Redlands Board of Education — September 22, 2026

An independent community summary of the Redlands Unified School District Board of Education meeting of September 22, 2026. This page is not affiliated with the district and is drawn from the district's own agenda, transcript, and adopted (draft) minutes.

The headline business of the night was the long-running fight over how the district stocks and balances its school libraries. The board took first-reading action on two linked documents — a revised Board Policy 6144 (Controversial Issues) and a brand-new Administrative Regulation 6163.1 (Library Media Centers) — and spent roughly half an hour wordsmithing the regulation live on the dais before settling on softer language. Around that centerpiece sat a full slate of consent business, a superintendent's goals report, and a round of unusually sharp public comment.

The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. with all five board members present, and adjourned at 8:08 p.m. 48.

📚 Library and "controversial issues" policies

This was the meeting's defining debate, and it is the latest chapter in a dispute that has run through RUSD for more than a year. The district's existing Board Policy 6144 already requires classroom instruction on controversial issues to be presented in a balanced manner, addressing different sides without promoting a particular point of view, as Community Forward Redlands noted in its August coverage 128. The current round of revisions grew out of board direction at prior meetings and tracks a broader statewide push; the same outlet reported in August that trustees were debating "whether school libraries should be required to provide opposing viewpoints on political or controversial reading materials" 136.

Board Policy 6144 — first reading. The board accepted the first reading of the revised policy. The minutes record the motion carried 3-2, with Board Vice President Holohan and Board Clerk Ayala-Quintero voting nay 67. Before the vote, the board confirmed that struck-through cross-references were not being deleted but would be moved to the end of the policy 67.

Administrative Regulation 6163.1 — first reading, revised. The new regulation prompted an extended back-and-forth. The core dispute: whether the regulation should effectively require a one-for-one opposing-viewpoint purchase. Per the minutes, Melissa Ayala-Quintero objected that the drafted language read as one-to-one and pressed for the list of categories to be either narrowed or spelled out so staff could actually apply it 67. Candy Olson argued the libraries had drifted out of balance and pushed to keep specific, enforceable guidance toward balanced selection 67. Jeannette Wilson noted existing policy already asked staff to make such determinations, and Patty Holohan defended librarians' professional work 67. Michele Rendler repeatedly re-read proposed rewordings aloud to find consensus language 67.

Following discussion, the board revised the regulation to remove the requirement that an opposing-viewpoint book or other media "shall be purchased," replacing it with a standard that each school librarian or designee "make a concerted effort to provide a balanced selection when ordering materials and reviewing available content" 67. That outcome mirrors what Community Forward Redlands reported after the meeting: board members "agreed to revise the proposed language in BP 6144 so that it would refer more broadly to 'age-appropriate materials and a balanced selection of library content'" 132. The revised regulation first reading carried 67; staff noted further revisions could still be made because this was a first reading 67.

The agenda packet documents the prior-meeting direction behind these revisions: retain the existing Library Media Centers policy while placing implementation language in an administrative regulation, remove the paragraph assigning responsibility to "each librarian or designee" as drafted, and broaden Policy 6144 to address age-appropriate materials and a balanced selection rather than the narrower reference to "the Presidents of the United States" 87.

For context, the long-standing Board Policy 6163.1 already states that libraries should provide "materials that present opposing sides of controversial issues, so that students may learn, with guidance, how to analyze and think critically about what they read" 123.

🗣️ Public comment: trust, staffing, and campaign signs

Public comment was blunt. On agendized items:

• Eriko Grossman questioned why the board was spending so much time and taxpayer money on the library policy, emphasizing literacy, student interest in reading, and professional librarian judgment, and criticizing reduced library staffing 51. During the RESPA public hearing she returned to describe paraprofessional working conditions — including being spat on, punched, and kicked — and urged the board to support RESPA 53.
• Katharine Applebee raised procedural questions about the 6144 revisions and the new regulation, including cross-references, implementation procedures, and the proper role of policies versus administrative regulations 51. In the non-agendized session she questioned a board member's familiarity with board policies and requested a presentation on district enrollment over the past five years 72.
• Mark Laird urged the board to heed RTA on the controversial-issues policy and warned that additional requirements could make it harder for educators to address controversial topics; he also discussed library staffing, collection development, and funding 51. In later comment he offered context on bulk book purchases and publisher donations 72.

RTA President Stephen Caperton addressed academic freedom and the union's collective-bargaining language on balanced discussion, expressing concern that the proposed Policy 6144 contained vague language that could discourage educators from addressing controversial topics, and asked that it be clarified 50.

During the RESPA public hearing and non-agendized comment, Peter Hall and Joshua David Hall argued against deferring to appointed staff experts; the minutes record Peter Hall discussing board authority and Joshua David Hall discussing "consent of the governed, trust in experts, and reliance on community judgment" 53. In non-agendized comment, Peter Hall raised allegations of campaign-sign thefts and referenced prior allegations involving Patty Holohan — while, the minutes note, acknowledging that an allegation or complaint should not be treated as proof of a violation 71. Joshua David Hall discussed what he characterized as privilege and alleged differential treatment on campaign-sign matters 71. These are unproven allegations aired in public comment; the archive contains no finding on them.

💰 Decisions of record

Beyond the policies, the board took these actions:

• Stipulated expulsion for student 2026-2027-001 through the first semester, with the second-semester order suspended — carried 66.
• Educational Services consent (14.a–14.l) approved, carried 58. This set included a slate of student trips. The Citrus Valley Advanced Mixed Choir's $75,000 trip to Carnegie Hall drew extended discussion over funding: staff clarified that student and parent fundraising (ASB and booster funds) would pay, with general funds serving as a safeguard and covering certain substitute costs. The board retained the agenda wording and requested a follow-up expense report showing the district's ultimate contribution 58. In the transcript, Candy Olson pressed for that accounting and Jason Hill explained that "general" is listed as a catch-all so trips aren't canceled over small shortfalls 26.
• Business Services consent (12.a–12.g) approved, carried 54 — including Measure D-funded inspection and testing agreements for Kingsbury and McKinley modernization, a WakeCo change order, and a payment transmittal of $3,233,760.71 57.
• Human Resources consent (16.a–16.d) and three university practicum/student-teacher agreements (Hope International, Concordia Irvine, University of Redlands) approved, each carried 6970.

A public hearing was held on the district's initial RESPA reopener proposal for 2026-2027; the proposal addresses Article 6, Pay and Allowances 97. The board opened and closed the hearing after comment 53.

🎓 Superintendent's goals and presentations

Superintendent Juan Cabral presented his 2026-2027 goals, reporting a 93.36% graduation rate, flat attendance as an area needing work, budget monitoring, and the early launch of dual language immersion at McKinley Elementary a year ahead of schedule 54. He said 2026 CAASPP scores are expected October 15, with a presentation planned for the October 22 board meeting 54.

Assistant Superintendent Patricia Buchmiller presented on the Garner Holt Education Through Imagination labs (at four sites) and the RapidMOOC video-production program (at 15 sites) 49. The meeting opened with a student highlight on Cope Middle School's after-school tutoring (CAST) program, introduced by Principal Wendy Caress with two eighth-grade AVID students 48.

Routine consent items were approved as grouped. Where this page describes an action as approved or carried, that reflects the adopted (draft) minutes on file; vote splits are given only where the minutes record them.