BY BRADEN CARTWRIGHT
Daily Post Staff Writer
Text messages between Councilwoman Julie Lythcott-Haims and her school district friends show that Lythcott-Haims voted against a volunteer for a city commission because of the volunteer’s views on Gaza and math.
Lythcott-Haims sought advice in a group chat with former school board president Jennifer DiBrienza, former school board candidate Nicole Chiu-Wang and parent Nana Chancellor. Lythcott-Haims asked them about Allyson Rosen, a Stanford psychologist who applied for the city’s Human Relations Commission in October.
“I’m hearing there are concerns about (Rosen) based on ‘PAUSD issues.’ Does any of you have an opinion?” Lythcott-Haims asked the group chat on Oct. 3.
“Yes. Do not let her on there,” said Di-Brienza, who was on the school board from 2016 to 2024.
Rosen has a PhD “in something” and bills herself as “a data person” but twists data to suit her agenda, DiBrienza said.
“She is one of the math acceleration people. She is very unsympathetic toward Gaza,” DiBrienza said. Rosen went to a meeting to make sure nobody blamed academic pressure for student suicides, DiBrienza said.
Warning a friend
“Oy,” Lythcott-Haims replied. “I’m good I’m good no need to say more!” The Post obtained the messages from the city on Friday using the California Public Records Act.
Chancellor told Lythcott-Haims that Rosen is “one of the ones I warned you about.”
“She is the worst!!” Chancellor said.
Chiu-Wang said Rosen went after DreamCatchers — a nonprofit that offers free after-school programs, led by Chiu-Wang.
“She should definitely NOT be on HRC,” Chiu-Wang said.
“Anti-equity in every way,” Chancellor added. “She is also a big Rowena supporter. Okay, enough said.” Chancellor was referring to school board member Rowena Chiu, who was elected in November 2024 to change the district’s culture and allow students to advance in math.
The interview
Council members asked Rosen two questions during her interview for the Human Relations Commission on Oct. 15. Mayor Greer Stone asked about federal budget cuts, and Lythcott-Haims about Rosen’s posts in a Palo Alto parents’ group chat.
Rosen told the chat that she needed help in “an information war to defend Israel in the world of public opinion,” according to Lythcott-Haims.
“We are running around trying to debate radial pro-Palestinian activists telling us that Israel is committing genocice and promoting ceasefire proclamations,” Rosen’s post said, according to Lythcott-Haims.
Lythcott-Haims asked Rosen how these views were compatible with the Human Relations Commission.
Rosen said it’s important to have correct information in the war between Israel and Hamas.
“If we don’t have correct information, then that turns into propaganda and hate against the Jewish community,” Rosen said at the meeting.
Didn’t get any votes
Rosen ended up getting no votes. Council picked Michelle Kraus, Sridhar Karnam and Salwa Ansari for two-year terms.
The Human Relations Commission’s mission is to “promote the just and fair treatment of all people in Palo Alto, particularly (its) most vulnerable populations.”
In an interview yesterday, Rosen said she felt like Lythcott-Haims blindsided her during the interview.
“I was very struck by how disrespectful it was,” said Rosen, speaking for herself not for her job as director of dementia education at the VA.
Feels judged
Rosen said she wanted to help the Human Relations Commission address student suicides, which she attributes to depression and bullying. She said she thought her background as a psychologist would be helpful, but she feels like Lythcott-Haims judged her politics, not her qualifications or approach.
“This isn’t about me,” Rosen said. “It’s about whether council members are making decisions with fairness, independence and integrity – not based on retribution or personal grievances or irrelevant political litmus tests.”
‘We all make mistakes’
Lythcott-Haims declined an interview yesterday.
In an email, she said she learned in passing that Rosen had a long history of speaking at school board meetings and had disparaged supporters of Palestinians. “Whenever a candidate has said or done something concerning I give them an opportunity to explain where they were coming from and ask whether in retrospect they might have behaved differently,” Lythcott-Haims said. “We all make mistakes and are capable of growing. How they answer determines whether I would feel comfortable appointing them to the commission.”
Lythcott-Haims term on council expires at the end of this year. It isn’t known if she is running for re-election in the fall.
Like ‘Mean Girls’
Former Mayor Lydia Kou said Lythcott-Haims was scolding and condescending toward Rosen.
“It was a demeaning tirade,” Kou said in an interview Tuesday.
Kou said the text messages reminded her of the movie “Mean Girls.”
“If that’s all the information that’s needed in order to say no to a volunteer – even though they’re highly qualified for the HRC position — it’s very shameful,” Kou said.
Lydia Kou may call it Mean Girls, but I call it due diligence. Looks like we dodged a bullet here.
Seems like these private messages are a violation of the Brown Act…
Please show me where in the Brown Act it says that a public official may not reach out to members of the public to perform due diligence about an individual they’re considering for an appointment?
Did you read the texts? First, these are supposed to be our leaders and the texts read like middle school girl social media bullying. Next, the whole thread has nothing to do with HRC – Nicole even tells Julie not to vote for Rosen bc “she went after me (obvi).” And DiBrienza demeaning data driven decision making? That’s not diligence – that’s negligence.
What a disappointment to see our community leaders treat Allyson Rosen so disparagingly. The texts are cruel and unfair, and the coded messaging back and forth between a small group who seek to hold onto power in this community with an agenda that wreaks of their own priorities at the expense of others is illuminating and disturbing. Calling someone out for their views on Gaza sounds like a dog whistle for antisemitism. Julie Lythcott-Haims and Jennifer DiBrienza should feel ashamed.
Mean girls exactly. Good grief!
You can’t unring the bell.
Asking people whose opinion one trusts is something we all do prior to making an important decision. What do your chat apps look like? Also, I believe that the person holding the HRC position – volunteer or not – can have quite a bit of influence and should be someone who is as inclusive and unbiased as possible.
sure, except all this chat reflects bias and non inclusivity. Or do you call it inclusivity when it matches the news channel that you watch?
Also, why am I the only one here who’s willing to post comments under my full name? I’d encourage others to be as transparent.
Online, you are who you say you are. Just because someone uses a first and last name doesn’t mean they’re telling the truth. People pretend to be authentic all the time. People who use their first name are probably telling the truth. We use it in real life every day. Others feel more comfortable using a screen name. To each his own.
I just watched the video of this Oct. 15, 2025, city council meeting (why after 8 months is this even news?). The meeting video is enlightening.
First – Lydia Kou states in the article that JLH was “scolding and condescending” toward Rosen, that “it was a demeaning tirade”, “shameful”, and JLH a “mean girl”.
There goes Kou’s credibility. She’s just making stuff up. The video shows JLH to be calm, simply putting a couple of questions to Rosen which is part of the interview process. No scolding, no demeaning tirade, no mean girl, nothing to be ashamed of.
We want council members to be careful about appointments to Commissions. If they ask responsible community members about an applicant, good. That is no breach of policy or protocol in doing so. It is telling that JLH wasn’t alone in not voting for Rosen – no council members did so.
A couple decades ago the council was discussing an anti-discrimination policy. Members of the HRC were there, having already considered it. A HRC member told council that as a Christian she wouldn’t vote to for a policy protecting gay Palo Altans from discrimination (so much for the separation of church and state). A gay member of the council was then very articulate when she told off the HRC member.
The point being, it’s better to screen out fraught personal bias in the application process as JLH did, rather than find out during a later policy discussion.
But yet it is ok for JLH to discriminate against the Jewish candidate because she supports Israel and quality math education?
Would be great to have separation from the state church of LGBTQ and its enforced and coerced orthodoxy.
What a bunch of quality people.
They say the difference between government politics and corporate politics is that the government version is cattier and more personal, because there’s less at stake.
Simple solution: the Texting Bee should all go on HRC themselves, basically an ideology discussion group where there’s frankly little at stake; while Rosen should run instead for school board, which really does matter. The school board has been occupied for too long by dumb-downers, including JDB, who would close the achievement gap by holding back high achievers. They swear they don’t mean that, but yes, actually, that’s exactly what they do mean. It’s past time for more adults there, who will both do their job as a board vs delegating it to the administration, and who also care about ALL kids reaching their potential, not just some of them.
Funny how these folks who all wax eloquent about “inclusivity,” except for people they exclude, whether it’s kids who love math or people with unrelated-to-the-job political views.
Love this- my vote is for Allyson and Rowena. The rest of the school board can go
Who told Julie’s small group of friends to comment here?
It is a Brown Act violation for the city clerk to poll council members to determine who will or will not be interviewed by council. Such polling, done privately, constitutes a “serial meeting,” and is expressly prohibited by Government Code Section 54952.2(b).
Incorrect. It constitutes a serial meeting if it is with a quorum of the members.
I’m talking about the polling of council members to determine who will be interviewed by council. It was mentioned in the October 13 text message. Such a poll is specifically prohibited by statute.
Only one person is a City Council members. The others are just her friends.
I am personally not a fan of JLH at all and I kind of chuckle at this. It’s embarrassing but there’s really no ethical or legal violation. She texted her friends for thoughts about someone. Legal and actually reasonable (much as I find her policies and other behavior unreasonable).
This is incorrect. It is only a violation if it’s a majority of the members.
Jamie, perhaps you misunderstand. The violation occurs when the city clerk asks each council member who should be interviewed by council. Such a poll must take place in public or it is a violation of the serial meeting provision of the Brown Act. The polling was mentioned in the October 13 text message. This is enough information for a district attorney to open an investigation. However, the problem can be resolved by providing the clerk with proper training and changing the council’s procedure so that polling takes place during an open meeting.
Julie Lythcott-Haims often speaks eloquently about transparency, kindness, and inclusion. Yet, these texts show her participating in a behind-the-scenes veto-by-text that blindsides candidates with mischaracterized information and snap judgments. We warn our children against gossip and pile-ons; it is high time we demand the same standard of ethics and professional conduct from those we elect to lead our city.
I CONDEM JLH HER FOR HER SEXUAL ABUSE WHILE AT STANFORD. CAN’T TRUST HER AND SHE SHOULD HAVE DONE SOME JAIL TIME AND BE REQUIRED TO TO REGISTER AS SEX OFFENDER. NEVER SHOULD BE AROUND YOUNGER WOMEN, NO WONDER SHE MUST HAVE FELT THREATEND BY A WOMAN WHO IS SMARTER THAN SHE IS. HER JEW BASHING MUST END.
Thank you, Sarit. You are brave to speak up —
This is at least strike three for Julie, who broke everyone’s trust by abusing her power to have an inappropriate relationship with a Stanford undergrad, then running against our beloved Joe Simitian, plus much more. That she’s making decisions by text – just see how Nicole Chiu Wang told Julie not to vote Rosen as retribution – is just another reason she shouldn’t run. This mean girl texting is exactly what we tell our kids not to do – but a former board president jennier diBrienza is doing exactly that. Just disgusting that this is how Palo Alto works.
How else would you recommend Julie perform due diligence if not ask people she trusts about the candidate—people who have observed the candidate over many meetings? People who know the causes the candidate advocates for (and against), can assess how she behaves, and can attest to how she treats others?
It would be one thing if the text comments weren’t inaccurate and that they proved that Rosen’s advocacy had negatively affected anyone. Since I don’t recall seeing JDB at a meeting she claims to be providing information about, I’m doubtful of her motives. Who refers to someone’s children as “the suicides”. It’s no wonder she didn’t improve the experience for students (except her own) during her stint on the school board. I guess the way to get involved in this town is to suck up to people in power and never express personal opinions about anything.
Hooray for Rosen wanting to defend and disseminate truth about Israel and help with bullying and depression. Sounds like bias and no inclusivity allowed on the Council that doesn’t fit their small personal views.
Lythcott-Haim’s private inquiries is ethically questionble for the following reasons
1) Public interviews are designed to ensure that the selection process is visible to the community. When a council member gathers information privately, they are effectively making decisions based on data that the public cannot see or verify
2)Every applicant deserves a level playing field. Private inquiries can introduce information—accurate or not—that the applicant never has the chance to address.
3)Private inquiries often rely on personal networks, which are frequently echo chambers of similar social, economic, or political backgrounds.
It is only equity and inclusion if JDB and JLH say so… The convo isnt against the Brown Act; it is against equity and inclusion. It shows how the mean girls control us – from school yard to city council. These Ad Hoc committees are put togegher by people “they” decide have the same values as them. Then, they preach from the dias how they got, “community input.” I guess people who have “PhDs in something” dont get a voice…oh! except the ones who have inappropriate relationships with students. Palo Alto is the off-broadway production of DC.
Why is Julie Lythcott-Haims even a councilwoman? Why is everything a controversy with her? She has contributed nothing but angry agitation to our community as a whole (albeit hidden behind a few smiles). It’s ridiculous that residents would align themselves with her brand of divisiveness. It’s great to rage against injustice. However, when you’re enraged 24/7 when a soothing conversation might suffice, it shows a mindset that isn’t about building up a community of different people and views. She says that everyone “to be treated with dignity and kindness.” Apparently, Ms. Lythcott-Haims doesn’t apply this standard to people who she disagrees with on various divisive sociopolitical issues.
I too echo the questions above about why JLH is on the City Council and why CC only barred her for single year from serving on committees dealing with youth. While they love to waste time fine-tuning “values” statements for the entire city, they ignore flagrant breaches when confronted with real violations of the values they claim to espouse.
My problem with JLH is her dishonesty. She told the student with whom she was having the affair to lie about it. absurdly claimed Stanford’s rules didn’t apply to deans but only to faculty and staff. What — pray tell — are deans if not Staff?
When the girl’s mother reported her to Stanford which finally forced her out, she claimed she left to “pursue her love for creative writing” and has consistently refused to address the issue or to issue a public apology.
Her entitlement extends to her lying about anyone who disagrees with her: calling Doria Summa a Jim Crow advocate, claiming PASZ is the “loudest voice in the room” unlike all her huge and deep-pocketed campaign contributors, claiming to espouse “equity” for all while ignoring antisemetic attacks against Ed Lauing.
As a Harvard-educated lawyer, she accepted campaign contributions and ran for CC knowing full well about the limits on outside income and — once elected — then sued to overturn the limits.
Her version of ‘equity” applies ONLY to herself and those agreeing with her. She fails to realize she represents the entire city yet ignores all the residents and businesses telling PA to enforce existing laws re the RVs and oversized vehicles until miraculously all homelessness has ended!
She ran against Joe Simitian as a spoiler to benefit Stanford when she hadn’t even served out a single CC term and knew she had no chance of winning.
Her lies about the Churchill closing and misrepresenting the students’ petition are just the latest example showing how little she cares about “equity” and the community she’s supposed to represent.
I find it notable that the council as a body decided to not take sides on complicated geopolitical issue that Gaza and Israel presented because doing so would be divisive in the community.
But Ms Lythcotte-Haims did so when she judged an applicant to serve on a commission that has nothing to do with such issues.
And she based it on opinions expressed as gossip and hearsay rather than the direct, thoughtful and honest answer provided by the applicant, Ms Rosen, when she was awkwardly questioned her about this issue in her interview.
Deliberately fomenting divisiveness in our city is as unwelcome and unproductive as the Council thought it was when they made that decision!!!