UPDATE, 2:47 p.m. — The Palo Alto Schools Management Association, a union that represents principals and other administrators in the district, is calling for Chiu to resign for criticizing one of its members.
“By posting and commenting on an incendiary social media post filled with racially charged rhetoric and personal attacks against a PAUSD initiative and staff, Ms. Chiu has violated the ethical obligations of her position and betrayed the trust of the community she was elected to serve,” the letter said. “Her actions reflect a divisive, harmful, and regressive mindset that threatens the very foundation of inclusivity and educational equity that PAUSD upholds.”
ORIGINAL, 10:14 a.m. — Fourteen former Palo Alto school board members have signed a letter condemning new school board member Rowena Chiu for reposting an online message that was critical of a school district administrator in connection with the Ethnic Studies debate.
The letter was signed by Alan Davis, Diane Reklis, Julie Jerome, Susie Richardson, Amado Padilla, Cathy Kroymann, Gail Price, Dana Tom, Barbara Sih Klausner, Terry Godfrey, Ken Dauber, Jennifer DiBrienza, Todd Collins and Jesse Ladomirak.
Chiu reposted a message from Asians Against Wokeness. The message said Chiu announced during the school board’s Jan. 23 meeting on Ethnic Studies that she didn’t feel “safe” due to “bullying by other woke school board members.”
The message that Chiu reposted claims that about an hour later, a district administrator, Danae Reynolds, “lectures (Chiu) about how the word ‘unsafe’ is essentially inappropriate for people of Asian background because Asians are not truly oppressed.”
Because of the message, the employee was “harassed by numerous racist comments on the Asians Against Wokeness post Chiu reposted,” according to a news release circulated by former board member Ken Dauber.
“Before Chiu made her repost, the thread already included many racist and bullying comments directed at the staff member, which Chiu’s post rebroadcasted,” the news release said.
Dauber’s news release said that Chiu appears to have deleted her repost from her own timeline sometime on Wednesday, Jan. 29.
The video of the meeting, at 3:51:40, shows Reynolds responding to Chiu’s comment about feeling unsafe and, in directly, concerns by Asians about their feelings of oppression being downplayed.
“I worry about the word safe as a person who has to worry about my husband driving and coming home, right, if he gets pulled over. And the word safety is something we have to be a little bit, we have to be aware of what that means,” Reynolds said, according to a video of the meeting. “Now being uncomfortable, absolutely, I feel uncomfortable sitting up here maybe that I worry about my husband but it’s the truth. We can feel uncomfortable. That’s part of growing and learning and being a human being but also being apart of this community.”
“Our teachers will often feel uncomfortable when a student says something in their classroom, in a math classroom, a student may (say) something to the one black student in the class or the one Pacific Islander student in the class about ‘Why are you in here?’ That happens in some of our math classes and that teacher might feel uncomfortable, and that teacher has to address it,” Reynolds said. “Because if the teacher doesn’t address it, the teacher is complicit, right?”
“So I know that we may have members of our community who may be worried about the terms oppressor or oppressed,” said Reynolds. “I completely understand that. But as a person who comes from the community that was oppressed and continues to be oppressed, I have to live with that every day. And our students of color live with that every day.”
The Post has been unable to reach Chiu for her side of the controversy.
The board voted 3-2 to keep Ethnic Studies as a graduation requirement. Board members Shounak Dharap, Shauna Segal and Josh Salcman voted for the class. Chiu and Alison Kamhi voted against it.
This is hilarious coming from Dauber. How many times did his wife bully and villainize people in the community including school employees? Yet he never once said a word about her.
Make sure to follow Asians against wokeness!
Not all white hold progressive, marxist viewpoints. Stop vilifying whites as though they are all the same please.
Asians against wokeness is violently anti-black, transphobic, and homophobic.
The post was not anti black or homophobic but very factual. Mrs Chius comment was expressing her experience. This cancel culture has to stop. Let’s discuss facts not vilify others.
Did someone tell you it was a racist profile? I looked at the profile I didn’t see anything anti black or racist
Well the account reposts accounts like ‘End Wokeness’ which is literally run by a nazi, they constantly villify black people to make them seem like enemies of Asians. The post itself wasn’t inherently racist, but it made Ms. Reynolds a target for racist attacks.
I support Rowena and feel this is a smear campaign. Rowena is standing up for Asian families. Too bad Ken Dauber doesn’t like that. Change is needed in PAUSD. It’s good that Dauber is gone, but Rowena needs to be able to speak at board meetings without having to worry about attacks. The former school board members who signed Dauber’s letter should feel ashamed. They have tainted their reputations.
I want to get all the names of people that signed to ask her to resign, what a group of harassers that threatens Asian in every way.
I am not Asian but fully support her. She stands for open discourse not ideological cultural campaigns
Stop bullying Asians and whites – they are not oppressors. This is a false Marxist framework to systematically discriminate against others.
i can’t wait to discriminate against whites honestly
So you are a racist. Go away from our community. We want all people to leave together and be judged by the content of their heart not the color of their skin
Wow looks like the anti-Rowena folks are the racists in this fight
Sorry Rowena – it’s not about you or Asians or not Asians. The School Board is about providing the best educational solutions for Palo Alto Students. If you can’t keep your incendiary comments to yourself and focus on the job at hand, you need to resign. Are there problems with the contents of the Ethnic studies curriculum? Then the School Board needs to work through that and set up an Ethnic Studies program that does what is necessary to do. All of you should read the book “James”. Now that is about persecution.
I don’t understand something. The employees work for the school board, right? Since when do the employees get the right to tell off their bosses as (name removed) did at this board meeting? This is backward. Austin has lost control of his staff.
Danae Reynolds please resign.
The right calls this “deep state” unelected operatives going against elected representatives. Maybe there is something to it
It’s her first ammendment right to post whatever she wants. I’m proud that she’s standing up for, and hearing parents voices in PAUSD. She’s coming at it with logic and not emotion. Thank you Rowena!!!
No there are certain ethics policies for school board members. She amplified racist content. Do you call that ‘logical’?
She amplified one post. Get over it.
She amplified the wrong post
If she would only fall inline with the woke ideology!!!
What was racist in that post. Judge the content? It just showed how poorly run that meeting was
The most liberal people are racists. Asians can’t say they or their ancestors were oppressed? Really? Ken, thanks for revealing yourself.
I support Rowena and understand why she said she “has not felt very safe.” At the school district meeting on the evening of January 23, 2025, only students who supported keeping Ethnic Studies as a graduation requirement were allowed to speak, while opposing parents were left waiting outside and couldn’t get in. By around 8:30PM, there was hope that the decision would be overturned with a 3-2 vote, but then came endless delays and excessive questioning, ultimately leading to a reversal. The entire meeting felt like a drawn-out, bureaucratic process. Rowena spoke boldly and stood her ground until the very end, advocating for what was right. It was no easy feat.
Another obvious attempt to silence Asian voices. And a coordinated effort as well. Is it no wonder Trump won in a landslide? The district should be ashamed at this blatant political play.
Any reasonable person in Our community will agree that the lack of transparency over the past couple of years is outrageous.
No one, not even the board members, has seen the materials
Is it liberated ethnic studies? Is it inclusive ethnic studies? How were the students in the pilot study selected? Why did Don Austin share sample lessons rooted in liberated ethnic studies? Why were the speakers only the ones in favor of mandatory ES for all 9th graders? Why couldn’t those in favor of a “pause” be given a chance to speak?
Rowena was a voice of reason in that room.
Shame on the administration and former board members for gas lighting this.
I surely hope Rowena will stay strong for those who only want what is best for ALL our students and families – not just this loud minority who is trying to silence our only female board member of color. .
Proud of Rowena!
Don Austin is a technocrat who came to saw discord in our community. He is on an ideological mission and it’s not for the good of the parents or kids. We the tax payers want him recalled and replaced by someone who is here to serve the community not culture wars.
The fact that Rowena Chiu got attached by those PAUSD educators proved how much an Asian is oppressed in PASUD’s own “inclusive” policy!
Asians are probably the most oppressed group by the peninsula liberals. Ken and his “wife” Michele don’t want anyone to succeed by hard work and believing in family. Let’s drop them to the lowest common denominator so they will stay in line and do what “we” say. Individual thought is not allowed.
Rowena needs to stay off social media – but asking her to resign over this is laughable. The school board has bigger things to worry about than this nonsense. Grow up!
What was wrong with what she did on social media? You don’t like that she responded to a profile that’s against Wokeness? Not every parent in the Bay Area is woke. Most of us actually despise the woke ideology and just want to be somewhere in the middle
I want Rowena to be successful and effective – wading into social media is an unnecessary distraction and prevents her from focusing on what’s important – the needs of students and families. She is an elected official, time to be circumspect. How can she possibly do what voters sent her to do if she has people howling for her to resign? She needs to have a cooler head so she can remain on the board and get the job done.
The audacity of a school administrator to tell a board member if she can feel oppressed or not! There’s something seriously wrong with this school board and the Don Austin administration. Time to take out the broom and sweep these racists out!
Rowenda shouldn’t resign. She’s was exercising her right to free speech. The 14 former school board members should apologize for trying to censor her. I guess they think that the Asian lady on the school board is supposed to stay silent and bow down to the racists. This black administrator should resign for making such a racist comment.
In light of the recent discussions surrounding Board Member Rowena Chiu, it is important to take a step back and reaffirm our collective commitment to respectful dialogue and the principles of free speech. While we recognize the concerns expressed in the recent letter, we must also ensure that all voices—including those of our elected officials—are heard and respected.
Board members, like all members of our community, are human beings. They, too, have the right to express their thoughts, engage in discussions, and participate in public discourse. While accountability is essential in public service, so is fairness. Ms. Chiu, as an elected official, retains the right to share her perspective publicly—just as any citizen, including national leaders, does. Her participation in discussions should not be viewed as an endorsement of divisiveness but rather as an exercise of her right to engage with the community she serves.
Calls for resignation based solely on social media interactions set a dangerous precedent. Democracy thrives on the exchange of diverse viewpoints, and condemning a board member for engaging in public dialogue—without due process or clear evidence of misconduct—risks silencing important perspectives. It is crucial that we maintain a balanced and measured approach, allowing for differences of opinion while continuing to uphold PAUSD’s values of inclusivity and professionalism.
We urge all community members to approach this situation with level-headedness and fairness. Constructive criticism is essential, but so is ensuring that discussions remain open, respectful, and free from undue pressure. Let us strive to create an environment where everyone—students, educators, parents, and board members alike—feels safe expressing their viewpoints without fear of unjust reprisal.
Now is the time for thoughtful dialogue, not division. Let’s come together as a community to ensure that all perspectives are heard and that we uphold the fundamental principles of fairness, respect, and free speech.
The post that Rowena reposted is absolutely accurate except for the fact that it’s off by a minute or so. This irritating administrator, who finishes every other sentence with “right?”, diminishes Rowena’s concerns in about one sentence and then goes into this rant about how her concerns are much more important. So the post in question is spot on. Watch it for yourself, but it starts at 3:51.40.
It’s important to note that Rowena felt unsafe because high school students were acting as high school students do – they booed when they heard comments they disagreed with or felt were untrue, and snapped when they heard comments that aligned with their experience at PAUSD and hopes for it to improve by introducing curriculum that reflects their cultures. These students are students of color who are *literally* unsafe at PAUSD schools and who have dealt and still deal with unsafe treatment, curriculum, and conversations toward and about them. They are 15-18 years old. They are kids. It is appropriate for the director of secondary curriculum – in a conversation that is largely about language (inclusive vs. liberated, oppressor vs. oppressed) – to discuss the connotation of a word. It is appropriate and necessary to stand up for students and teachers who have been thrown into a firestorm of bad faith arguments and untruths. Reynolds did not say that Asian people do not have a right to feel unsafe. She instead, respectfully, challenged her word choice in order to make a larger point about discomfort vs. danger in the context of the argument at hand. It is dangerous to retweet and amplify a racist account. I’m not sure if you can still see the comments that were underneath the post she amplified, but I haven’t seen something so blatantly racist in a very long time. It is dangerous to correlate an attempted sexual assault with having your ideas and position challenged in a public forum, which is what it is literally meant for. It is dangerous to post the image and personal information of a Black woman out to an audience of particularly emboldened racists who see a one semester 9th grade history class as a threat to their way of life and their children’s opportunity to succeed. This battle over the class requires you as a board member to be especially thoughtful and careful with your use of language in public. Everyone commenting should watch the full video before believing clickbait and commenters.
“they booed when they heard comments they disagreed with or felt were untrue, and snapped when they heard comments” — what the hell does “snapped” mean? Is it like those Stanford law school students who snapped their fingers in unison when they were disrupting the federal judge who was trying to give a lecture? “snapped”? Where did they learn that? Seems like we’ve got some activists teaching our kids, not educators.
Hi, I was a 16 year old who was there and we snapped because we were asked not to clap by Ms. Segal. This is a skill taught in all of our PAUSD public schools as a way to support people without interrupting them.
Hi, I am a 16 year old who was there that night. Thank you Jane for reaffirming this– also to be clear, there was no jeering or yelling at Ms. Chiu from the audience, there was simply an equal number of people from both sides. What Ms. Reynolds said made sense in the context. The racist comments under the X post, on the other hand, were unacceptable.
bro yes i swear whose parents are making these other insane comments. Thank you for speaking the truth.
Totally bro! I don’t get how these parents don’t understand it. We were simply following our teachers instructions. Who doesn’t love an easy A class, where you just have to parrot the same awesomeness they believe in. Now we know it is all about power and oppression and social justice and empathy toward POC and dismantling the structures of white capitalism.
The personal information is public for anyone to see. There’s nothing racist with the Asians against Wokeness profile. You just want to claim anything that isn’t left leaning is racist. The intolerant left is why Trump won.
Rowena we love you and we support you! Thank you for being the voice of the community and standing strong with courage and grace! You were elected precisely because the majority in our community had enough of the divisive, biased, and self serving leadership and administration. That group just proved again that they have no rock bottom.
For those that need context. The school board special meeting was chaotic and irregular and hostile to those that opposed or even questioned the agenda. Many felt unsafe. There were security guard in the room and many selectively could not speak or even get in. Rowena expressed twice that she does not feel safe in the face of the hostility and also expressed that families feel unsafe with making a class with undisclosed curriculum a requirement.
The school administrator lecture also “downgraded” feelings of *others* to “uncomfortable”, and seemed to believe this is a desirable outcome.
Now, this administrator is the “Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction” at PAUSD. This is a person in direct charge of TK-12 minors! This is very unsettling.
It had been a full week and no apology or explanation from the administrator or the Superintendent clarifying that this statement does not reflect PAUSD values. Or perhaps it does?
Can a district that views mental health as a zero sum game (it is not!) and minimizes feelings of unsafely support its students? How can parents trust this district when sending their children to school?
Thanks for providing the context! Everyone has the equal right to feel “unsafe”. The PAUSD meeting appeared to endorse the notion that it is acceptable to tell people of specific ancestry or people of specific community that they have no right to feel unsafe.
We should all respect the freedom of thought and expression. Instead of denying someone’s right to feel unsafe, a more compassionate response is to ask why they feel that way and what can be done to address their concerns.
I support Rowena.
Here’s actual text. This article left out the juice / outrageous part about “Mercedes” from the Reynolds.
Rowena Chiu: “I want to say personally I have not felt very safe in this room… I am attempting to maintain an open mindset, but the feedback that I’ve heard from the community so far has made me feel very unsafe. I have felt very unsafe in this meeting. So I will attempt to be constructive and ask questions with an open mindset. [Time Stamp: 3:00:00]”
In response to Rowena Chiu, the district’s “Executive Director of Curriculum & Instruction” Danaé Reynolds:
“I know that we have members in our community who may be worried about the terms oppressor or oppressed. I completely understand that. But as a person who comes from a community that has and continues to be oppressed, I have to live with that every day. And our students of color in our district live with that every day. And the students who may not have that experience – now I’m not saying that I’m a victim. Believe me, I am not a victim. I am not saying that. Y’all know Ms. Reynolds. I also know that I can be Ms. Reynolds in Palo Alto here, but I can also be the black woman driving her Mercedes someplace else and also get pulled over and not come home to my husband. That is living an oppressed experience, right? And it’s okay to say that in a classroom because our kids are experiencing it every day. They’re experiencing it every day. So yes the language can be triggering for people. [Time Stamp: 3:51:30]”
Executive Director Reynolds: Going for gold in the victim olympics, nut then claims “i am not a victim..y’all know ms.reynolds”
What a joke that woman is.
She has such low self-esteem and so much hate in her heart, she should not be anywhere close to these kids.
Hey maybe be quiet if you have never had the chance to meet Ms. Reynolds. She has an undying bond to this community.
Unshackle her bond. Let her roam free her to feel safe in her Mercedes-Benz.
a school district cannot selectively allow some parents and students to attend a public school board meeting while preventing others from attending, as this would violate Open Meeting Laws (Sunshine Laws) and First Amendment rights.
1. Public Meetings Must Be Open to All – If the meeting is a regular or special public school board meeting, all members of the public (including parents) must have equal access.
2. Viewpoint Discrimination Is Illegal – A school board cannot exclude certain parents based on their opinions, criticisms, or advocacy.
3. Space Limitations Must Be Neutral – If a meeting room is full due to capacity limits, restrictions must be applied equally (e.g., first-come, first-served or livestream alternatives).
All the above violation has happened in the last week’s meeting. Some parents was stopped by security while seeing others going in even they came after then.
Rowena is all the time being polite and patience. She has been asking over and over she need the transparency of the Ethical Study course. But the district did not disclose enough information, used one year old brainstorm files. Leaving all the newly elected board members in wonder. The teacher taking the issue personally and getting emotional. To be honest, a good social study should have a clear mind and be neutral to guide the students in critical thinking. I clearly didn’t see that happening base on the behavior of the school district. On what ground did the union want her to resign? Rowena didn’t do anything wrong. The action and those people participate on the action of asking her to resign is unbelivable nasty.
Reposting from X is probably not a smart move these days, but the self-righteous indignation over all of this is ridiculous. Stick with it, Rowena. The old (mostly white) guard is trying all the tactics they can to get rid of you after losing the election (by a lot).
I know Mrs. Reynolds from El Carmelo days when she was the principal there, and I think she is a good principal. I also admire Rowena for her courage to stand up for the community and voice opinions for people against making Ethnic Studies as the mandatory graduation requirements. Even if they have two different opinions, I wish they can be open to the other side’s opinion and work things out because they are both good people in my mind. I’m against the action from former school board members to request Rowena to resign. She was elected by the people in this community, she brought fresh air to the school board and is our hope for a reform. The very few who initiated this action should respect the larger community who support Rowena and voted her to represent this larger community. It’s much harder to work things out together but they chose the easy way to kick out people with a different opinion.
I met Rowena back in the fall when she was campaigning for our School Board and found her to be a very intelligent, thoughtful, dedicated, and reasonable person, even when she and I didn’t agree on some topics. I was very happy to see her win the election – she is a change agent, and change agents are desperately needed here. The debate over this Ethnic Studies class is obviously very controversial, and it doesn’t make sense to ram through a decision that is so divisive. Why doesn’t the PAUSD School Board step back, and allow more time for parents to learn about this proposal, and more voices to be heard by the School Board, before embarking on this path???
The exchange between Mrs. Rowena Chiu and Mrs. Reynolds a school employee, on a social media ,is not the main issue.
The main issue is the special school board meeting on January 23rd-2025 about Ethnic Studies.
Tonight instead of searching on Netflix to watch a horror movie, watch the video of PAUSD board meeting on the night of 23rd.
The main player of the this horror meeting was Shana Segal, the board president, assisted by Shounak Dharap, a returning board member, Dr. Don Austin , the superintendent , cheered by a crowd of teachers and students.
I who sat at home and watched the meeting, felt intimidated, scared and unsafe, like Mrs. Rowena Chiu. For instance, if one dared to express any idea that contrasted the teachers’ or the students’, a crowd of students would reply with head shake and the teachers would use body language to express their disapproval. Cancel Culture at its best.
We feel unsafe when there is a coup, that what happened during this meeting. Before the doors were open to the public, the room had already been filled by students and teachers who came to advocate for ES. It is possible to hear on the video, a member of the public complaining that only supporters of ES are let in.
Shana Segal and Shounak Dharap manipulated the agenda and thus the vote, in such a way that the board had to stop few times and ask what is it that they were actually voting for.
Mrs. Rowena Chiu was the only person who dared to ask informative questions. Based on her questions, we learned that the curriculum on the PAUSD web site was not actually the one used to teach. That was good to know but what exactly was taught remained undisclosed. Why? We also learned that the supposedly randomly selected students in the pilot course were not randomly selected at all. They were hand picked by the teachers to participate in the pilot program. It was not a selection by lottery or random selection! We all know how we can choose so it will turn out according to our liking (right??)
It was not just Mrs. Rowena who felt unsafe. I for one truly believe that also Mr. Josh Salcman felt bullied and unsafe. He was placed in unattainable position. He was pressed, for example, to find a substitute schedule for student to graduate, if they would not take ES. a tall order for a board member who just was elected.
It was a night of a horror, this is not the role model I expect from teachers to provide their students. This is not just about Ethnic Studies, it was about bullying to get what it is convenient to get. The teachers were stating that since they spent so much time on creating the Pilot Program they should get it. So why do we have an elected board? this is a mockery of the democratic process.
Mrs. Chue is a person of integrity and principle, the only person on the board who can truly work for the mental safety of our children. As such , she was bullied and hence felt unsafe.Teachers and the Trustee do not like to hear the truth.
I do hope that we will have more leaders like Mrs Rowena Chue! Rowena can not be manipulated as to satisfy the Trustee.
Please readers , I hope you know now why Rowena felt unsafe, please take care of her safety and the safety and mental safety of our children.
Rowena has done nothing wrong. We need five Rowenas on the board. This “controversy” is instigated by the old-guard virtue signaling progressives who want to protect the status quo of mediocrity, incompetence and obstructionism. As for Ms. Reynolds response, it was, at best, inarticulate. No person, race, ethnic group, or political party has a monopoly on “feeling unsafe”. It is very hypocritical and Animal-House-like: “safe space and trigger warnings for me but none for you”. Rowena, stay strong. We’re behind you.
Ask Rowena to resign is ugly! We voted her and she is representing our voice! Stop bullying her! Leave Rowena alone!
Given Reynolds’ long diatribe, you’ve got to think that the Ethnic Studies curriculum will be weighed toward the Black Experience, and the oppression of Chinese will get short shrift. Never mind the fact that 40% of the kids in the district are Asian and about 1-2% are black.
I support Rowena too.
Calls for her resignation is hypothetical at best.
It was surprising to see Todd Collins’ name on this smear of Rowena Chiu. Todd has avoided ad hominem attacks in his eight years on the school board. I recall a letter to the editor Collins wrote on October 22, 2012 about Ken Dauber, the organizer of this attack on Chiu. His letter said:
“Dear Editor: In reference to Dave Price’s column last Monday, it is great to see someone call out the real issues in the Palo Alto school board election. Candidate Ken Dauber is demanding fundamental change in our school district, despite its tremendous success. His first public salvo was an op-ed piece in 2011 calling for Dr. Kevin Skelly to be fired as superintendent. And why? On everything — graduation requirements, counseling, mental health, even online systems — Mr. Dauber thinks he has all the answers.
“Dauber wants to centralize decision making — and make sure he gets to make the decisions, not the educators.
“If we elect Mr. Dauber, can anyone believe that Dr. Skelly and the team he has assembled will not start taking head-hunter calls the day after the election?
“Mr. Dauber has ideas worth considering. But his caustic, “I know best,” approach is wrong for Palo Alto, and he does not belong on the school board.”
Todd Collins Palo Alto
It’s got to be Ken’s way or the highway. Looks like he’s still trying to run PAUSD. Sad that Todd has lent his name to this.
You’ve got to wonder why these other 13 former board members would associate their good names with Ken Dauber.
Go back in 2014 and 15 when PAUSD was under siege from the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR). OCR was investigating everything from old articles in student newspapers to a Terman kid accused of stealing money from their teachers.
Why was OCR, a federal agency in Washington, D.C., so interested in Palo Alto?
Dauber never told anybody at the time, but public records revealed he was quietly sending OCR emails recommending the agency investigate PAUSD. He was giving OCR targets.
When it all came out, Dauber’s fellow school board members were blindsided by his involvement. His goal seemed to be running Superintendent Max McGee out of town. It’s worth noting that none of Dauber’s fellow board members at that time signed on to this letter attacking Chiu, and he had to go back to people who served in the 1980s to fill out his list.
Why not ask the board to reconsider? And if they say “no,” hold a referendum.
I can’t believe this is happening on the heels of making Ethnic Studies a mandatory course. This is proving the concern of many that the course is going to teach the students that cancel culture is an appropriate response when you have a difference of opinion.
Ms Chiu should be applauded. If anything, she should be given the mantle of president instead of Shana, who could not control the room or discussion.
Ms Reynolds should be given a formal letter of reprimand to her personal file for behaving in such a rude and condescending manner to a school board member. This is unacceptable behavior by a staff member, regardless the topic.
I support Rowena. She represents our community.
Rowena was treated in a patronizing and very condescending way during the 1/23 board meeting when she was lectured not to use the word “unsafe” and told that others but not she are entitled to that term. That night she was asking some of the most thoughtful questions with patience and composure regardless of high pressure in that room. Requesting her resignation by PAUSD management team members because she reposted from social media the board meeting video with a time stamp is preposterous. Making it sound like she did something racist is pure slander. People should read her comment and decide for themselves. That video is public information and posting on social media is free speech. PAUSD management members demanding her to resign based on nothing factual that could stand in court when it is the Palo Alto residents who elected her to be on the board that oversees PAUSD that’s employing all of them?
Rowena, thank you for putting yourself out there for the families of Palo Alto. I hope you can stay strong and withstand this intense and unwarranted pressure. You have a lot of people in this town supporting you.
Too bad Ms. Reynolds is consumed by her desire to force feed CRT on our kids. An objective Ethnic Studies teacher could do a week or two on how Chinese were forced to build the transcontinental railroad owned by Leland Stanford. They were paid 30-50% less than white workers. Their children were placed in segregated schools. Chinese workers were often responsible for the most dangerous and difficult work, such as tunneling and using explosives. They worked in harsh winters, sometimes in tunnels dug under snowdrifts. They faced physical abuse from some supervisors. And our Legislature passed laws preventing Chinese immigrants from voting, becoming naturalized citizens, or appearing in court. Seems like that would be relevant in an Ethnic Studies class. Will they mention it? I don’t know. Superintendent Austin won’t reveal the curriculum, which makes me suspect the whole class will be about what Ms. Reynolds thinks is important, which isn’t Asian oppression.
That is all taught in U.S history junior year. I know this as a current student at gunn.
“Asians against wokeness”? Is that a joke? The word “woke” was code for Black people traveling in Alabama to be careful and “stay woke”, originally from a Lead Belly song. Being “against wokeness” is odd terminology, almost as if it’s demanding to keep our eyes closed. Not sure how that benefits anyone. What I heard in the meeting were the students sharing how this thoughtful curriculum helped them build empathy and an understanding of different cultural perspectives. This is what will remedy our mental health crisis. We clearly need courses that build empathy and connection, instead of divisiveness & competition. I trust our teachers and their skills in encouraging our students to listen & learn from each other. It felt to me like Rowena had them on trial for teaching critical thinking. Maybe this is a foreshadowing of things to come, as Vance just stated publicly that “professors are the enemy.” We are heading into uncertain times for public education
From what I listened to in that meeting. Rowena wasn’t opposed to the Ethnic Studies course, she was only asking for more information/transparency and asking for more time. For the students and teachers who are excited to go ahead with the course, the school should allow them to do so – but making it a mandatory graduation requirement for every student should make people more careful about moving forward. Saying that Rowena “had them on trial for teaching critical thinking” sounds like a big stretch.
Did you mean ‘critical thinking’ or ‘critical race theory thinking?’
Remember how Ken Dauber and the board wanted to change the name of Jordan or Terman to Yamamoto? Chinese parents objected to the name change since Yamamoto was the Japanese admiral who masterminded Pearl Harbor. The problem was that the committee recommending new names didn’t have any Asian or Latino members, though the two groups together comprise half of the district. There was a local man named Yamamoto who they wanted to honor, but they didn’t understand the history. The school board was made up of Caucasians like Dauber. It took a massive outpouring from Asian parents to stop the board from doing this.
The cancel culture may have died nationally, but it persists in Palo Alto. Here we have Ken Dauber, a left-wing ideologue, trying to cancel Rowena Chiu. I can’t tell what Ms. Chiu’s politics might be, but it doesn’t matter. She’s on the side of common sense, in opposition to Dauber’s allies in the PAUSD. But cancel culture only works when people go along with it. Let’s reject cancel culture and have tolerance for all points of view, whether we agree with them or not.
This is ironic.
A minority school board member utilizing all the jargon language of the current zeitgeist and then is in the most passively aggressive way possible, policed in using the word “safe”.
Only in Palo Alto.
I smell a good old fashioned lawsuit coming spearheaded by all the coffers who have been ready to pounce.
It would be funny if PAUSD lost federal funding for hiding DEI as Ethnic Studies and Danae got fired.
This is not only about race.
They (former board members and admins) have made PAUSD degrading over years and now tried to silence a different voice reflecting the true thought of residents.
This is another round of elevated bullying on top of Reynolds’ performance during the board meeting. Shame on all of you!
Chiu we support you.
Reynolds you should resign by playing this dirty trick. All individual of all races can express their “unsafe” feeling.
Residents and parents, please watch the original video and share your view who should resign?
Interesting seeing how the special interests are running with this. Mrs Chiu absolutely stepped in it by posting and supporting such a divisive account. It’s unprofessional to repost an account made to create division and directly attack your colleage.
Asking for transparency is fair, but unsafe has a very large connotation that isn’t appropriate for a city meeting. Being in a position of power and having citizens or colleagues disagree with you in a meeting is not the same as being unsafe. Uncomfortable and upset is valid, but she wasn’t physically unsafe and to infer that the people in the meeting were a threat is wrong.
Me Reynold’s comments make me wonder what exactly will be taught in Ethnic Studies class. She leaves me with the impression that the class will emphasize blacks to the exclusion of Asians. We need to know what they will be teaching to ensure it’s not a skewed version of history.
How many years did PAUSD focus on stopping bullying. Then an administrator bullies a new school board member and if we object, we’re called racists. The bully needs to be fired. Bullies need to be put in their place.
Thank you Daily Post for letting all sides be heard. The other paper would delete criticism of Dauber and his wife. I know because I tried to post some of that criticism. They don’t believe in honest debate. I’m glad the Post has become the main newspaper in Palo Alto.
How dare Palo Alto parents elect someone to the board that the PAUSD administrators do not approve of?
Here is what AI thinks of the PAMA letter:
– A bureaucratic hit piece, disguised as a defense of the oppressed, while virtue signaling.
– Uses accusations of racism as a weapon against democratic change
– Attempts to nullify election results through moral pressure
– Classic example of using DEI language as a shield for institutional interests
– Treating a policy disagreement as a moral emergency
– Deliberately vague
– No specific quotes of the alleged racist content
– No concrete examples of harm
– Institutional actors trying to override the democratic process
– Using moral accusations to sidestep debate
– Collective administrative action against individual elected official
– likely written by a bureaucrat with a PhD in pseudo science/’studies’ with many years polishing the same tactics. Recipient of DEI benefits, smart enough not to sign the letter.
– most signatories are again the useful idiots.
– motivated by bureaucratic vengeance.
**Ms. Reynolds could be policing someone else’s language, the very language that is utilized in the same Ethnic Studies dynamic she is supporting. She literally insinuated that other groups of people do not qualify to FEEL or utilize this language. If Ms. Chiu had said “As a small Asian woman in this room with all of this hostility I do not feel safe” she would probably have grounds for a lawsuit.
**Ms. Segal was clearly not qualified to run this meeting. She constantly in all her grandstanding nervousness stated that clapping would not be allowed but the constant “click click” applause coming from the crowd is not equal to clapping?
**At the very best Ms. Chiu is ignorant at how X works. At the very worst she knew exactly what she was doing. Let’s not forget the X activity of past board members on the political grandstanding.
**Wouldn’t it be nice if the teachers on the panel made this a model Ethnic Studies lesson on intent vs. impact? Think about it – the “healing circles” are already made where they were positioned, they could hand out worksheets on the new vocabulary that is in play here, they could have “speaking sticks” to allow for equal speaking time, and everyone could actually earn their paycheck. This is the same group that is confident in their work. Let’s do this!
Ken Dauber follows Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. In the case of Rowena, he’s applying Alinsky’s rule No. 13 — “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Just watch what has happened and what will happen. He’s gotten away with it in the past, no reason to believe he won’t succeed again.
What Rowena did was to express her concerns about our children’s education in PAUSD in a civilized and professional manner. We are deeply shocked that her just and responsible actions have resulted in death threats against both her and her children.
The accusation of anti-Black bias against her is clearly baseless and without evidence. If democracy allows organizations to use power to silence or force the resignation of those with different views and legitimate concerns, then such a “democracy” risks evolving into a dictatorship.
We stand by Rowena and strongly believe in the importance of open dialogue, mutual respect and the protection of every individual’s right to express their concerns without fear of retaliation.
After viewing the exchange between Ms Reynolds and Ms Chiu, I was sure an apology was due to Ms Chiu for the condescending remarks dismissive of Ms Chiu’s legitimate feelings. After all, empathy and respect are cornerstones of learning about other ethnicities. None came.
I was also impressed with Ms Chiu’s intelligence, moral clarity and respectful behavior during the meeting.
I have not been able to see what she re-posted afterwards and then, perhaps realizing it was linked to unacceptable language by others, un-reposted it.
If it was as described, it warrants an apology as well. But there’s no pattern of bad behavior and it’s a very far cry from an offense justifying resignation.
The ugly campaign to pressure Ms Chiu into resigning is clearly politically motivated by prior board members who were voted out. Rowena Chiu was voted in by a larger number of votes than any other candidate. It is what we Palo Altans wanted — someone intelligent to challenge the status quo.
If the educators or others had concerns, why didn’t their leaders suggest a meeting between the parties to work through the issues? If their purpose was to inflame the situation, they’ve succeeded.
You don’t undo an election by storming the Capitol. You don’t undo a local school board election by pressuring and bullying.
Shame on those who signed such a petition without taking the time to check the facts or consider the consequences. Shame on us all if we let their tactics succeed.
Rowena Chiu has done nothing wrong, except for reposting from a controversial X account, although there was nothing racist about that specific post or her comment. This can be considered a mistake, but I think her frustration in the last few days is understandable. Her participation in the board meeting was measured, thoughtful, and constructive under very difficult circumstances, and just for daring to raise some questions she has been exposed to relentless personal attacks. To call for her resignation based on what has transpired over the last week is ludicrous.
Beyond that, I have two comments/questions. First, an argument has been made at the board meeting that the school district is not here to cater to parents’ concerns; rather, it is here to optimize the students’ outcomes. (Let’s leave aside whether that is currently the case in Palo Alto.) In any case, the board is elected by adults, not K-12 students. So clearly the parents and more broadly Palo Alto citizens are supposed to have a say in the process. Was this a proposal to revise this principle?
Secondly, a lot has been said about discomfort and how this is an indication that something useful is being learned. That is a possibility, although discomfort itself does not indicate which side is right or wrong; it could go both ways. The proponents of mandatory Ethnic Studies are now experiencing some discomfort with the fact that there is a significant backlash against it from the Asian community, one of the “communities of color” which was once assumed to be under their umbrella. Is this an indication that they have something to learn, too?
I regret voting for Ms. Chiu. I believed she would advocate for our children, but she seems to advocate more for herself and her victim narrative. She just started her job and already she’s complaining of how overwhelmed she feels and that she’s being picked on. This is NOT what I voted for.
No required ethnic studies courses period. End of debate.
Ms. Reynolds should resign. As someone designing an ethics study, she should remain unbiased. I watched the video, and it is apparent that, in her mind, the word “safe” can only be used and felt by certain races. This is a racist mindset.
To be honest, I wasn’t even aware of that X account until the former Board Trustee and PAMA launched a massive campaign around it. They are the ones amplifying that account, not Rowena. Rowena has since removed her repost and comments—she should not be held accountable for what others have said. Her comments were not racist in any way.
Shounak Dharap should resign as well. We voted for an Education Board to supervise and ensure transparency—this is the least we should expect, not blind trust in teachers. Dharap has not provided any productive input and does not listen to the community that pays taxes and voted for this board. He needs to revisit his responsibilities. If he cannot fulfill his fiduciary duty, he is not qualified to serve.
Thank you, Rowena and Alison, for standing up and voicing our concerns!