — came off the agenda at approval, and Board President Michele Rendler announced no action was taken 1120. The packet shows what was on the table: following an "Above Average" evaluation finalized June 23, 2026, a 3% salary increase effective July 1, 2026 and a one-year extension through June 30, 2029 21. Amendments for the other cabinet members — Lisa Nakamura-Bruich, Patricia Buchmiller, Rudy Wilson and Jason Hill — were approved 11.

Money. Business Services consent included Payment Transmittals 27000001–27000099 totaling $8,561,131.80 22, a 2026-2027 SBCCD/CAEP adult-education agreement of $1,169,298.00, and Bid 13-26 for fencing and V-ditch repair at Crafton Elementary, funded by Measure D 23.

Educational Services. The board approved the 2026-2027 School Plans for Student Achievement for all district schools, including new Title I schoolwide programs at eligible high schools, and two stipulated expulsions 24. Consent items included the A.K. Smiley Public Library Fourth Grade Heritage Tours agreement that several commenters singled out approvingly 25. Resolutions No. 2 and No. 3 approved employment of Katherine Kon and Krystal Toy under credential waivers 26.

---

🕒 How this fits the archive

Neither policy arrived out of nowhere. In September 2023 a speaker was already challenging the board over its refusal to agendize parental notification 27. In January 2026 a commenter said he was "not exactly sure why we have seemed to stall on this issue" and pressed for an opt-in structure 28. In May 2026 a board member noted from the dais that a no-deception policy had been requested "several times — I think this is the third time publicly" 29.

The opposition has equal tenure. In April 2025 a teacher told the board she "did not enter this profession to betray that trust by being forced to out students" 30. Several July 21 speakers are long-standing regulars: the October 14, 2025 minutes record both Jeff Poggi and Valerie Taber addressing the board 31. Coverage previewing this meeting noted both items were listed as discussion only, meaning trustees were expected to talk rather than act — which is what happened 32.

---

This is an independent community summary drawn from the district's own records. It is not an official Redlands Unified School District document.