The school board members of Sunol Glen School passed a resolution with a 2–1 vote to display only the flag of the United States and the flag of the State of California at the K-8 school.
The resolution sparked an outcry from the LGBT community, which sees it as a ban on pride flags.
Stephanie Szto, a concerned parent of Sunol, told The Epoch Times in an email, “I confronted one of the reporters that day telling him that it is not a ban, because the pride flag will still be displayed on the fence during pride month, and it also shows that no special interest group gets special treatment, this is not limited to the LGBTQ community only.”
“We, as parents, are the only victims here, we only want our kids to have a school to learn and have some childhood memories, that’s all,” she added. “One LGBTQ activist slapped the phone out of a parent’s hand, it was all recorded and we called the cops, however, they didn’t make any arrests.”
Jennifer Gail, a grandmother and business owner, told The Epoch times in an email, “This also means we won’t be flying a ‘blue lives matter’ flag, however, I’m relieved we don’t have to worry about waving the ‘satanic’ flag for satanist week, do you see where this is going?”
Ms. Gail said that one of the activists against the resolution was triggered by a grandmother in attendance who was holding a “never bend the knee” sign and verbally attacked her for it.
She said, “We as adults have to remember that Sunol Elementary is K-8th grade and we must protect those younger kids in the younger grades from situations that their little minds just can’t wrap their brains around yet.”
On Sept. 12, the school board meeting started with the Pledge of Allegiance followed by School Board President Ryan Jergensen’s comments.
Mr. Jergensen voted in favor of the resolution. He stated that flying only the U.S. and California state flags is more fair and inclusive than choosing what other flags can or cannot be flown.
He said the meeting’s discussion needs to be civil and handled with kindness, and he encouraged the sharing of opinions during the appropriate time of the agenda.
“Some people have told me that they are afraid and they’re not here tonight because they feel bullied, and they feel bullied by a group that’s claiming inclusion and kindness,” Mr. Jergensen said. “I fully support the school’s goals to provide a safe, inclusive environment to all students regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, disability, nationality, sexual orientation, or gender. I hope all of you can do the same.”
Mr. Jergensen said the resolution does not restrict the free speech of teachers or students and is only restricting the speech of the district itself.
“After much research and discussion with the attorney for the district, it is my understanding that we have before us the most inclusive policy possible. Although you may not agree with it, it prevents any potential or actual discriminatory behavior,” he said.
In a public statement, Mr. Jergensen said, “The only motivation I have to serve on our volunteer school board is to make our school district a safe, inclusive, and excellent place of learning for all children.”
Board member Linda Hurley stated that the resolution was needed because of the potential legal risks that the small school could face if the resolution didn’t pass and certain groups were not allowed to raise their flags.
Ms. Hurley mentioned a case from Boston in which the U.S. Supreme Court voted 9–0 that the city had violated Harold Shurtleff’s free speech rights when he was denied his request to fly a Christian flag on one of the city’s flagpoles.
She said: “Our little school could be vulnerable to lawsuits. To only fly the American flag is not saying I am against LGBTQ people; it is inclusive to all people, and hopefully our kindness and our acceptance of one another continues and increases.”
Ted Romo, school board clerk and attorney, who cast his vote against the resolution, responded to Ms. Hurley by saying that government speech is different from private and public speech and the Shurtleff case makes that distinction.
“We are talking about here how government speech is maintained. That’s what Ryan’s policy is. … It’s not about whether an individual comes along and says, hey, I can raise a flag on your property because you let somebody else to do that,” Mr. Romo said. “It’s my legal opinion that flying the pride flag doesn’t bring a liability to the district for the passage of a resolution.”
A tense moment occurred during the Sept. 12 meeting when Superintendent Molleen Barnes was giving a report that focused on equity, inclusivity, and support for the LGBT community. Mr. Jergensen stopped her report when she brought up the flag resolution. Mr. Jergensen said that her report should not include other agenda items.
She was allowed to continue but was stopped again when she tried to give Sunol Glen teachers a platform to speak out against the flag resolution during the time allotted for her report. She was allowed to continue again but was finally stopped by Mr. Jergensen when she started to read a letter from faculty and staff denouncing the resolution.
As Mr. Jergensen was moving the meeting forward, Mr. Romo stopped him, asking for Ms. Barnes to continue. This exchange led to an audience member yelling out, “You’re not above the law, Ted!”
Ms. Gail said: “People need to know about conflict of interest here. With Molly Barnes being the superintendent and the principal, how can one person hold two offices of such high power? Seems to me a school with only 280 kids doesn’t need a superintendent. Would the smart thing to do be to cut the superintendent position altogether? Look at the money saved.”
Mr. Romo tried to strike the flag resolution from the agenda, saying that it is an “attempt to inject divisive national social politics into the administration of Sunol Glen.”
He said, “In fact, one supporter of this resolution is a member of Gays Against Groomers, the group that the anti-defamation league describes as, quote, an anti-LGBT extremist coalition, unquote, that has worked with the Proud Boys, [a] known violent extremist group, and Moms For Liberty, a far-right parent group. The agenda item is unnecessary as there’s no pending or threatening legal litigation in respect to flags to display at Sunol Glen.”
Mr. Romo said that public schools can prohibit private speech on public school campuses only insofar as such speech substantially interferes with or disrupts educational environments or interferes with the rights of other students, and there has to be actual evidence of substantial destruction. He said the flag resolution will censor not only the district, but students, teachers, and staff.
Mr. Romo said the wording in the resolution is not clear and instead actually limits free speech of teachers whose actions are an extension of the district. He said the resolution will prohibit them from hanging such flags as 4-H and red ribbon week flags.
Ms. Szto said: “From a parent’s perspective, it is disheartening to see that the school has been politicized at this level; the goal of the school should prepare our kids for their future. Every single department of the school has been tainted by politics.”
Ms. Gail said that about two thirds of the community are in favor of the resolution, but people are afraid to speak out.
At the Sept. 20 board meeting, Mr. Jergensen said that his wife and four of his children had been verbally assaulted that morning. He said that whoever is calling in outside groups and media has the right to do so, but he asked them to please have civility.
In a Facebook post, Mr. Jergensen wrote that people in the community were falsely accusing him of being associated with the groups Moms For Liberty and the Proud Boys, and that he had received death threats due to this false claim. He said to stop the rumors for the sake of his children.
Mr. Jergensen issued a statement regarding events unfolding around the resolution.
He stated: “Unfortunately, some radical individuals have used this issue to divide our community. These people—some inside our community and some from outside—have shown up at school to disrupt our students’ education. Some have even emailed death threats to me personally; encouraging me to buy life insurance, giving notice that this weekend ‘could be my last,’ and that I may want to put my wife and six children into hiding as the individual determines whether to ‘hunt Christians’ in response to our neutral flag policy.”
Mr. Jergensen is the only board member with children at the school in Sunol.
For the protection of Mr. Jergensen’s family, an Alameda County judge has granted him a temporary restraining order against one individual.
Ms. Szto said the resolution verbiage was referenced from CA ED code 52720, and the board did the right thing by consulting both superintendent and legal counsel prior to putting the resolution on the agenda. The board also provided enough time for the community to read the resolution on the school website and provide input. Now, because of the resolution, there is an ongoing recall effort against the board members, according to Ms. Szto.
During an interview with NTD, a sister media of The Epoch Times, on Oct. 4, Mr. Jergensen indicated that he is not aware of any formal recall going on. He is doing this because he wants to “preserve a great school and a great district for our community and for all of the children that go there.”
“The only way for bad and evil to continue is for good men to do nothing, so I encourage good people from all walks of life to stand up for what is right, for this country, and for the children, and to stand up to make the school a loving, kind place for everyone,” he told NTD.
Public Comments
Parents, teachers, and school board members debated the flag resolution during the public comments section.The section started off with a letter from teachers and staff denouncing the resolution.
Kerouac Diamond, a Sunol teacher, read, “We feel that the board is not accurately representing the goals and ideals of Sunol Glen School’s historical inclusiveness of all students and families, as well as the current majority of the teaching staff.”
Debbie Ferrari, a Sunol resident, stood up and said that after the Aug. 1 board meeting when parents brought up their concerns about special interest flags being flown at school, Mr. Romo wrote an open letter, called the concerned parents bigots, and said that their reasons were all lies.
She said, “If you’re truly worried that some students feel alienated, bring them together through art or sports or other activities; volunteer, and if you see a warning sign, talk to the parents or try harder to include the student in activities. … The important point is that no one should discriminate, and there is no evidence that anyone in our community has discriminated against anyone.”
Elizabeth Harmuth, a Sunol Glen employee, stood up at the meeting and denounced the resolution.
She said, “This isn’t about other flags but, everyone knows, is squarely focused on a pride flag, flying for a handful of school days in June.”
She added that the resolution has caused some families to consider pulling their children from Sunol Glen, which could lead to a revenue loss that could result in a loss of programs, teachers, and staff.
Anthony Rubio, a Sunol resident in favor of the resolution, said at the meeting, “This resolution is beneficial to the students of the school because it limits distractions and exposure to special interests that are not related to the school.”
He said the resolution will result in school educators spending their time on the learning of students rather than other matters. He added that the resolution will keep students from being exposed to topics that some families do not find age appropriate.
Midji Rovetta, a Union City resident and immigrant to the United States, said, “The American flag here is a symbol of inclusivity to everyone in the world, regardless [of] their race, their belief, their lifestyle.”
Because of people shouting and disrupting the public comments section, Mr. Jergensen banged his gavel on the table and called on Alameda County Sheriff deputies to remove everyone from the room.
Events Leading to the Resolution
Mr. Romo said the issue started when the school hung up a pride flag on the fence outside the school during Pride Month. He said the school board passed a resolution in 2021 to show support to the LGBT community, and the flag has gone up ever since, recognizing Pride Month in June.Someone then tore the flag off the fence, so Ms. Barnes hung the flag on the flagpole with the intention of keeping it safe.
Mr. Romo said James Lowder, a parent of a Sunol Glen student, wrote a letter to Ms. Barnes saying that if the pride flag was being put on the flagpole, he wanted to know why they couldn’t also put up Christian flags, the “National Rifle Association” flag, or the Gadsden flag as a show of equality.
At the school board meeting on Aug. 1, Mr. Jergensen opened the meeting to public comments on future agenda items, saying, “There were a few people in the community that were concerned about which flags for special interest groups are being put up on the chain link fence or on the flagpole.”
Debbie Ferrari, a Sunol resident, stood up and said, “Even if it is flown in earnest, it could make somebody else feel as if they’re being excluded.”
Tricia Young, another Sunol resident, said: “Public schools should only fly the United States flag and the state flag. This keeps all opinions, politics, political views, religion, hatred, and division at bay.”
She added, “I’ve already witnessed a division happening within our school between families over the past few years, COVID being the catalyst.”
Mr. Jergensen said, “Ms. Barnes at the time said she did not want to make the decision of which flags to be flown and suggested it was a decision for the board to take up.”
He said the board decided to go see legal counsel and draft the resolution.
