Expressing the belief that books available in district school libraries and texts used in classroom instruction are “left leaning” a 3-to-2 majority of the Redlands school board on September 23 voted to ensure balance in the educational process in the district’s schools with regard to “controversial issues” and the books and material available to students.
The action was immediately subject to criticism and charges that the board was proceeding with action in which both its goals and the standards it was applying are ill-defined.
Led by Board Member Candy Olson, Board President Michell Rendler and Jeannette Wilson voted along with her to amend its existing policy, which requires that educational materials be “presented in a balanced manner, addressing all sides of issues without bias or prejudice and without promoting any particular point of view,” so that teachers and librarians are prevented from ushering students toward conclusions regarding issues of social or philosophical contentions one way or the other.
Without saying so directly, Olson seemed to be suggesting that there is an inherent political slant to the vast majority of subjects and topics covered in the educational process. Moreover, it appeared, she is accepting of the proposition that a political scale exists in which liberal constructs, concepts and values are positioned to the left and conservative designs, ideas and ideals stand to the right, such that individual texts and books can be plotted with some degree of precision as to where they are positioned on that spectrum.
Olson had previously raised the issue of the district’s educational materials and books in its libraries celebrating the lives and accomplishments of individuals she characterized as liberals and progressives while slighting one who are deemed, or whom she considered, conservative icons.
As a consequence of Olson’s suggestions, the board on September 23 was presented with an amended policy regarding “controversial issues” that retained preexisting language that “The governing [i.e., school] board recognizes that the district’s educational program may sometimes include instruction related to controversial issues that may arouse strong reactions based on personal values and beliefs, political philosophy, culture, religion, or other influences. Instruction concerning such topics shall be relevant to the adopted course of study and curricular goals and should be designed to develop students’ critical thinking skills, ability to discriminate between fact and opinion, respect for others, and understanding and tolerance of diverse points of view.” and “The board expects administrators and teachers to exercise professional judgment when deciding whether or not a particular issue is suitable for study or discussion. They shall consult with the superintendent or designee as necessary to determine the appropriateness of the subject matter, guest speakers, and/or related instructional materials or resources.”
The new policy dispensed with sections pertaining to “recognition of religious beliefs and customs… sexual health and HIV/AIDS prevention instruction… comprehensive health education… history-social science instruction… courses of study… curriculum development and evaluation… selection and evaluation of instructional materials… supplementary instructional materials… student and family privacy rights)… freedom of speech/expression… [and] student organizations and equal access.)
The revamped policy, contained within Section 6144 of the district’s policy manual, first adopted in June of 1995 and revised inJanuary of 2015, added this language, “The district recognizes that school libraries provide students with access to materials that support an understanding of the history, government, civic institutions, and diverse perspectives of the United States. To support a comprehensive understanding of the nation’s history and civic life, school libraries shall provide access to age-appropriate materials and a balanced selection of library content. Such materials shall be selected and evaluated in accordance with established district policies and procedures governing library materials. For additional provisions regarding the selection, evaluation, and management of library materials, refer to Board Policy 6163.1: Library Media Centers.”
Further preserved was the previously existing portion of the district policy that stated, “When providing instruction related to a controversial issue, the following guidelines shall apply:
1. The topic shall be suitable to the age and maturity of the students.
2. Instruction shall be presented in a balanced manner, addressing all sides of the issue without bias or prejudice and without promoting any particular point of view.
3. No student’s viewpoint shall be suppressed, provided such expression is not malicious or abusive toward others.
In another venue, language in the existing policy was preserved with an adjustment. That portion of the existing language in the policy which stated, “Students shall be assured of their right to form and express an opinion without jeopardizing their relationship with the teacher or school” and the following was added to the remainder of the sentence “or grades or being subject to discrimination, retaliation, or discipline, provided the viewpoint does not constitute harassment, threats, intimidation, or bullying or is otherwise unlawful.”
Preserved was this sentence: “Students shall be informed of conduct expected during such instruction and the importance of being courteous and respectful of the opinions of others. “
Throughout California, the public education system has reflected the attitudes and mindset of the teachers functioning as the predominant element of the schools in which 5,731,260 students from kindergarten through grade 12 are enrolled. Virtually all of them are members of local chapters of the California Teachers Association, which
represents 310,000 educators across California’s public schools and colleges, including teachers, counselors, psychologists, librarians, education support professionals, school nurses, higher education faculty and staff, and retired educators. As such, it is the second largest public employee union in California, the Service Employees International Union which boasts 750,000 members. In terms of party registration, public school teachers overwhelmingly are affiliated with the Democratic Party over the Republican Party at a ratio of nearly 3-to-1. Surveys show 84 percent of California’s educators during the 2022 election cycle supported Democrats, with 92 percent of the political contributions made by teachers supporting Democrats.
Olson, a Republican, says this affiliation has carried over into a bias in the classroom and in the selection of teaching materials.
The Redlands School District fell into line with the majority of the state’s school districts over the last three to four decades in terms of its board composition. That changed with the 2024 election, when Olson and Wilson, both Republicans, were elected. Their presence on the board, in conjunction with the centrist Michell Rendler, broke what was commonly perceived as a liberal coalition’s vicegrip on the district, which provoked a concerted display of protest at multiple school board meetings in early 2025, which in turn pushed Rendler further into the Olson/Wilson camp. This allowed Olson and Wilson, led by the far more vocal Olson, to push for the adoption of district polices extending to banning all flags, banners and symbols other than the United States, California, U.S. military and school flags – aimed at the homosexual pride flag in particular – from district campuses; a requirement that teachers inform parents if their children have adopted in the school/classroom setting a gender identity at odds with the one assigned them at birth and removing those books from the district’s school libraries that had overtly sexual content.
Olson and to a lesser extent Wilson and Rendler have come in for criticism over their espousing of patriotic values while simultaneously seeking to curtail the expression of viewpoints at odds with their own and their embrasure of “conservative values” that blurs the distinction between constitutional conservatism, financial conservatism and social conservatism.