California School District Ditches Opposition After State Threatens Fine 

As California’s state-level Democratic leaders continue to force far-left decrees on local governments, a few moderate enclaves are beginning to stand up in protest.

This has been particularly evident in school districts opposed to certain aspects of the broadening LGBT agenda.

At a recent meeting of the Chino Valley School Board, for example, the state’s school superintendent was ejected from the meeting after exceeding his allotted time. Tony Thurmond had been attempting to convince the board to reject a proposed policy that would require school officials to notify parents if a student begins identifying as transgender.

District official Sonja Shaw cut him off during his long-winded soliloquy, declaring: “Tony Thurmond, I appreciate you being here tremendously. But here’s the problem, we’re here tonight because of people like you. You’re in Sacramento proposing things that pervert children. You had a chance to come and talk to me, Tony, by all means, you had a chance to come talk to me. Why was it so important for you to walk with my opponent? You are the very reason we are in this.”

The measure went on to pass with a vote of 4 to 1. 

State officials continue wielding their power over local districts, however, and that was on full display in a recent Temecula Valley Unified School District board meeting. Members had opposed a statewide curriculum that included a lesson about the state’s first openly gay elected official, Harvey Milk, who also faced allegations of inappropriate behavior around minors.

In response to the district’s objection, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom threatened to hand down a $1.5 million fine. The stakes were apparently too high for a majority of the members and the board ultimately voted to accept the new textbook.

Board President Joseph Komrosky acknowledged that he brought the matter back for another vote because he did not want the district to become mired in a lawsuit.

Newsom took a victory lap after the vote, claiming that the adoption of the controversial textbook means that “students will receive the basic materials needed to learn.”

He was still not satisfied, however, and used the opportunity to level allegations against the “extremists” on the board “desire to control information and censor the materials used to teach our children.”