Thank you community members for getting this out. My son has friends on the Campanile. Kathy refused to stop hounding individual students until a lawyer warned her to stop. She also to meet alone with students without adult teachers present. She's still trying to get our principal fired. I can't imagine how she would be on the school board.

"If someone is really doing that much to get their name out there and most voters don't have this very important information then it makes sense to try to get it into their hands," Todd Collins, school board member, said.

Amazing! Wonder what he thought about Dauber's emails to the OCR that only came out AFTER the election last time.

Or is this just against one candidate?

I’m not surprised, I recall parent interactions couple years back with Kathy Jordan being unnecessarily abrasive to another parent, my email search confirmed my recall and am glad something is being done to address a very real risk of adding stress to the system.

On balance I want someone who can be effective and not abrasive.

Let me get this straight -- Todd Collins, an incumbent school board member, is attacking a parent for standing up for a sexual assault victim. Really? And he doesn't disclose who is contributing to the campaign? I'm glad we have someone in our community -- Kathy Jordan -- who is willing to stand up for victims. The current school board was clearly part of the problem the last four years, as we've all read. This is the type of dark money smear campaign that gives politicians a bad name. Guess Todd Collins is just a typical political.

Why did the Campanile just not correct their reporting after her first email? They did not read it? Their adviser knew it was wrong, why did the adviser not tell them to correct it? What was in it for the Paly administration and the adviser? The email would have stopped. The emails are not attacking, they just tell them to do the right thing.

So, let me get this straight.
Jordan wanted the Campanile to retract an unverifiable statement made about the Oct 2016 bathroom assault at Paly.

The Campanile called it "consensual" because that is what the boys lawyer and the now resigned Principal Diorio told them. That fact, however, was not able to be verified because the records were never public.

Jordan sent emails to the Campanile trying to get them to remove that one statement and the Campanile refused, even though they could not verify it.
Todd Collins agrees with Jordan that the Campanile should never have portrayed the assault as consensual.

Collins [loans money for] a full page ad criticizing Jordan for her dealings with the Campanile because he says she spent too much money and despite the many, many articles written on these interactions, doesn't think voters are aware of them.

Sounds to me like Jordan, while maybe a bit aggressive in this instance given she was dealing with students, will be a breath of fresh air for this board. She showed that when she feels that a student has been mistreated or harmed, she's willing to stand up for that student. The Campanile refusal to retract the portrayal of consensuality is nothing more than bullying. They eventually issued an apology. Is that in Collins' ad? Would you rather have a board that, even when they know something is wrong, as Collins did, just sit back and let it happen?

I'd rather have a board member that stands up for what's right, not what's easy. [Portion removed.]

Kathy Jordan sounds like a person who will keep the board honest. People continue to say that she's hard to get along with or abrasive. I'd rather have that then five people who always agree even if they don't believe in what they're saying. Jordan seems to tell it like it is, even if it might get some people upset.

[Portion removed.]

Jordan's claim that the current board has been weak on sexual harassment and sexual assault is false, as the Weekly endorsement editorial explaining why they didn't endorse her shows:

"Kathy Jordan is a parent, former professional tennis player and Stanford University graduate who became publicly involved in school issues last spring, when she waged a campaign to have former Paly Principal Kim Diorio, and potentially others, fired over their handling of sexual assault and harassment allegations dating back several years.

As much as we share some of Jordan's complaints about the past failures of Paly and district administrators who handled these matters, her tactics do not suggest she has the temperament to work effectively with other board members or the new district administration. She has sent hundreds of repetitive and demanding emails to the board, administrators and the media and made unreasonably broad requests for years of emails between district employees.

Her criticisms of the current board are also misplaced. The board took all the right steps to investigate and remove or discipline the staff members who made mistakes, as described above."

Web Link

Jordan has been running a negative campaign against the district, pretending that there hasn't been progress on this issue. That's not true as the Weekly says, despite mailers and ads with 2-year old headlines. I think the bigger knock on her candidacy is that she's building a school board campaign on misinformation. That's why she has no endorsements from newspapers or any local community leaders. Temperament is one thing, honesty is a bigger problem.

I could never vote for someone for school board who sent dozens of repetitive and threatening emails to children. What kind of person does that?

If you don't like a newspaper's coverage, you send a letter to the editor. Maybe you meet with a school board member or speak at open forum.

You DON'T HARASS STUDENTS. That seems like the floor for what we can expect for a school board member.

You can't be an advocate for student safety while making students feel unsafe. She's not appropriate for the school board.

In a nutshell, a 14 year old girl was sexual assaulted, ex-principal Kim Diorio told the community that the offender had the right to stay in school, and the victim was eventually forced to leave the area. [Portion removed.]

When the Campanile published numerous one-sided stories claiming the sexual assault was consensual, adding salt to the wound, nobody was concerned and no committee was formed, again except for one person: Kathy Jordan. She provided information to the Campanile teacher advisor asking her to forward it to the student editors. [Portion removed.] Only then did she email the student editors directly. The Campanile refused to make any changes, and continued to publish six more articles claiming the incident was consensual. It wasn’t until 18 month later that they finally published an insincere ‘apology’. Nobody was concerned and no committee was formed to address this injustice.

Now that Kathy Jordan is running for the school board, suddenly people get concerned [portion removed.] No, not to praise Kathy Jordan for standing up for the victim, not to stand up for all the other victims of sexual assault in our district whose cases were mishandled by our administrators, but to complain about the emails Kathy wrote to the Campanile. A victim being sexually assaulted and then shamed by the school newspaper was fine, but emails asking them to correct their reporting are apparently a big no-no.

What an upside-down world we live in!

I support Kathy Jordan 100%.

She stood up for a 14 yo girl who could not have consented to any sexual encounter. This 14 yo girl and her mother permanently left Paly (moved to another city), fearful of the other student, already known to the administration for his being a possible predator (I don't have every detail, but another young girl was attacked by him-at her church-and that juvenile criminal case was pending when the claimed attack happened in October and decided against the male student by the time the article was published). And, this 14 yo girl has to find out that her school that she left prints an article in its main paper that says the act was consensual. Geez.

But, more importantly, Todd Collins and Lynn Brown and whoever else is paying Todd back for his loan of $2600, what the heck are we teaching our students about journalism. [Portion removed.]

Although I am writing this response, I am speechless. I am devastated. If feelings are hurt, let's meet and talk about that. We don't have to agree, but we can listen one year later. We can do much better for our young people than wasting money on expensive ads when we have kids who don't eat real meals at home in our District.

Even Todd Collins, he in an email written one year ago today to the administration, he asked the administration where the advisors were in this process. He pushed for a retraction. He was a Board member and he didn't get a retraction. How is that even possible? If Todd could not get a retraction from "the inside", what was Kathy to do? Sit back, do nothing. Is that who we want on our school board, people who sit back and do nothing. Is that what Todd wants? I hope not.

Finally, Weekly, do you think it is socially responsible to print such a negative ad that has only part of a story on the eve of an election? This is also incredibly disappointing. Is it not enough that you only choose male candidates to support and that you couldn't make a house call to the Campanile to teach them about responsible journalism.

And, #email search, really, do you know how hard it is to get change in this District. You are worried about one abrasive email when we have huge financial mistakes, lack of compliance, academic issues regarding how we educate and a potentially very changing economy ahead of us. I want someone with backbone who does her homework and pushes the administration to do its job well, just like the rest of us have to do.

My kids have gotten and are getting solid educations. I see that they are prepared for college and beyond. The District has great strengths, but we must stop hiding from its weaknesses.

A vote for Kathy is a vote for a courageous woman who supports educating all students, compliance and fiscal responsibility.

Dear Fact Check:

Isn't the current Paly principal the person implicated both in the first and second Cozen reports (the second one being on the Nov. 2015 incident that PAUSD/Campanile don't like to write articles on because it is so damning?) What has the board done about that?
What has the board done about vaping in the bathrooms and the fire alarms?
What did the board do when Paly brought to them the new bell schedule that was 21 days deficient in instructional minutes? (We trust you, no need for us to exercise oversight... Seems like the board is confused about what exercising oversight means..)

Kathy is not dishonest. Now the board, I cannot comment on.

I think that the story says it all.

Current board member Todd Collins says that he [loaned funds] to Lynn Brown's committee because although he agreed with Jordan's critique of the Campanile coverage, he felt very concerned about her tactics. He says he thinks she temperamentally unsuited to being on the board.

She also filed 800,000 pages of public records requests including 100,000 pages of from the Paly office secretary. Fulfilling that request would have cost our district nearly $1M dollars, and taken months of staff time. She has no limits and no filter. I have talked to her and in my opinion, she is [portion removed], fear-based, and unsuited to being on the board.

Do you want someone with a total lack of perspective, proportion, and judgment making decisions for your children?

WOW I just found this letter in the letters to the editor of today's paper. WOW. I have never seen a teacher, especially one as respected as Woj, write a letter like this one.


Editor,

As a 36-year teacher in Palo Alto, I believe there's a school board candidate who will create chaos and fear if she's elected. That opinion is based on her behavior last fall with regard to my students who publish The Campanile.

That candidate is Kathy Jordan, who has mounted a negative campaign based on false information.

Kathy harassed my students for more than two months, after which I got a law firm and the school to ask her to cease and desist. The kids were very upset all year long because they never knew when she'd start up again. The problem had not been resolved because she refused to communicate with the advisers either via email or phone.

My response, also representative of the faculty in PAUSD, to Kathy's four main campaign points:

1. Be strong for students.

We already promote an environment free from discrimination, intimidation and harassment for all students. We have a dedicated and passionate faculty at all schools. Palo Alto is the No. 1 school district in California.

2. Spend dollars responsibly.

We already have in place fiscal watch dogs, especially since the addition of new district level personnel last spring.

3. Achieve academic excellence.

We rank in the top 100 schools in the nation. Our curriculum's outstanding, and many districts follow our leadership.

4. Build trust and accountability.

Kathy advocates open communications among the district, the board and the community, but she represents just the opposite. Students and faculty do not trust her judgment. Teachers, administrators and students are frightened by her lack of appropriate conflict-resolution skills. There's no way to build trust with Kathy Jordan based on her past behavior.

Her supporters should rethink their decision to vote for her and vote instead for Ken Dauber, Stacey Ashlund or Shounak Dharap, all excellent candidates.

Esther Wojcicki

Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto

Dear Hundreds of Students:

Think about what Kathy was up against: a powerful, moneyed, connected adviser with an axe to grind in covering up an investigation of assault. Not as respected as you would like to think.
Kathy is being attacked for doing everything in her power to get to an environment where all victims of assault can come forward, and not be suppressed.
The Campanile adviser did her level best to suppress the information.
Mr. Collins is speaking out of both sides of his mouth: he agrees with Kathy's perspective, he said so. He sent emails to the Superintindent at the time, Karen Hendrickson, about spreading sexual rumors. No one in this town has the courage to confront the Campanile adviser about her lack of ethics, no one except Kathy.
It is fascinating to watch this town: it is easy to theoretically stand with Ms. Blasey Ford, because you don't have to do anything for it really. But when a true hero like Kathy actually stands up for a victim, this town's leaders are doing their level best to take her down.

[Portion removed.] Kathy Jordan didn't contact students until Esther Wojcicki failed/refused to respond to her.

Just more proof that we need Kathy Jordan on the board to tell the truth and provide actual transparency.

[Portion removed.] How can she say that, "We already promote an environment free from discrimination, intimidation and harassment for all students." when her own paper was the one doing the harassing?

There is a right way and a wrong way to advocate for your position as a private citizen.

Even if your position is right you don't do what she did, and certainly not as a self-appointed advocate.

Send an email to the board. Go to the open forum and speak.

You don't send dozens of emails to children and demand to meet with a child alone.

Vote NO on Kathy Jordan. She lacks judgment.

[Post removed.]

Dear Hundreds of Students:

Kathy spoke at board meetings. She sent email to the board. She sent email with information to the adviser [portion removed.]
If the students report on real world issues, they have a responsibility to do it properly, factually, and sensitively. Else, they are being taught yellow journalism. You are so focused on the tens of emails from Kathy to the Campanile students that you are ignoring their adviser's poor guidance, lack of responsibility, misleading of students, the list goes on.
[Portion removed.] Let us all advocate for victims, as long as it never affects us. Let our students be free of all consequences of what they say. Same as streaking. And what consequences? A few emails (not libelous, not insulting, to the point and stating the law), telling them to be responsible journalists? [Portion removed.]

I agree with the Weekly endorsement editorial, based on what I know: "Her criticisms of the current board are also misplaced. The board took all the right steps to investigate and remove or discipline the staff members who made mistakes, as described above." Based on some of the comments in this thread she would fire the current Paly principal who is new this year. I don't want a school board member who seems to be obsessed with firing people including principals and teachers.

To me, Jordan's "tens of emails" to students, text messages to individual students (!) and demand to meet them without adults are also serious red flags for any parent, let alone someone who wants to be on the school board. [Portion removed.]

I go back to the Weekly editorial: "Her tactics do not suggest she has the temperament to work effectively with other board members or the new district administration. She has sent hundreds of repetitive and demanding emails to the board, administrators and the media and made unreasonably broad requests for years of emails between district employees."

The Campanile published seven articles calling the alleged rape "consensual". Kathy Jordan sent 15 emails asking for retraction without success. The school violated federal law in not doing a proper investigation, allowing the victim to be harasses and shamed. These articles caused direct and irrevocable harm to the victim, and they promoted a rape culture where no victim would ever dare to come forward.

[Portion removed.] PAUSD has used a student publication to spread sexual rumors, harm a victim, and discourage victims from coming forward. Wow, what has PAUSD become?

FYI, Todd Collins endorsed Ken Dauber and Shounak Dharap.

@ "facts straight"

It does not matter what Kathy Jordan's concerns were or how valid they may or may not have been.

Her tactics for handling them reveal a person completely temperamentally unsuited to being a Board Trustee.

If you disagree with a paper's coverage, here are the steps to take:

1. Contact the editor and politely ask to submit an oped. If they say no, ask if you can write a letter to the editor.

2. Submit oped or letter.

If you think that a student paper is poorly managed:

1. Contact the faculty advisor.
2. Contact the principal.
3. Contact the school board

What you don't have a license to do is appoint yourself the JOURNALISM TEACHER and contact our CHILDREN dozens of harassing emails and text messages trying to bully them into doing what you want.

The fact that a parent did that is bad enough.

Do you want a board member with no boundaries or judgment?

Kathy Jordan's campaign has published numerous advertisements with logos of the Palo Alto Weekly, the Palo Alto Daily Post and the San Jose Mercury News. Candidates usually put such logos in their ads when they have been endorsed by the papers, but her ads merely quote articles, which should be identified without using the logos.

And as for Ken Dauber, he initiated the process of having the district cooperate with the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights and not have a lawyer fight every allegation. For this reason alone, he should be re-elected to the School Board. And Ken Dauber voted against the budget where district staff overestimated income by including the tax-exempt Stanford Medical Center expansions in expected revenue. Another reason to vote for Ken Dauber.

Our school district has just (belatedly) released some of its 2017 emails in response to a Public Records Act request. In them, Ken Dauber, our board president that is running for re-election, expresses his reasons for trying to limit homework given to our students (p. 741 in Dec. 2017 correspondence at Web Link

"I'd also like to point out the connection between the equity goal and the homework goal. One of the major motivations for the homework policy -- both on homework duration and content -- was to reduce the impact of differences in family resources on educational opportunity. Students whose families can provide homework help, can afford tutors, and can provide a quiet place to do homework have an advantage over students without those resources. We can address some of those differences by providing tutors, etc., but if we persist in a homework practice that has a disparate impact on students with different resources than we're working at cross purposes to our own district goals."

In other words, Ken Dauber is saying he is willing to sacrifice and limit the achievement of the majority of our students on the altar of equity, rather than try and raise the achievement of low-achieving students. Reduce the achievement gap by suppressing the top rather than by raising the floor.

Should a person holding such beliefs be re-elected to the school board? Is this the kind of schools we want in Palo Alto?

Kathy Jordan aggressively stood up for a victim of sexual assault, after the poor victim's own high school's newspaper repeatedly published incorrect information regarding the assault. What could possibly be wrong with that? I read the published emails Kathy sent. They're extremely assertive emails, sure, but that's exactly what this crazy situation warrants. It looks like the people who run the PAUSD are simply upset that someone's got the guts to challenge the status quo and fight for what is right.

I admire and respect Kathy, and I was already leaning towards her. After the [portion removed] campaign that's being run against this courageous woman, she's definitely got my vote next Tuesday.

@hundreds of emails
Jordan did all of those things.

The teacher advisor allowed it to be published to protect the principal

The principal was disciplined because she failed to act appropriately. She was more concerned about herself than her students.

Jordan sent emails and spoke at board meetings directly to this point.

[Portion removed.]

Yes, I want a board member who will protect a student who is being bullied, especially when it is allowed to happen by staff and the district and the board sits on their thumbs.

If a student is bullying my child, you'd better believe I'm going to address that student. You act as if these students are little lambs. They are capable of expressing their opinion.

@Hundreds of Emails:

According to you: "If you think that a student paper is poorly managed:

1. Contact the faculty advisor.
2. Contact the principal.
3. Contact the school board"

KATHY CONTACTED THEM ALL. They did nothing because they had their own axe to grind. If Kathy had given up, they would have gotten precisely what they wanted. And the victim would have been left high and dry (as she mostly was, except that a year later the Campanile did publish an apology).

In all this "consensual" business, no one wonders, if it was consensual, why did she report it at all? What junk the Campanile and its adviser are trying to peddle?

Boundary issues? You want justice to die on the altar of students pretending to be grown up by publishing edgy, untruthful stories, and then being called upon for their bad behavior? Talk about entitlement over and over.

I suggest listening to the students (Web Link

"Last fall, when The Campanile and Jordan tried to organize a face-to-face discussion, she initially agreed to a meeting, but then insisted the meeting only take place if both Campanile teacher advisers were not present, leaving just Jordan and a student reporter at this meeting.

The student Jordan had been arranging to meet with, who asked not to be named because of concerns over community backlash, said Jordan’s insistence that they meet alone “seemed like a red flag” and the student “definitely would have been uncomfortable to go by [themself].”

Jordan sent numerous emails to The Campanile editors-in-chief and staff, many of whom weren’t directly involved in the articles, demanding the articles regarding sexual assault be retracted. These demands came across as harsh and aggressive, resulting in many Campanile staff members feeling shaken and harassed, according to Campanile staff members."

When students asked her to stop,Jordan refused. Here's why: "Last month, when addressing the topic of these emails in the comments section of a Palo Alto Daily Post article, Jordan wrote, “emails that no one need open are not harassment.” In an email statement about her interactions with The Campanile staff, Jordan reiterated that “no one is forced to open any email sent to them.”" In other words, she said that she was not going to respect their requests to stop until and unless she agreed with them! She only stopped after she was contacted by a lawyer.

These are all facts. They may be inconvenient for Jordan and her supporters, but voters deserve to know them.

Kathy Jordan has spoken at many PAUSD board meetings in the last year, often several times in the same meeting.

She is consistently strident, abrasive, and intimidating. He shows no interest in hearing other people's ideas or views or in working collaboratively.

I once approached her on a matter and she was very dismissive. We should not tolerate that from a school board member, let alone a candidate!

With some effort, she could be an effective activist and district critic. She is not a good choice for an elected official.

Fiscal responsibility, accountability, and transparency! Kathy Jordan is going to fight on our behalf to make sure we have these things on our school board. She's already proven it with out regard to how it might cause retaliation against her own children. I don't know anyone else that would do it. She's very brave and I'm thankful for her.

What a strange place we live. The District hires a lawyer because of emails sent to students on the school newspaper they felt were aggressive. This past school year, a group of students went to the Paly and District administration to complain of a teacher harassing and bullying them and they did absolutely nothing for weeks until the students gathered 22 signatures on a petition and went to a public School Board meeting to express their concerns. Up until it was made public, no one at Paly or the district cared enough to do a thing. I guess some students matter more than others?

[Post removed.]

@"Crescent Park"

Kathy Jordan's conduct does not promote fiscal responsibility. She filed over 800,000 pages of public records requests, the vast majority of which were completely irrelevant to anything she was actually looking for. Fulfilling this request would have cost the district over $1MILLION DOLLARS. That is one million of your tax dollars that would go to Kathy Jordan's completely unfocused negative campaign against our schools, teachers, and students.

She is positioning herself as an advocate for the Paly victim. Did she ever have the victim's permission to USE HER to get elected to school board? This victim had a lawyer, and had her own very able advocate. Since Kathy is presenting herself in this story as the victim's advocate it is reasonable to ask: did the victim consent to being used and politicized in this manner for someone's political ambitions?

[Post removed.]

I am SO glad somebody is ready to protect our students from her. As a PALY parent, I would like to join this group. All those who think via PC cliches that are so popular in Palo Alto, you are out of reality.

She ousted Kim Diorio, an amazing administrator and leader, who could have mishandled one questionable sexual assault case. [Portion removed.]

We, the parents of Palo Alto, do not need any radicals on our school board!

[Post removed due to inaccurate or unverifiable assertions.]

[Post removed.]

[Post removed.]

As the parent of a Campi editor, it’s clear these students go to great lengths to research and present their articles, and unlike people commenting here, are willing to apologize. The Campi staff are proud members of a student led newspaper, which means they think for themselves. [Portion removed.] If you are interested in knowing what the students have to say check out their articles. In October 2, 2017, edition of the Campanile the authors clarified their initial report and in an attempt to clear up any misunderstandings the editorial board issued this apology on October 4, 2018, Web Link These students have also written about their experience with Kathy Jordan Web Link Before voting, read these articles, and do what our students do, think for yourself.

For those who don't know the details, I strongly suggest reading the report on Jordan's behavior by the Campanile students themselves (Web Link In addition to documenting the extent of Jordan's contact with students, including her demand to meet them without adults, it makes it clear that she was interested in enlisting them in a campaign against Paly administrators.

Here is the letter the district lawyer sent to Jordan:

"It has come to my attention that our Campanile staff is feeling threatened and harassed by your multiple emails, phone calls and text messages regarding some articles published in the Campanile. The students have shared that the repeated contacts occur sometimes more than once a one day and the students are feeling stressed and harassed. Our Campanile staff prides themselves in being student journalists, and since they are minors, I respectfully ask that you stop any contact directly with students, in particular the Campanile staff. If you do have any questions or comments you would like to make in regards to the Campanile, please contact [email protected] and the teacher advisers ­­— not individual students."

Some of the letters are included in the story. They are well worth reading. In one, Jordan writes: "Diorio, Kim did nothing. How can they remain in their positions when they didn't take the required steps to keep our students safe?" Diorio is the former principal, I think Kim is an assistant principal. I understand that Jordan has spoken many times at board meetings about the need to fire these people plus the current high school principals. Most of another of her letters is a long diatribe about Diorio. Jordan was also trying to enlist students in a campaign to remove the accused student (who she described to students as a "sexual predator") from Paly, based only on what had been reported in the press.

I think "obsession" is a reasonable description of what these reveal. Contrast that with the Weekly's conclusion: "Her criticisms of the current board are also misplaced. The board took all the right steps to investigate and remove or discipline the staff members who made mistakes, as described above."

Kathy Jordan has portrayed herself as a crusader and champion on sexual assault. But what her letters actually reveal is someone who has used the subject of sexual assault to cynically advance her own political agenda.

Did she have permission from the survivor to use her assault to launch Jordan's political career?

Did she have permission from the survivor to engage in a protracted public discussion about her assault -- keeping her assault in the press might well be retraumatizing. The survivor was represented by a very fine attorney, did she need Kathy Jordan's help or want it?

The victim was already withdrawn from Paly before the story was ever in the Campanile. So why do Jordan's supporters insist that the Campanile's error is the reason she left school? Has Kathy misled them into believing this in order to demonize the Campanile editors and make herself look good?

Kathy Jordan, however sincere her beliefs may have been, ran off half-cocked with the victim's story -- a story that was not hers to tell -- and then ran with it and used it not for the victim's purpose, which was being served by the school board's independent investigations and by Channel 2, which the victim herself contacted, and by her attorneys. Kathy decided to use it for Kathy's purpose, which was to attack Kim Diorio and Woj and Kathy Lawrence. Kathy Jordan used this girl's personal story for her own political benefit with probably no permission from the girl herself.

I am sure there is no thank you letter coming from the victim about keeping her assault in the news by politicizing it.

Meanwhile there is a group of parents in RISE who are working hard night and day to make sure that assault is prevented. Kathy chose not to join that constructive effort but instead to use the assault to throw rocks at Woj.

I am also concerned about Kathy calling the perpetrator a "predator." She also (inaccurately) told the Post that he got a pass due to being a special ed student, stoking anger at disabled students unfairly.

[Portion removed.] She should not be on the school board. If she is somehow elected she will be marginalized and ineffective since the other board members will never work with her. She has her own agenda and it is not in the best interests of students.

[Post removed.]

I went ahead and read the posts that were made by staff at the school and hope people will take the time to read this on Kathy's website so they will not be just going on other's opinions. I still have no opinion but found the link interesting. I think the kids missed a very good opportunity to interview her and they could use the information to give a wider view of all the information without a lean in one direction or another. Not talking to her and refusing this great opportunity for what she sees from her perspective gives them a narrower view and journalists should not filter information. It seems like she really wanted to be heard and was tenacious in wanting the news staff to listen to her. To ignore such a source like this is interesting and probably the difficult part of creating a kid run newspaper. They seem fine reporting rapes, sexual assaults and drugs though, so I do not think this interviewing this mom should have scared any of them and I think they could have had another adult present. Would love to see an interview still and would love to see them interview the victim and learn how to do so with dignity. They are all so talented and the adult staff helping them is so great.

[Portion removed.]

All Jordan seems to have done is to interact with the Paly journalism students, who repeated and wrongly reported that the assault was consensual, like they are responsible thinking young adults capable of discussing an important issue rationally and making decisions. If they aren't, they shouldn't be publishing a student newspaper like this in the community. Wasn't another teacher just fired for NOT treating the students like independent responsible young adults? The community and district have been trying very hard to cultivate and respect the independence of our students and not infantilize them. Jordan clearly seemed to think she could appeal to the students' intelligence [portion removed.] When the school made clear their position, Jordan stopped communicating.

I do think there is a double standard here when the person who is a woman comes across as assertive. People had the same concerns about Dauber being abrasive, etc., but the same traits in a woman, especially a middle-aged woman, are still unforgivable in our society.

I just spoke with some college women about how the kind of responses they get when they try to be assertive, and it's very disheartening. I don't even know Kathy Jordan, but I do know how dysfunctional our district can be (and still is) when there are problems in need of solving. In all my years of experience with the district, I can tell you that if you have a serious issue that needs addressing, especially if you have to go up against someone in the district who has said or done something wrong or false, you will only be treated like a chump if you act the way people here expect Jordan to act in light of what she was trying to accomplish.

It's never desirable to have an echo chamber in this kind of organization. They way other board members have acted, as if it's even desirable to try to avoid a board member who isn't going to help build another echo chamber, have convinced me that Jordan is what they need.

@Dotty:

On one side are the assault victim's feelings who was hurt by her peers disregarding her statements, and on the other side are the feelings of the students who misreported an assault as consensual, and were hurt when they were told so.

Yes, it is inconvenient that students were being misled by a journalism adviser and principal who were, according to manifest PRAs, holding back information from the students.

It is inconvenient that the students could have met with Kathy with any other neutral parent, but did not get that advice from their adviser, their principal, or any one else, because it could possibly have revealed the incompetence of the administration and board.

Kathy has not politicized this, the Campanile has, by making their inaccurate reporting a first amendment issue at the candidate debates.

The district has lost some money over PRAs, but I guarantee you not as much as they have over lawsuits for mishandling student issues.

[Post removed due to deletion of referenced comment.]

[Portion removed.]

I know Kathy Jordan and she is no politician and can be abrasive. However, Ken Dauber can be rude and overbearing too (people complained of his abrasiveness when he ran the first time, lost, then ran again and won). I have known both of these people for many years. Neither are politicians and both lack political social skills. Ken also spent a lot of district money through requests for paperwork. Actually, both of them are on the same page, both sincerely care about children, more than past lazy members. Although Jordan has more integrity than Dauber; Ken will say whatever he thinks the voter wants to hear, just to get re-elected [portion removed.]

We need change in our district (particularly middle and high schools). We need people who care. Both these people care and have decent judgement but poor social skills. They can stand up to the teachers. If they can get all the teachers fired and rehire with no teachers union, that would be a miracle. We need accountability; too many teachers are relaxing on the 2-year tenure that keeps them employed. Paly has some great teachers too, but they should all be fantastic.

Those who vote for Dauber should vote for Kathy too, as they can both accomplish a lot. Ken is buried in his career while Kathy is a stay-at-home mom who has plenty of time to dedicate to this position. In addition, her older child graduated in 2017 so she has current experience (while Ken sends his child to private school). I think the point has been made that Kathy needs to work on being more cordial; hopefully, if she wins, she will be more polite. Voters gave Ken a chance, why not Kathy?

Others? Ashlund is interested only in underrepresented students, Boyd and Sharf have no chance of winning and are throwaway votes. Dharup is a Dauber puppet, too busy with his career.

Regarding Jordan harassing Paly, her letters are posted in the Campanile. The truth? Everyone was protecting Principal Diorio. [Portion removed.]

To "Get Your Facts Straight": the issue is not that Jordan communicated to the Campanile students that she disagreed with their reporting that an alleged assault was determined to be consensual. It's that Jordan directed that idea at them a barrage of emails, texts and phone calls, sometimes multiple times per day (according to the district's lawyer). She refused to stop when they asked her to, requiring the intervention of a lawyer. She tried to enlist them in her goal of firing various people, including administrators.

Why did she refuse to stop communicating with the students? She had made her point repeatedly - just look at the emails in the Campanile article. If communication was her goal, she achieved it in Email #1. She refused to stop because they hadn't taken the steps she demanded of them.

As someone else said on another thread, Jordan is making her aggressive conduct the theme of her campaign. She's "Strong for Students". She'll stand up to staff. Etc. It's completely fair to look at her actual conduct to see what we can expect, if she's elected.

When I say that the facts are inconvenient, that's what I mean. I'm sure that Jordan and her supporters prefer the slogan "Strong for Students" to the reality of behavior that failed to respect adult/student boundaries. But I don't think it's reasonable to run on being aggressive and then complain when people want to talk about what that looks like in practice.

[Portion removed.]

Last but not least, a last thought regarding sitting school board member, Mr Todd Collins’ present alliance with Ms. Lynn Brown (his anti-Kathy-Jordan-campaign-treasurer). Ms. Brown was a vocal critic of Mr Todd Collins last fall, on how he and fellow board members were handling the sexual assault case. Read for yourself:

Here is an exerpt of an article on the sexual assault case discussed in Palo Alto Online’s article above that appeared in the Palo Alto High School’s paper:
The Paly Voice, September 24, 2017:
“School board discusses sexual assault findings, community speaks up”

(…) Despite all the positive support, the administration is not in the clear yet. Not all community members were supporting of leaders in the district. Kathy Jordan, a Palo Alto parent, was one such person.
“It sounds like the staff is happy with her, but she didn’t take care of her students,” Jordan said in response to staff members who spoke out in favor of Diorio. “She didn’t comply with the law, and she’s not the only one.”
Another community member, Lynn Brown, posed a question during her comments to the school board: “Why is it that every time there’s a problem, a hiccup, a mistake, a misstep, there’s a witch hunt?”
Brown said she puts the blame on the board, but more specifically on trustees Todd Collins and Ken Dauber, whom she called out with a pointed finger.
“They should solve problems,” Brown said. “Good leaders manage and fix problems in a forward facing positive manner. (…).

Web Link

Definitely supporting Kathy Jordan now more than ever. An upstander and role model for our students is needed at times like these.

With a perspective,
a Paly parent.

The whole consensual-nonconsensual confusion is due to the fact there were 2 cases, one of which was consensual. From Palo Alto Online itself:

"These were not the young man's first juvenile sexual violence convictions. In December 2016, he was found to have committed forced oral copulation of a female Menlo-Atherton High School student, then 15 years old, in October 2015, according to court documents reviewed by the Palo Alto Weekly. The assault took place in the bathroom of a local church. He received probation, was ordered to pay restitution to the young woman and to adhere to a restraining order.

He was also accused of forcing a female Paly freshman, then 14 years old, to perform oral sex on him in a campus bathroom in 2016; however, the district attorney's office declined to file any charges against him "other than consensual underage sexual activity," according to Rickard"

Web Link

Luckily Lynn Brown isn't running for the school board, Kathy Jordan is.

I haven't seen anyone actually defending Jordan's behavior with these students, as opposed to:

- Attacking other people
- Analogizing Jordan to Dauber (but Dauber never caused students to feel threatened and harassed, as far as I know)
- Pretending that it didn't happen

Is there a Jordan defender who will actually engage with what she did, and explain why, for example, refusing to stop communicating with minors until a lawyer is involved, and refusing to meet minors with adults present, is behavior that recommends someone for the school board?

@Downtown Parent: Who reported the "consensual" activity? As far as I know, it was the victim herself. So she went to the administration, and said, I need to report to you that I engaged in consensual oral copulation with a male student?

@Dotty:

The Campanile defenders have not answered why there was no neutral adult in the room asking for a meeting with Kathy, why there was no adult in the room who answered the first email with an apology, but stuck to their guns, apologizing only a year later?

When all the board members and administrators sanctioned the proposed new Paly bell schedule, Kathy Jordan discovered that the bell schedule was going to be 21 days short of instruction out of a 180 day school year. Kathy stood up and stopped it.

This is the temperament we want -- strong for students!

Kathy STANDS UP for the kids who have been bullied and sexually assaulted, even while being attacked for shaking up the status quo.

This is the temperament we want -- strong for students and righteousness!

It is easy to find candidates with beaming smiles and enticing promises, but in the end they do nothing or bring more harm than good. It is extremely difficult to have a candidate like Kathy with extraordinary integrity and bravity. Out of the 60,000 plus residents of Palo Alto, only Kathy Jordan spoke up and fought for justice for victim students. The establishments used media to pour rumors and biased opinions on her, and many Palo Altan jumped into this chorus. What a shame!

Tocqueville said, it is easier for the world to accept a simple lie than a complex truth. So true.

People who know Kathy all like her, admire her, and respect her. She is so humble, kind-hearted, and friendly. She is one of the best Americans, both inside and outside, I've met and I can hope for. If you have a chance to know her better, you will like her just like many of us do.

Palo Alto is redeemed from shame and hypocricy because it is still blessed to have ONE citizen like kathy Jordan!

@Downtown Parent:

In addition, you are citing the boy's attorney Rickard, when you say:
"however, the district attorney's office declined to file any charges against him other than consensual underage sexual activity," according to Rickard"

Can you please cite the DA or the girl's attorney also?

To "Get Your Facts Straight":

Again you are not defending Jordan's behavior which is the issue here. The Campanile editors are not running for the school board. Woj is not running for the school board.

Jordan described the ad as "smear". Why? Is it inaccurate? I haven't seen anyone describe it that way. When a candidate describes the truth as a "smear" that tells you a lot. In my opinion, Jordan doesn't want these facts known because they are telling about her fitness for the school board.

I go back to the Weekly's conclusion in their endorsement editorial, explaining why not to vote for Jordan:

"Her tactics do not suggest she has the temperament to work effectively with other board members or the new district administration. She has sent hundreds of repetitive and demanding emails to the board, administrators and the media and made unreasonably broad requests for years of emails between district employees. Her criticisms of the current board are also misplaced. The board took all the right steps to investigate and remove or discipline the staff members who made mistakes, as described above."

Based on what I'm seeing, the Weekly is right.

@Dotty:

I can do no better than to quote @Upstander:

"All Jordan seems to have done is to interact with the Paly journalism students, who repeated and wrongly reported that the assault was consensual, like they are responsible thinking young adults capable of discussing an important issue rationally and making decisions. If they aren't, they shouldn't be publishing a student newspaper like this in the community. Wasn't another teacher just fired for NOT treating the students like independent responsible young adults? The community and district have been trying very hard to cultivate and respect the independence of our students and not infantilize them. Jordan clearly seemed to think she could appeal to the students' intelligence "

Kathy never assailed anyone's character as the Campanile students and staff are intent on doing. All Kathy did was cite the law.

To "Get the Facts Straight":

"Interact" is a pretty bland description for what Jordan actually did: send so many emails, texts and phone calls (according to the district's lawyer) that students felt harassed and threatened, and refuse to stop when asked except when a lawyer had to get involved. If she was just appealing to their intelligence, why refuse to stop? Why engage in extreme repetition?

I think a better explanation is that students felt harassed because they were being harassed, including with the suggestion that they had done something illegal (Jordan's [portion removed] claim of libel).

It's telling that you won't engage with this actual behavior, as I said before. I suspect it's because the Jordan campaign realizes that Jordan's actual behavior is a serious impediment to getting votes for the school board.

[Post removed.]

I would like to know if he victim feels she would like to share her story now. would be interesting to hear her views on how she was portrayed. I wonder how she feels years later and how she will think of the newspaper when she is 50.

@"facts"

Kathy Jordan is not the self-appointed decision-maker as to what should or shouldn't happen with our students. She is just a parent in the district.

It is one thing to try to make the case to the school board that they should take a look at the way journalism is being taught, or the conduct of the principal. As Todd's inquiries show, the Board was already doing that but there's nothing wrong with a community member urging them to do it.

It's quite another for that random community member to suddenly appoint herself the one to decide what happens and to start contacting students, including texting and emailing them several times a day. That crosses a line and to be honest I think that is completely clear to everyone other than Kathy Jordan herself.

She has bad judgment, she has no boundaries, and she has no place on the school board.

It is pretty interesting that many parents in Palo Alto - members of the same Santa Clara County community that voted to recall judge Persky for the light sentence he gave to a convicted sexual assaulter - is so scandalized by the assertivness of a school board candidate speaking out and taking action in support of a sexual assault victim, especially in the shadow of the recent Ford testimony in Washington DC. The spin doctors are certainly at work in the article: is it really relevant that one of Ms. Jordan’s emails was sent at 3AM?

This is what we used to call a teachable moment: boys can learn that it is not ok to assault girls, high school newspaper reporters can learn that they must fact check the stories they publish, school administrators and teachers can learn that it’s not ok to cover up professional malfeasance, and communities can learn that speaking truth to power is difficult but courageous.

The Weekly deleted my phrase "apparently false" when referring to Jordan's claim that the Campanile's story was libelous. My fault, I took that from the Campanile coverage itself:

"Jordan implied The Campanile’s article was libelous in public comments and explicitly accused The Campanile of libel through email correspondence. The Student Press Law Center (SPLC), a nation-wide organization dedicated to protecting the freedom of press for student journalists, confirmed The Campanile’s coverage of the sexual assault incidents was not libelous."

See Web Link

I don't understand how Todd Collins can fault Kathy Jordan for tactics. He was a Board member requesting a retraction regarding "spreading sexual rumors" and he was unsuccessful. Then, he asks straight out why the advisors (which includes Esther Wojcicki) were not doing their jobs.

Copied from PRA email of Nov. 2, 2017 from Todd Collins to Karen Hendricks. This is a direct quote. I have deleted nothing.

"Thanks Karen, I appreciate your getting this out.
This is not acceptable to me, I'm afraid. Per my email of a week ago, I believe the statement is unverified
(whether true or false), and therefore constitutes spreading sexual rumors, which is prohibited by board
policy. If a student paper printed, "X was caught doing it with Y" as news (true or not, verified or not), would
we allow it? It seems impossible that
board policy can be ignored if published in a school sponsored publication. This point needs to be addressed.
I am also curious what the position of the advisers is on this matter. In the absence of an argument from
someone about why this is not spreading sexual rumors (I have seen none), I am concerned that they have
permitted it and do not seem to be objecting to it as strongly as I am. I very much do not want for you or Ito
have to do their job - but avoiding the publication of unverified sexual rumors seems like a very important part
of what they should be doing.
I am happy to talk to you today, happy to talk to the lawyer today, happy to talk to anybody today, or
tomorrow or anytime. But I am getting a little frustrated that time is passing, the point is not being addressed,
and we are condoning spreading of sexual rumors. Not good stuff and I would like to see it addressed."

@Hundreds of Emails:

Taking your logic to the next level, who appointed anyone all over the country to defend Blasey Ford? I guess we should not have defended her as well, our bad.

@Dotty:

She sent emails. Because she cared that the students not misrepresent facts.
The emails are on Campanile's website: very factual, no insults to anyone.
The adviser and the students could have stopped this after the first one, if they had corrected their reporting. Why did the students not correct their reporting? Please explain.

Here is the Palo Alto Online reporting vs. the Campanile reporting. Judge for yourself.

Palo Alto Online version:

Web Link

"A former Palo Alto High School student was sentenced Friday to 60 days in juvenile hall for sexually assaulting a young woman in 2016. It was the second sexual-violence conviction for the young man, whose continued enrollment at Paly in 2017, after the first conviction and a third accusation sparked community outrage"

"He was also accused of forcing a female Paly freshman, then 14 years old, to perform oral sex on him in a campus bathroom in 2016...It's unclear if he was convicted of this crime, a misdemeanor, since court records for that charge are sealed"

"Then a junior student-athlete, the young man remained at Paly. After this incident and the M-A conviction came to light last spring, parents, students and community members flooded public meetings in outrage over the district's handling of the allegations..."

Campanile version:

Web Link

"As the news broke last week about a Paly student who was allowed to stay on campus despite being convicted of an off-campus sexual assault, many felt confused and frustrated due to a lack of information. Much of the confusion was caused by a partially inaccurate KTVU news report, which misreported on one instance of alleged sexual assault on Paly campus. While the instance on school grounds was consensual, the student was convicted of an off-campus sexual assault."

"In contrast to the initial story reported by KTVU, the acts that occurred on campus appear to be fully consensual. Principal Kim Diorio has repeatdly denied any arrest or conviction of the alleged assailant for sexual assult or sexual harrasment on Paly campus. Furthermore, the lawyer for the alleged assailant, Stephanie Rickard, claims that the only crime her client is guilty of is underage sex of a consensual nature. Despite the alleged consensual nature of these acts, the female student filed a restraining order and moved over 100 miles away after the incident."

@Dotty,

[Portion removed; unverifiable statements of fact]

PALY's usual media practice is that student reporters do not bring their advisors or any adult with them to any interview, including the most recent interview that PALY Voice student journalist conducted with Ms. Jordan (Web Link Both side are professional and got the job done - a normal and healthy interaction.

No problem at all!

Like @Get Your Facts Straight said in the beginning, had the Campanile published their apology pieces (Web Link at the first request of Ms. Jordan, there will be no more emails.

Now, the question is: why did the Campanile waited ONE YEAR and 6 wrong reporting articles to correct their reporting and apologize?

[Post removed.]

To "Get the Facts Straight"

You write, "The adviser and the students could have stopped this after the first one, if they had corrected their reporting. Why did the students not correct their reporting? Please explain."

This is a nice summary of Jordan's logic: You want me to stop sending emails, texts, and phone calls that cause you to feel threatened and harassed? Simply accede to my demands. What's the problem?

This is not about communication, it's about refusing to leave students alone until they agree to your demands -- until a lawyer intervenes.

The question in front of voters is whether this is the behavior they want in a school board candidate. I keep expecting Jordan supporters to confront that question. But perhaps not surprisingly, they don't seem to want to.

@"facts"

Christine Blasey Ford isn't a 14 year old. The perpetrator in the Paly case isn't a federal judge candidate for U.S. Supreme Court. And the institution was the U.S. Senate not a school district in a small community.

The most revealing post of the day was just made by one of Jordan's supporters, @15 emails, who wrote "had the Campanile published their apology pieces (Web Link) at the first request of Ms. Jordan, there will be no more emails." That is basically the definition of extortion. That is what happened here and that is why Kathy Jordan is unfit to be on the school board.

It doesn't matter whether or not Kathy turned out to be right about the Campanile coverage. It was HOW she acted, not what she believed that was the issue.

Here are the serious issues with her fitness for the job revealed by this whole situation:

--Kathy doesn't understand special education. Throughout the campaign she has made inappropriate comments about the special ed status of the involved boy and implied falsely that he somehow got away with it due to that status.

--Kathy can't be trusted to keep student info confidential. She shouldn't be commenting on anyone's special ed status which is FERPA protected. She should demonstrate good judgment in the handling of sensitive info.

--Kathy does not really understand Title IX or the law. She is not a lawyer but she pretends to be an expert about things she doesn't fully grasp. This has spread a lot of misinformation about Title IX in the community.

[Portion removed.]

-- Kathy has inappropriately used a teenager's assault as a political launchpad, almost certainly without permission of the girl, which is something no true survivor advocate would ever do.

--Kathy is not a lawyer and does not have full information that the board had yet continues to declaim about what should have happened in both student discipline and personnel matters that she does not know about.

--Kathy has put forth a false and dangerous narrative that the district doesn't handle sexual assault complaints correctly which is discouraging victims from reporting. Again, something no real survivor advocate would ever do.

Why knows why Kathy Jordan, after years of evidencing zero concern for sexual assault issues in our district including during the Verde Rape Culture issue, the OCR investigation, the Gunn student dating violence issue, and the three teachers who were investigated terminated and or arrested for sexual abuse of students, the Brock Turner case, her alma mater Stanford's massive history of mishandling Title IX -- has suddenly decided right before the election that she is the champion of sexual assault victims and Title IX. [Portion removed.]

Whatever it is, she is definitely not a survivor advocate. She is a Kathy Jordan advocate.

She's not strong for students. She's wrong for students.

[Post removed; duplicate of earlier comment.]

I find it incredible that Campanile journalists are being taught to be frightened and fragile little lambs that freak out when someone confronts them with allegations of inaccurate reporting, perhaps with the wrong tone of voice. Then to respond by writing a huge front page article detailing how they felt threatened. Their teacher-advisor must then shield them and the parents rally to attack the messenger. Really? What nobody has said yet, which I find interesting, is that the students' reaction has been bizarre and extremely unprofessional.

What happens in the real world when our world-class journalism graduates work in the real world at a top publication like the NYT and someone calls them out on inaccurate reporting? Freak out and write a front page article that the writer was rude to them, and that their feeings were hurt? Really?

Is this what we are teaching our students? I would have hoped that our budding journalists were being taught to confront adversity and engage with unpleasant facts and people in a level-headed and professional way. You have to be tough, smart, and brave. Sometimes even going into harm's way and getting literally shot at.

However, Campanile students: please consider whether you are proud of your response and actions and if you believe you acted professionally as you would in the harsh real world. Campanile parents, what about yourselves? Are you proud of how your students reacted conducted themselves? Or is this the new standard of journalism?

Students: is this the way you really are, or is this perhaps an expression of a pre-existing feud between your teacher-advisor and Ms. Jordan?

@Zeev Wurman: Your post complains that Ken Dauber is working to implement PAUSD's homework policy. That policy was adopted after careful consideration involving teachers, administrators, and parents, aimed at reducing meaningless busywork and excessive homework that actually reduces student achievement. In other words, Ken Dauber understands that homework sacrifices its value when it impacts balance and wellbeing, or is used to compensate for curricular material NOT taught in the classroom. Both of these issues are longstanding in the district, and have been contributors to student mental health problems, including sleep deprivation, and to educational inequity for under-resourced students. Our students are better off with our revised homework policy.

The necessary change in the homework policy was based on research that shows that the efficacy of homework has limits. References abound. The fact that Mr. Wurman sees the positive effect for low income and minority students as a defect is particularly disappointing. The fact that he would claim student achievement and actions towards educational equity are at cross-purposes with each other is telling. I'm voting for Ken Dauber for PAUSD school board precisely because he supports research-based teaching practices that benefit ALL students.

I'm curious as to the source(s) of Jordan's campaign funding. Is all of the $50K from Palo Alto residents? Or is part of that from sources outside of Palo Alto? If so, how much, and what outside interests are they representing?

"Current school board member Todd Collins said he lent $2,668 to the campaign committee to pay for the advertisement."


I can't believe this. Every time I think this board has gone as low as it can, it proves me wrong.

How is it possible that we have sitting board members taking out full page attack ads on candidates?
How is it possible that we vote in board members who think it's OK to spend thousands of dollars to attack candidates?

@Fundraising. Sorry, no story there. She really does have widespread support and many individual donors. Check out the campaign finance disclosures. And notice all the lawn signs all over Palo Alto. I can’t imagine why anybody would care about our school board race outside of Palo Alto. No conspiracy there.

@Hundreds of emails:

Funniest portion of your comment: "Christine Blasey Ford isn't a 14 year old. The perpetrator in the Paly case isn't a federal judge candidate for U.S. Supreme Court. And the institution was the U.S. Senate not a school district in a small community. " Because Ms. Ford is an adult it was okay for the nation to stand up and defend her, and because this victim is a child, it is not okay for the community to stand up and defend her?

"Kathy can't be trusted to keep student info confidential" and Ms. Diorio and Ms. Wojcicki obviously could, because they informed the Campanile staff that the incident was consensual? What confidential information did Kathy leak? Please inform us.

"Kathy does not understand special ed": there are many special ed parents, and parents whose students have been bullied, whom she helped when no one helped them, behind her. Stop using mis-reported comments to bolster your case.

"Kathy has put forth the dangerous narrative that the district does not handle sexual assault cases well": And what do the two Cozen reports say? They provide a different narrative?

@"facts"

First off, there is a big difference between the general public standing with an adult survivor who has made the choice to come forward and reveal her identity and explicitly stated that she appreciated the support from the public and Kathy Jordan using the case of a child sexual assault victim who did not share her identity or agree to be the basis for a political campaign to launch Kathy's political career. The fact that Kathy and her supporters cannot see that difference is emblematic of the poor judgment she has shown throughout her campaign.

This isn't a case of Kathy running on the general issue of improving handling of Title IX cases -- in fact she couldn't do that since that has already been done. So instead she has run on the extremely salacious facts of the case -- facts that the victim probably would not at all appreciate seeing on the internet over and over in the service of electing Kathy Jordan to office.

Kathy Jordan keeps trying to turn this conversation back to Kim Diorio or anyone but Kathy Jordan. But none of those people are running for School Board -- Kathy Jordan is. And because of that, the public is entitled to consider her tactics, her behavior and her judgment.

Let me ask the voters this -- if your 14 year old child was receiving persistent unwanted texts, calls, and emails from an angry demanding adult that left your child feeling scared, shaken, threatened, and harassed, and that adult responded by saying "if your child would just do what I want I would stop contacting her but if she won't do what I want I will continue until she does," what would you do? I know what I would do.

There's another thing that has been bothering me about these over-the-top interpretations of Jordan contacting student journalists regarding their misreporting of the assault as consensual -- are they really all minors?

The journalism course is for 11th and 12th graders. The cutoff for kindergarteners used to be earlier and those kids are now 12th graders. So many people held their kids back one or two years or put in young 5's, it's not unusual for that cohort to be on the older side. I would be really surprised if there weren't kids in that group who are 18 years old or even 19, i.e., not minors. We're talking about 17-19 year olds, maybe a few who are younger. I mean, the slam against Jordan was that the students were "minors", but is that even really true of all of them? There are students running the maker space at Cubberley, the journalism students are in a blended learning situation, we have made such strides in learning how to raise adults, I just think the way the school adults behaved in this situation is the thing that sent the terrible message, as if on the cusp of going off to college, they aren't capable of dealing with people who disagree with them or want to right an injustice in the real world. I agree with the poster above, how are they going to handle being real journalists (or just being adults)?

If these students were community college, or Stanford students, or were interns for the Mercury News - and the exact same age (even 17) - I wouldn't at all assess Jordan's behavior as uncalled for as a member of the public in that situation (pushy, but clearly righting that serious wrong required it given you they responded) - but I would see the reporters' behavior as unprofessional and lacking maturity. I am concerned that the community that has made such strides in treating our young adults like young adults and not helpless kids is sending a bad message with this.

So, my question is probably neither here nor there, but are we really technically talking about minors? There was a crime story in the Weekly recently, I think one or two of the Paly students in the story were 19. The response of the community came down really hard on the student for being 19 and still in school, but in this cohort, I'm not sure that's all that unusual.

Just a question.

@"Hundreds":

Kathy never called any of the reporters. If you claim so, prove so, else stop spreading misinformation. She sent 5 texts to the student reporter who contacted her. and emails to the Campanile staff who put their emails out there to be contacted by anybody.

Kathy talked to the victim's mother, and she was appreciative of Kathy's efforts. If you are not informed, please don't misinform.

Kathy did not use the assault as the basis of her launch. It was the Campanile that politicized it. At her campaign kickoff, Kathy was focused on other missteps the board had made, i.e, instructional minutes and the $6 million snafu.

@"facts" says that "Kathy never called any of the reporters." But the letter from the district's First Amendment lawyer prepared for AP Janice Chen to send to Kathy Jordan to stop her harassment of the students specifically references "emails, phone calls, and texts."

See:Web Link


Dear Ms. Jordan,

It has come to my attention that our Campanile staff is feeling threatened and harassed by your multiple emails, PHONE CALLS and text messages regarding some articles published in the Campanile. The students have shared that the repeated contacts occur sometimes more than once a one day and the students are feeling stressed and harassed. Our Campanile staff prides themselves in being student journalists, and since they are minors, I respectfully ask that you stop any contact directly with students, in particular the Campanile staff. If you do have any questions or comments you would like to make in regards to the Campanile, please contact [email protected] and the teacher advisers ­­— not individual students.

I appreciate your understanding and cooperation.

@"facts" you seem oddly well informed on Kathy's perspective and doings.

You say that "Kathy talked to the victim's mother, and she was appreciative of Kathy's efforts."

Did Kathy obtain the victim's permission to use her sexual assault as the basis for her political campaign, include it in her campaign literature, discuss it extensively online, and in public forums, and otherwise use the fact that a 14 year old child was forced to perform oral sex in a bathroom as the basis for launching her political campaign?

I am guessing the answer is no.

@Hundreds
You may want to think twice before questioning "Get Your Facts Straight" on anything about Jordan. Not only does Facts make just about identical arguments as Jordan, Facts seems to have uncanny insight into everything Jordan has done and said. Heck, Facts even knows Jordan's motivations, "She sent emails. Because she cared that the students not misrepresent facts."
Clearly, Facts knows much more than any of us about what Jordan has done, how she thinks, and even how she talks and writes. Just sayin...

Here is the Mercury News report vs a series of Campanile reports. How would any victim want to come forward?

The Mercury News version:
Web Link

Inside the bathroom, “he grabbed me at my waist and he locked the door,” the second victim said. “He started kissing me. I said, ‘I don’t know if I can do this. I can’t do this. No, it hurts. I don’t want to do this.’ ”

The assailant first tried to turn her around, she said. Then he tried to have her straddle him, then demanded oral sex and forced her head down. She said she felt as if she didn’t comply, he would hit her.

“I was scared,” the second victim said. “He’s strong. At that moment I just kinda felt stuck.”

The attack left the second victim feeling increasingly depressed and anxious. Her grades dropped. She said she became the subject of bullying, from rumors to graffiti messages on bathroom walls.

She faults Palo Alto High for not keeping her safe from bullying in retaliation to her complaint.

She obtained a temporary restraining order a month after the assault that requires her assailant to stay at least 100 yards away from her, her home and her school.


Campanile versions:

Web Link
The incident that occurred on campus was not ruled a sexual assault, but a misdemeanor by the court.

According to the suspect’s attorney, the student was convicted of a misdemeanor — having consensual underage sex — for the incident at Paly. KTVU had originally reported, erroneously, that the charge was a felony of sexual assault.

“Although the student in question has been in compliance with all court orders… and the district attorney’s office has declined to file anything against the student other than consensual underage sexual activity as a result of the conduct on campus, the student has elected not to complete the school year on campus.

Attorney Stephanie Rickard

The KTVU report had multiple inaccuracies, causing unnecessary community concern. One of the inaccuracies was that the incident on campus was an assault, but in fact it was deemed consensual by a judge.
Web Link

While the instance on school grounds was consensual, the student was convicted of an off-campus sexual assault.

In contrast to the initial story reported by KTVU, the acts that occurred on campus apear to be fully consensual. Principal Kim Diorio has repeatdly denied any arrest or conviction of the alleged assailant for sexual assult or sexual harrasment on Paly campus. Furthermore, the lawyer for the alleged assailant, Stephanie Rickard, claims that the only crime her client is guilty of is underage sex of a consensual nature. Despite the alleged consensual nature of these acts, the female student filed a restraining order and moved over 100 miles away after the incident.

However, we can confirm that they determined the on-campus sexual incident to be fully consensual.

More Campanile versions:
Web Link

The student had been convicted in juvenile court of “oral copulation by force, violence, duress, menace or fear” for the incident at the church, and of consensual sex with a minor, not sexual assault, for the incident on Paly’s campus.

Because the student did not commit or attempt sexual assault or sexual battery “at any time while on school grounds, going to or coming from school, during lunch, whether on or off campus and during or while going to or coming from a school sponsored activity,” according to Education Code 48900, he was not eligible for suspension or expulsion from Paly.

Web Link

“The incident was subsequently determined to be consensual.” This line was based on conversations with Principal Kim Diorio and an interview conducted by The Mercury News with attorney Stephanie Rickard, who represented a former Paly student who left the district following accusations of sexual assault.

In May, Rickard said in a statement published in local newspapers , “… the district attorney’s office has declined to file anything against the student other than consensual underage sexual activity as a result of the conduct on campus … ” Court records regarding these proceedings are not available for review by the press, including The Campanile, because the case involved minors.

The report refers to the case of a 14-year-old freshman female who reported being forced into a sexual act by a male Paly student in a bathroom on campus. The incident was subsequently determined to be consensual.

Web Link

The assailant was charged with having consensual underaged sex as a result of the on-campus incident and was convicted of forced oral copulation, a felony and now under appeal, for the church bathroom incident.

Because the student did not commit sexual assault “at any time on school grounds”

The issue isn't whether the teenage student reporters at the Campanile could have improved their reporting. Even they think that the answer is yes and by the way they are students and they are learning so of course they are going to get stuff wrong sometimes.

The issue is whether Kathy Jordan behaved reasonably in reaction to that mistake and the answer is not just no it's hell no.

She isn't strong for students. She's wrong for students.

Vote no on Kathy Jordan.

@Dotty Henderson,

The following is not true:

"Last fall, when The Campanile and Jordan tried to organize a face-to-face discussion, she initially agreed to a meeting, but then insisted the meeting only take place if both Campanile teacher advisers were not present, leaving just Jordan and a student reporter at this meeting.

The student Jordan had been arranging to meet with, who asked not to be named because of concerns over community backlash, said Jordan’s insistence that they meet alone “seemed like a red flag” and the student “definitely would have been uncomfortable to go by [themself].”

The fact was the father of the November 2015 victim was also to attend the meeting along with Kathy Jordan and student editors of Campanile. Kathy Jordan had public records of the teacher advisor withholding information unfavorable to the Paly principal from the student staffers of the Campanile, she had evidences (which was shared by many earlier comments and blocked by editor) that the teacher adviser was not objective. She declined to have the teacher advisor to attend the meeting.

Kathy simply hoped to get the wrongly published information damaging to a victim retracted, and went through the normal processes. I admire her deep care, integrity and courage in advocating for students. It is hard to understand why she has to be bullied, misrepresented and smeared.

Are we living in a town that is proud of itself with fairness, transparency, integrity, and a belief in basic human goodness?

You folks supporting what Jordan did - the idea that her imagined ends justify her means is truly terrifying. And the things she's "shocked" to find - are already everybody else's top priorities, that she just never bothered to pay attention to.

First, the ends - she has accomplished literally nothing. Jordan's entire campaign against the students and staff - the [portion removed] emails, the [portion removed] PRA requests, the dozens of personnel complaints - produced exactly nothing.

In fact, the effect was negative, since the cost and distraction detracted from other efforts. Her imagined impact - staff leaving at Paly, for instance - almost certainly happened because of internal personnel processes, driven by the public Cozen findings. She acts as if she deserves credit - in fact she accomplished nothing positive.

Second, the means - she literally bullied students. In what world is that ok? It doesn't matter if you think the students are bullying someone else - you don't get to make that decision, and you don't get to intervene. Imagine those Paly editors' parents, hearing day after day from their kids about this lady, sending harsh, intimidating emails to them day after day, accusing them (wrongly) of libel - no wonder the school stepped in to stop her. But they were always afraid she would come back.

She also tried to bully staff, harassing, bringing ungrounded formal complaints, running up a giant PRA bill. Imagine if everyone took this scorched earth approach on an issue where they thought they were right? Do you really think that's the way it should work?

And in the meantime, sensible people were getting things done. Over $1 million was spent on professional sexual assault investigations to make sure no stone went unturned, and the results made public. People implicated in the Cozen reports left the district; so did the much of the senior staff. A new Title IX process went in place that is the best for K-12 in the state. Last year's superintendent (now deputy superintendent of compliance) spent a huge portion of her last year improving compliance from top to bottom. Special ed is being overhauled under new leadership; fiscal management the same.

Bottom line - Kathy points to problems that everyone knows about, and acts like no one is doing anything about it, while in fact, they are already everyone else's top priorities. She just doesn't bother to listen and refuses to work with any existing effort. [Portion removed.]

Kathy's approach isn't "accountability" or "transparency" - it's bullying and fear. Her judgment is poor; her effectiveness is nil. If you're angry, find a more productive way to channel it - this way will fail us all.

[Post removed.]

To "Better PAUSD":

You are writing to me that the statement from the Campanile isn't true, and that some other man also wanted to attend the meeting with Kathy Jordan and the students with no teachers present? I think this makes it worse not better. Who in the world would refuse to meet with high school students unless teachers are excluded?

You are also writing to me that "Kathy simply hoped to get the wrongly published information damaging to a victim retracted, and went through the normal processes." To me, "normal processes" means sending a letter to the editor and to the administration. It doesn't mean dozens of emails, phone calls, and text messages to students, refusing to stop only when a lawyer gets involved. Why would any parent refuse to stop emailing students even after they complained of feeling harassed?

I am still waiting for any Jordan defender to defend what she actually did, as opposed to some alternate reality in which she followed "normal processes" and "interacted" or "communicated." Or how about an apology from Jordan herself? Does she really see nothing wrong in how she handled herself?

QUOTE: I can't believe this. Every time I think this board has gone as low as it can, it proves me wrong.

[Portion removed due to factual inaccuracy.]

How is it possible that we vote in board members who think it's OK to spend thousands of dollars to attack candidates?


^^^^^ Things have gotten a bit too political at the PAUSD. This [portion removed] is probably based on an inherent fear of Ms. Jordan's popularity amongst a sizable number of PA voters & her outspoken nature in regards to various district-related issues and controversies.

Ms. Jordan's zealous advocacy may rub some people the wrong way but if she is exposing critical district problems & taking proactive steps to address/correct them, what more can be asked of an elected representative?

I am beginning to suspect that her detractors are more representative of a perfunctory mindset that tends to either 'look the other way' and/or 'rubber stamp' when it comes to key PAUSD decisions/issues.

I would vote for whoever the victim and her family would vote for and that is that.

To "R. Davis":

I would not describe a series of truthful statements about how a school board candidate dealt with high school students as a "smear campaign." When the truth is bad enough to be called a "smear" it reflects badly on the candidate, in my opinion.

I refer back to the Weekly's endorsement editorial: "Her criticisms of the current board are also misplaced. The board took all the right steps to investigate and remove or discipline the staff members who made mistakes, as described above."

As "Wow" said earlier today, Jordan is not actually "exposing critical district problems & taking proactive steps to address/correct them": "Kathy points to problems that everyone knows about, and acts like no one is doing anything about it, while in fact, they are already everyone else's top priorities. She just doesn't bother to listen and refuses to work with any existing effort." In the case of the Title IX issue at Paly the school board ordered the investigation that revealed staff failings, and then took action as the Weekly says.

I believe the reason people are talking about Jordan's behavior is that it is bad, not because she is good.

"I am beginning to suspect that her detractors are more representative of a perfunctory mindset that tends to either 'look the other way' and/or 'rubber stamp' when it comes to key PAUSD decisions/issues."

Let me correct your misimpression. Dauber and Collins are both on record recommending people not to vote for Jordan. They are the District's two biggest public critics. They went public on the need for McGee to leave while the board as a whole was waffling. Dauber's been the lead voice on improving sexual assault handling for 6+ years and led the settlement of the OCR debacle. Collins has been the lead critic of financial management. So the idea they are "looking the other way" or "rubber stamping" is pretty far off - the opposite is true.

I find this community's attitude regarding uncovering the truth and the demand for honest journalism very upsetting. I did a quick search on Paly, Campanile and Title IX and I found the follow from Ken Dauber's blog in 2015 (again quoted word for word).

"we should keep foremost in our minds our responsibility to educate all staff and students about sexual assault, consent, sexual harassment, and relationship abuse. Had the district conducted an appropriate Title IX investigation when the issue was first raised in 2013, we would have already had the opportunity to consider whether any systemic measures were needed to address these issues. Such remedies typically include: ensuring that district grievance procedures comply with Title IX; ensuring that the Title IX coordinator is fully trained; conducting annual school climate checks related to harassment incidents; fully training staff and coordinators on obligations related to identifying, reporting, investigating, and taking appropriate action in response to harassment incidents; training and educating students on recognizing and reporting harassment including teacher grooming and harassment of students; implementing primary and bystander prevention education for students, faculty, and staff; creating a system for investigating, record-keeping and tracking complaints and incidents of harassment; and creating a system for self-monitoring the effectiveness of the school’s response to harassment. In my view, these kinds of steps will greatly benefit our entire community.

Finally, I want to make it clear that I fully support the First Amendment rights of our students and student publications. It is my hope that by setting the record straight on these issues we can all begin to work together cooperatively to improve the climate in our schools for all students. As President Obama says: It's on us. All of us."

This post was in 2015. For those of you who think Kathy Jordan didn't contribute to our cleaning up our processes, I respectfully disagree. No one will know, but

1) when a District Superintendent and high school Principal think they can back date a Title IX investigation or fail to investigate at all, change is needed.

2) when a sitting Board member knows the Title IX process and doesn't require administration to document the process and prove that it is following the process on a regular basis, change is needed

3) when Board members don't feel the need to scrutinize whether instructional minutes which fail to deliver over 10% of instructional time over a school year is adequate, change is needed (personally I love the idea of a late start, but we have kids who need instructional time to learn)

4) when we have to pay a law firm like Cozen to uncover the truth as if we were some nefarious corporation protecting our CEO, change is needed

5) when sitting Board members loan money to an unnamed committee (except for one person) to take out a negative ad in the local paper, change is needed

6) when we continue to offer any non a-g classes when we have dropped our a-g graduation rate from 90% to 72% (and I don't even think we uniformly hit the 72% for all ethnicities--we may be at 50% for some), change is needed

7) when we can't embed District level stress reduction in our pedagogy/educational structure (retake of test with lower than 80% score for up to 80%), fixed late work policy (e.g, loss of 10% of grade every two school days), test stacking alternatives, dropping lowest test/quiz grade if it positively impacts grade, linking AP score to grade in class (should a student achieve a C in an AP class and get a 5 on the exam if he/she did all her homework?), change is needed

8) when we can't figure out alternative instruction ideas for classes where we are stressed for better teaching like Computer Science (Kahn academy, online programs, proctored and managed through an in-class supervisor), change is needed

9) when we have vaping in our bathrooms and have to close the bathrooms, change is needed

10) when we have an outside company charging $19K to prepare kids for college (highlighted in this very paper), change is needed

Kim Diorio was well liked by many, but no matter how much good she did, she looked the other way on a very important issue and then tried to sweep it under the carpet. The Campanile was complicit in this. Are we more concerned about integrity/ethics or good manners?

Maybe those current board members who are known for their good judgment are worried about adding a board member who has demonstrated poor judgment because they know just how much chaos she could cause and that someone who has poor judgment on a school board is a threat to the good functioning of the board and ultimately to the quality of the schools.

No board member has endorsed Jordan because she has terrible judgment and has acted reprehensibly to our students.

I'm voting Ken Dauber and Kathy Jordan.
I posted some harsh comments about Jordan but have amended my view.

I'm a sports fan, former Gunn tennis player (and went to Dick Gould's camp at Stanford ) so Jordan's excellence in tennis (Wimbledon doubles champ, ranked as high as #5 in world singles -- arguably Stanford's greatest women's player ever) means something to me: we seek excellence here, and try to instill this in our children.

It's an outrage that a current board member would attack a candidate like this. Backfired, buddy.

People I respect say they support her candidacy.
I met her husband on the campaign trail.

The thing about the Campanile reminds me of the time that the newspaper sent students to buy beer from liquor stores, turned the stores in and then wrote about it: they have a habit of becoming the news. And with due respect -- I've been reading the paper for 40 years -- the standards have fallen. The were wrong, Kathy was right.

Kathy Jordan stuck her neck out on behalf of a victim of sexual abuse; that should be lauded.

I think, if elected, she will do right by our students and our community.

She deserves a shot. My bet is that she aces it.

Mark Weiss
Gunn '82
Dartmouth '86
3x candidate for City Council

p.s. my first impression of Dauber was negative, but I amended there, too, and now support him 100 percent

P.p.s i often say that a PAUSD education in the 1970s was one of the greatest privilieges of my life.

@"facts"

What is important about your quote from Ken Dauber's blog is that it is a quote from his blog. That is how an appropriate adult responds to student criticism. In that case, the Campanile had written a story that was factually incorrect and also very critical of Ken. Rather than harassing, emailing, calling, texting and hounding students he wrote a respectful post on his own blog.

Ken Dauber: appropriate response to students
Kathy Jordan: inappropriate response to students

She's not strong for students. She's wrong for students.

Vote for anyone else.

#Hundreds (and please correct this, it was 15)

Actually, thank you for your point. I did not want to overwhelm this space, but Ken and Kathy did the same thing.

Ken's email was in response to public criticism from the Campanile. And, that criticism was about his going around the District and going to the OCR--that is not following the channels they preferred at the Campanile. Kathy has a website and she posted her response there.

We are all entitled to our opinions, but let's make sure we present accurate facts.

Again, verbatim from Ken's post:

"The Paly Campanile published an editorial last Friday criticizing my request in May 2013 that OCR consider offering advice (called "technical assistance") to PAUSD on Title IX compliance. My request was prompted by serious allegations involving sexual assault and harassment at Paly. The allegations were first reported in a story in the Verde, a student magazine, in April 2013. The Campanile editorial was reprinted in the Daily Post on Monday.

The student editors particularly criticize the fact that I reached out to OCR for technical assistance rather than limiting my inquiries about the matter to PAUSD officials."

I believe that Palo Alto is a loving and civilized community and people respect each other and discuss issues with facts. I believe that no one in the community likes a bully culture takes roots here.

Reading through the lengthy comments, I am shocked by how emotionally charged people can get. How many conspiracy theories are out there to interpret Kathy's simple desire to get something wrong corrected. I really hope that each of us just bring the facts to the readers without excessive accusation. We can share our own interpretation, but avoid making our personal belief a fact, and let the readers to decide themselves.

Here is what I learned that changed my opinion toward Kathy Jordan:

Campanile published several times that the victim had consensual sex based upon what the reporters heard about, and their interview with Offender's lawyer. They did not interview the victim nor talk to victim's family. Does anyone feel that they can get an honest and trust worthy opinion on what happened from Offender's Lawyer?

The victim and her family was devastated and felt victimized again after reading the campanile report. They wrote to school officials but was stone walled.

Kathy followed the process, spoke at school board meeting voicing her concerns, wrote to school principal, and wrote to teacher asking retracting the untrue Campanile report. I believe that this is a respectful and responsible process to address a problem. I believe her simple motivation to get a wrong corrected, because the student was hurt, both by the harassment and by the report.

She was stone walled. Several people posted comments here before showed the email between the teacher and the principal that the teacher already firmly believed the incident "consensual", and promised the principal a Campanile editorial to support that view, before the Campanile editors started investigation. (The eventual investigation was flawed as well, since the consensual sex evidence was based upon Offender's lawyer). Unfortunately this email and other emailed have been deleted by the Palo Alto Daily editor (deemed inappropriate).

Kathy took the Campanile published contact information and emailed the Campaniles asking for retracting the article, citing it was not true, and the victim was victimized again. A campanile editor asked to meet with Kathy Jordan. Kathy agreed to meet with the editor and along with other editors, and she also communicated that the victim's father (not any man) will meet with the Campanile editor. She declined to meet with the teacher because she already wrote to the teacher and her request was stonewalled and she had public information that the teacher was biased toward the principal. In the end, the Campanile editor canceled the meeting. All these facts was currently distorted into Kathy was to meet with the editor alone. No, Kathy agreed to meet with editors, and also along with the victim's father to the meeting.

Campanile openly apologized for its editorial piece this October. Web Link

As a parent with a child at the district, Kathy did what a good citizen should do, to correct a wrong when it happened, and going through the process and repeatedly appeal to the authorities. If it was already everyone's priorities as someone said above, why no one else supported the victim who was victimized again by a false publication except Kathy? As a parent myself, I can not draw any other motivation for Kathy Jordan's actions, except that she was motivated to correct a wrong. The wrong was devastating to the victim (the victim had suicidal thoughts) and the wrong could potentially hurt other students.

How would we think and feel, if the victim is our own child? Shall we appreciate someone like Kathy Jordan's clear conscience, loving heart, courage and tenacity to advocate for us, the vulnerable, or shall we label her as utilizing the situation to advancing her political agenda, and use it as a launch pad to a political career?

I feel some of the comments are based on emotional charged accusations, instead of the facts, which makes me feel the my way is the highway attitude. I do not believe that a louder voice will bring more credibility to a truth. I am against bully behaviors, whether it is from student, parents, or administrations. I hope for a better PAUSD with school board members advocating for transparency, protecting student, and have courages to correct wrongs.

"Facts and Figures" says "Ken and Kathy did the same thing" I guess because they both disagreed with something the Campanile did. But that's the only similarity. Dauber posted his disagreement on his blog. Jordan emailed, phoned, and texted students to the point where they felt harassed and threatened, telling them she would stop only if they agreed to do exactly what she wanted. She only stopped when the school got a lawyer involved. Did Dauber do any of that?

This is what I mean by failing to defend what Jordan actually did. It really underlines that what she actually did was deeply problematic.

I also want to note that all of this happened long after the girl in question left PAUSD, from news reports. So Jordan was not protecting the girl's feelings from what she was reading in the newspaper. Much of what is in the emails that she sent the Campanile, in fact, is a long series of complaints about Kim Diorio and other administrators expressing her opinion that they be fired. My sense reading all of this is that it is more about Jordan's desire to see them fired than about the student. I understand that she still wants to see administrators fired including the current Paly and Gunn principals.

There is a lot of misinformation in this thread claiming that Jordan did not do what she actually did. I find that very revealing. I think everyone understands that the truth is disqualifying for being a school board member which is why there is such anger about it being openly discussed.

The girl and her family asked Kathy Jordan's help after their plea to school authorities failed.

The girl's father offered to meet with Campanile's editors with Kathy Jordan to communicate the grievances of the victim and her family, but was declined.

I disagree with that if the truth is different from someone believed or interpreted from the lens of the conspiracy theory or the perception of distorted motivation, it can just be labeled misinformation.

@better

You have confused different cases. The 14 year old allegedly assaulted in a bathroom is different from the father who offered to meet with the Campanile. It was [name removed] whose daughter was allegedly assaulted on campus in a different case by a different student, who supposedly (based on this thread) tried to meet with the Campanile but since Kathy refused to allow a teacher to be present the students declined to meet with them alone.

Kathy has launched her political campaign using the facts about a 14 year old who was allegedly assaulted in a bathroom and Kathy apparently did not have any permission from that victim to use the facts of her assault to launch Kathy's political campaign.

This is the kind of misinformation that has powered the Jordan campaign.

@hundred,

Thanks for the clarification. You are correct, another victim's father, [name removed] was to join the meeting with Kathy Jordan and Campaniles editors and editors. The information went around depicted that Kathy Jordan was to meet with one editor alone (version 1), and Kathy Jordan was to bring a man (instead of a known victim's father) with her to meet with one Campanile editor (version 2). Both of these scenarios painted a very different picture from the situation. It seems that this fact is clarified.

We need to change a culture of Institutional Negligence  at PAUSD. The Collins attack on Ms. Jordan shows the Board to be disconnected from parents and those students most in need of advocacy and no-one will deny that Ms. Jordan is an advocate!

What matters here is the pain and suffering by students suffering sexual assault, or suffering from denial of special education rights or suffering from the lack of wellness conditions that lead to suicide. On sex education parents rights are not important. At PAUSD many students are hurt by some of the unqualified aides supporting the sex education classes given. An example is to say to a 7th Grade child that it is OK to get an abortion, that it is like going to the dentist and like the suction tube at the dentist. Parents want accountability and advocacy. Students receive the wrong information and will make the wrong choices and as parents we want to be involved.

Palo Alto is a kind community, but we underestimate the size of the task at hand. In many surveys including the Center for Disease Control sexual assault in High School is 20 % for girls and 5% for boys.
High school is supposed to be a wonderful time of dreams and opportunities to explore one’s gifts. Yet for 1 in 5 girls it is a nightmare that may never recede. We want to provide a safe place for girls.

One unique and inspiring perspective is in this video by former LAHS student, Thara Salim. Her wisdom and choices can transform our own lives. In numbers maybe 200 girls at PALY will suffer this before Collins faces election in 2020.

Web Link

Approximately 1 in 3 survivors tell no one and 93% do not report the incident to the school. One half tells a close friend and 13% tell a parent, but only 5% go to the police. Of the people who tell no one, one half say they wanted to deal with it alone, 44% are ashamed, 42% want to forget it happened, 50 % say that it’s private matter, 43% did not think what happened was serious.(Data from 2014 Everyfi survey).

The Collins email is prompted by a culture of Institutional Negligence  at PAUSD. Special Education is also not important to the Board, but is to Ms. Jordan.

Let us be inspired by Albert Einstein who was a special education child himself and later advised schools on how to implement different ways to teach children to learn. All students need to be taught how to learn with many different approaches and all students learn differently. We can turn all the money being spent on PAUSD litigation into having the best education in the world, for all students. PAUSD hides the amount, but upon information and belief it is in the area of $ 5 Million per year.Teach all students to learn how to learn. Bring equal education to all and create world class education and special education.

Regarding the Campanile Oct 4th hit article on Kathy Jordan, can someone explain to me how CA Education code 7054(a) was not violated? Web Link specifically calls out influencing a school board election:

EDC § 7054:
(a) No school district or community college district funds, services, supplies, or equipment shall be used for the purpose of urging the support or defeat of any ballot measure or candidate, including, but not limited to, any candidate for election to the governing board of the district.

(b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the use of any of the public resources described in subdivision (a) to provide information to the public about the possible effects of any bond issue or other ballot measure if both of the following conditions are met:

(1) The informational activities are otherwise authorized by the Constitution or laws of this state.

(2) The information provided constitutes a fair and impartial presentation of relevant facts to aid the electorate in reaching an informed judgment regarding the bond issue or ballot measure.

(c) A violation of this section shall be a misdemeanor or felony punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both, or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for 16 months, or two or three years.

@Christopher Boyd

Totally agree!

Kathy Jordan advocated someone who was victimized by harassment and false information and somethings needs to be corrected. She was against something wrong, flatly wrong.

Why a community can not tolerate someone who simply asked for retracting some false information published. Why Kathy Jordan's simple and direct act to help a victimized student has to be misinterpreted as her utilizing a victim to advance a political career? Why shouldn't people speak up for assault victims and advocate for them to be treated fairly and according to the law? Why Katy's repeated appeal to school board, teacher, and the principal to retract a false info can be stonewalled without any consequence, but her persistence in getting a wrong corrected received so much outcry? Is this normal for a civilized and educated community?

What message are we trying send to our kids? Do we tell them keep your mouth shut and pretend you did not see the wrong as if it did not occur around us? If the victim is not my own, should we just ignore her/him? If someone has power and media connection, then that person will have final say of what occurred and what didn't regardless of the facts? Some community may already have that culture, but I believe it is not the culture in Palo Alto. I believe that we all hope that it does not become an accepted culture in Palo Alto.

@Gravitas - California Education Code 48907 (1977), also known as the California Student Free Expression Law (Web Link expressly grants student newspapers the right to publish what they choose. It specifically addresses your question.

Good to know that Chris Boyd and Kathy Jordan are aligned on this issue. From what I've seen, Boyd can't even keep his story straight about his own "non-profit," so his endorsement of Jordan's approach is telling. She has no newspaper or elected official endorsements, but she does seem to have Boyd's.

The idea that the district doesn't take sexual assault seriously is so misleading as to be dangerous. Shame on you who spread that rumor. Multiple senior people left the district in part due to the handling of Paly's assaults; others were disciplined. Over $1 million was spent on independent investigations; a full time Title IX lawyer was added, enforcing policy and overseeing investigations, and publishing a weekly log of all complaints (literally no organization does that); a full time investigator is on staff so investigations are done well and timely.

Again, Jordan and some others who haven't been paying attention think they've discovered a new problem. Dauber and others have been working on this problem for 6+ years, and finally in the last two made significant progress. Maybe it's ignorance, maybe political distortions, but either way, Jordan and the others are just wrong.

[Post removed.]

For more on Mr. Boyd: Web Link

I'm sorry but "Better PAUSD" still can't address what Jordan actually did. Here is what that person says: "Why a community can not tolerate someone who simply asked for retracting some false information published. Why Kathy Jordan's simple and direct act to help a victimized student has to be misinterpreted as her utilizing a victim to advance a political career?"

Jordan didn't "simply ask for retracting some false information published." She refused to stop emailing, phoning and texting high school students, unless they agreed with her demands. It took a lawyer letter to make her stop. Requests from students wasn't good enough for her. For what reads to me like a pretty faithful representation of her thinking, see "Get the Facts Straight'" posts, until she stopped posting.

Jordan wasn't trying to "help a victimized student" as far as I can see. The student in question had already left Paly. Based on the emails, which have multiple pages of complaints about multiple staff members, Jordan's goal was to get people fired and to enlist the students in that effort.

I don't know if she was attempting to "advance a political career." It does seem that she and her followers represent her actions in this case as a major reason for electing her (!), so they do seem connected.

I think it would be better for the Jordan campaign to admit what she actually did, and deal with it, than try to keep spinning it as nothing.

Responding to Sarah Woodham regarding Ken Dauber

I did not complain that Ken Dauber works on implementing PAUSD's homework policy, as you claim. PAUSD homework policy--correctly, in my opinion--focuses on reducing unnecessary drudge work while aiming at having "opportunity to practice, apply, and reinforce and apply previously taught skills and prepare for future lessons, and is directly tied to classroom instruction" (BP/AR 6154).

Had this been what Ken Dauber was promoting, he would be faithfully implementing existing board policies, as he is expected to. Instead, Ken Dauber, our Board President at the time (and now) argues--in a semi-private letter to the superintendent normally unavailable to the public--that he feels that assigning homework per the board policy is "working at cross purposes to our own district goals" because students with families who "can provide a quiet place to do homework have an advantage over students without those resources."

In other words, Mr. Dauber believes--correctly as far as I can tell, as the research shows, and as the Board Policy states--that thoughtful homework has positive impact on students' learning, yet he (in private) urges the superintendent NOT TO PERSIST in implementing the homework policy because some students may get too far ahead of others, which he doesn't like.

This is precisely what I wrote in my original comment, and Ms. Woodham's efforts to confuse the issue by spuriously referring to "board policies" and "research" are not helpful. Ken Dauber is willing to actively stymie the achievement of some students so they will not get too far ahead of other, less successful students.

Dotty, Wow,

Ms. Jordan does not need my endorsement or anybody else’s to win this election. I only endorse my own campaign, but I see that she stands tall for justice and feel that as a parent I can trust her. Now, after Six debates I know it!

Any one of us can be destroyed in a second due to thoughtless or malicious or simply incorrect information published in print and magnified online. We now need to adapt to “a world in which the internet has the potential to amplify defamatory communications unparalleled in human history. Plainly, the worldwide web vastly expands the reach and impact of online defamation.” (Quote from Jim Wagstaff, The Wagstaff Group)

I faced such an issue in the September 21, 2018 issue of the PAOnline published by Embarcadero Media. In a second years of work and my career was destroyed by an article based on false facts. Huge personal damage was done. It is completely false to say: "School Board Candidate Misrepresents His Stem Program.”

I have received the help from two leading law firms, one in non profit formation law and one in defamation litigation law to correct the record. The facts show no misrepresentation whatsoever. Embarcadero Media has been served with a Defamation Notice under California Law and I will correct what is a false and unlawful defamation in Court.

I can not further comment on what is now a legal matter.

It is interesting how Dauber is brought into this discussion, both as a supposed precedent for Jordan's misbehavior (he isn't) and as distraction. Wurman's wholly false statement that Dauber was telling the Superintendent not to implement the district's homework policy is a good example.

This would be very odd if it were true, since Dauber has consistently complained that the homework policy is not being implemented. But it isn't true. In fact Dauber is arguing in this email that one of the reasons to fully implement the district's homework is to support the district's equity goal. Most of the email is about the equity goal, and these paragraphs (quoted in full, unlike Wurman) follow:

"I'd also like to point out the connection between the equity goal and the homework goal. One of the major motivations for the homework policy -- both on homework duration and content -- was to reduce the impact of differences in family resources on educational opportunity. Students whose families can provide homework help, can afford tutors, and can provide a quiet place to do homework have an advantage over students without those resources. We can address some of those differences by providing tutors, etc., but if we persist in a homework practice that has a disparate impact on students with different resources than we're working at cross purposes to our own district goals.
The Paly math letter is a good example of this problem in action. That letter cited family background and "lack of support at home" among the factors that produced the fact that some students "can't pass our Algebra II regular lane course." That this conclusion is antithetical to the purpose of a public school education is obvious. But I think it also illustrates the importance of ensuring that district staff address directly how to remove dependencies on resources outside of school."

Dauber is clearly saying that fully implementing the homework policy will forward the equity goal, because the homework policy "removes dependencies on resources outside of school." It's so clear that it's obvious that Wurman is deliberately misstating this email for a political purpose. Presumably to distract from the discussion about Jordan.

I don't know much about Wurman [portion removed.] Perhaps he also opposes policies that reduce the impact of students' income and racial background on achievement. I wouldn't be surprised, based on this.

If you follow the facts, especially the one where ‘the district attorney's office declined to file any charges against him "other than consensual underage sexual activity," according to Rickard.’
Web Link
then you come to realize that Kathy didn’t stand up for anything since there was no assault and no victim. She did however become completely unhinged in her zealousness.
What Jordan’s Campanile rant displays is a worrying level of self-righteousness not unlike the display we got from now Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh, who became completely unhinged in the assault hearing, displaying a Jordanesque level of self-righteousness that is worthy of neither a seat on the supreme court nor our School board.
If only Kathy had the decency that Kavanaugh was lacking, to withdraw from consideration. But that’s probably expecting too much from someone with her sense of self-righteousness and entitlement.

Kathy Jordan – WRONG for students, as a board member and a role model!

@Dotty,

Kathy Jordan first spoke at school board meeting. Her plea at the school board got nowhere, except that the principal used "Crazy women attacked me at school board meeting" in describing Kathy in her email to the teacher. This was shared by other readers above and was deleted by the editor here. Is this a simple respectful action in asking to retract the wrong and damaging information?


Kathy Jordan emailed to the teacher and the principal, plead again for retracting the false information. Is this another proper, and respectable way of communicating her desire to correct something wrong?

With being stonewalled by all people in power, she took the public information given by campanile, and emailed Campanile editors, again with a simple and straight forward request: Please retract the wrong the hurtful report. Is this wrong? Campanile put their contact info for readers to contact them. It is their way to seek feed back from readers.

Kathy responded to student's requests to meet and offered to meet with editorS, along with another victim's father. was it wrong to do it?

Kathy Jordan found out that the information she provided to the principal and teachers were not shared with Campanile editors and stuff. She was very concerned and felt wronged. Is that understandable? The inexperienced students were writing editorial articles, while they were not given the background information, and was not advised that the Offender's lawyers words should not be trusted or used as evidence to justify that the event was consensual. Kathy tried to explain that message to students. I do not see anything were wrong with it.

If at any of these steps, the people who are in charge (school board, principal, others in charge) recognized the wrong and apologized and asked students to correct the false information in print, the problem would have solved. Kathy would not need to push further for stopping the hurtful information. Why the Campanile's apology came out this October, more than one year after the event, instead of at the time that Kathy Jordan's feed back was received?

Should we all accept that if some serious wrong occurred, and people in charge did nothing, or did something wrong, we should all be sit still, keep our mouth shut, and be a quiet audience? If someone stood up and ask the wrong to be corrected, she will be defined as trouble maker and interpreted as having dark motivation for personal gain?

I disagree with that logic.

Your posts and other posts have projected her motivations. From a reader's point of view, it is your interpretation of her action of standing up against something simply wrong. It has nothing to do with the reality, her true motivation. There are multiple facets of facts. If the facts do not fit in your model of motivation theory, you could deem it spinning. This again is your accusation, not a fact. I believe that it is the best to let readers learn more about facts, and draw their own conclusions.

@Dotty Henderson,

You are correct that it is "interesting" that Ken Dauber is brought into this discussion. I did try to open a separate thread on Ken Dauber's statement, yet PA Weekly censors didn't allow it. So I posted much of it in this thread dealing with the election to the school board. And it has little to do with Ms. Jordan.

You are incorrect that my statement is--wholly or partially--false. I extensively quoted the complete relevant paragraph from Mr. Dauber letter, and I carefully explained what it actually says, and the relevant PAUSD policies.

In contrast it is you who attempt to confuse the issue and throw baseless accusations. The extra paragraph you quote about the Paly letter doesn't add to the discussion. It simply illustrates what Mr. Dauber already stated, and what I already pointed out, that homework is HELPFUL to student achievement. I think we can all agree on that.

But contrary to your argument that "Dauber is clearly saying that fully implementing the homework policy will forward the equity goal," Dauber says JUST THE OPPOSITE: that implementing PAUSD homework policy increases the achievement gap and hence should be resisted, even if--or particularly because--it reduces the achievement of students with stable homes.

As to your ad hominem effort to attack me, I suggest you better focus on the clear and explicit thoughts that Mr. Dauber expressed in a [portion removed] letter to the superintendent. That is the issue pertinent to Palo Alto voters that you try to avoid.

@Dotty,

Kathy Jordan first spoke at school board meeting. Her plea at the school board got nowhere, except that the principal used "Crazy women attacked me at school board meeting" in describing Kathy in her email to the teacher. This was shared by other readers above and was deleted by the editor here. Is this a simple respectful action in asking to retract the wrong and damaging information?


Kathy Jordan emailed to the teacher and the principal, plead again for retracting the false information. Is this another proper, and respectable way of communicating her desire to correct something wrong?

With being stonewalled by all people in power, she took the public information given by campanile, and emailed Campanile editors, again with a simple and straight forward request: Please retract the wrong the hurtful report. Is this wrong? Campanile put their contact info for readers to contact them. It is their way to seek feed back from readers.

Kathy responded to student's requests to meet and offered to meet with editorS, along with another victim's father. was it wrong to do it?

Kathy Jordan found out that the information she provided to the principal and teachers were not shared with Campanile editors and stuff. She was very concerned and felt wronged. Is that understandable? The inexperienced students were writing editorial articles, while they were not given the background information, and was not advised that the Offender's lawyers words should not be trusted or used as evidence to justify that the event was consensual. Kathy tried to explain that message to students. I do not see anything were wrong with it.

If at any of these steps, the people who are in charge (school board, principal, others in charge) recognized the wrong and apologized and asked students to correct the false information in print, the problem would have solved. Kathy would not need to push further for stopping the hurtful information. Why the Campanile's apology came out this October, more than one year after the event, instead of at the time that Kathy Jordan's feed back was received?

Should we all accept that if some serious wrong occurred, and people in charge did nothing, or did something wrong, we should all be sit still, keep our mouth shut, and be a quiet audience? If someone stood up and ask the wrong to be corrected, she will be defined as trouble maker and interpreted as having dark motivation for personal gain?

I disagree with that logic.

Your posts and other posts have projected her motivations. From a reader's point of view, it is your interpretation of her action of standing up against something simply wrong. It has nothing to do with the reality, her true motivation. There are multiple facets of the facts. If the facts do not fit in your model of motivation theory, you could deem it spinning. This again is your accusation, not a fact. I believe that it is the best to let readers learn more about facts, and draw their own conclusions.

To Wurman: You are making stuff up. Please point me to where Dauber tells the Superintendent "that implementing PAUSD homework policy increases the achievement gap and hence should be resisted."

You won't find it, because that isn't what he said. Instead, he said the opposite: "One of the major motivations for the homework policy -- both on homework duration and content -- was to reduce the impact of differences in family resources on educational opportunity...We can address some of those differences by providing tutors, etc., but if we persist in a homework practice that has a disparate impact on students with different resources than we're working at cross purposes to our own district goals." In other words, the current homework practice, which is inconsistent with the policy, can be mitigated with things like tutors but ultimately it needs to change to conform with the policy. That's why the paragraph you omitted is important. It's an example of how the Paly math department's practice reinforces differences among students in their resources and needs to change to conform with the homework policy.

Or are you claiming that Dauber believes the homework policy has been fully implemented, despite his numerous public statements to the contrary, and is now secretly trying to get it undone? I think even a political opponent of Dauber and partisan of Jordan can come up with a better distraction than that.

To "Better PAUSD": You still refuse to deal with what Jordan actually did in sending students dozens of emails, phone calls, and texts and refusing to stop when asked, except finally when a lawyer got involved. Please address that behavior.

@Dotty Henderson

"if we persist in a homework practice that has a disparate impact on students with different resources than we're working at cross purposes to our own district goals."

Yet as Dauber himself says, ANY HOMEWORK will have disparate impact that CANNOT be remedied by offering free tutors, even if PAUSD provides such. The clear implication is that homework should be resisted even if it is helpful to some students.

As to Dauber's complaints about homework policy implementation I never claimed that Dauber argued it has been fully implemented. As you say he often complained about it in public, in that he felt THERE IS OFTEN TOO MUCH HOMEWORK. That could be, and was a proper public argument given the board policies intended to limit the amount of homework IN THE NAME OF NOT OVERLOADING STUDENTS AND HELPING THEIR EMOTIONAL WELL BEING. Yet the board policies recognize the value of homework, and encourage giving appropriate homework, and Mr. Dauber never publicly--at least as far as I know--argued to abolish ALL homework.

Yet here is Mr. Dauber engaging in a NON-PUBLIC argument that, in principle, objects to ANY HOMEWORK with a DIFFERENT argument not present in the board policy: that homework "unfairly" increase the achievement of students with strong homes, and hence any homework should be resisted, effectively arguing for subverting the board policy and student achievement.

To Wurman: You are still making stuff up. I'll put out that putting NON-PUBLIC in caps doesn't hide the fact that this letter is actually public, which Dauber presumably knows it would become because of the public records law. The implication that this is a SECRET communication is silly.

Now you are claiming that Dauber secretly wants to do away with ANY HOMEWORK, despite years of his working to implement the district's homework policy. Further, you're claiming that rather than giving the Superintendent a reason to implement the homework policy (that it supports the equity policy), he's telling her to ABOLISH HOMEWORK. (I quite like these all-caps, they do seem to make the ABSURD seem even more so).

What he actually seems to be saying, which is consistent with the homework policy as I understand it, is that homework shouldn't be a high-stakes enterprise that works for students with tutors and lots of help who can afford to learn things on their own (even if makes them miserable), but doesn't work for other students. Homework should be for practice, not for learning things the first time. Teachers should teach in the classroom, not rely on students to teach themselves via homework or be tutored.

Sorry to burst your BUBBLE, Wurman. It's pretty obvious what you're up to though.

@Dotty Henderson,

1. Mr. Dauber's exchange with the superintendent was non-public. That is the accepted way to describe such internal communication, not available to the public unless a "public record act request" forces the administration to release it. I did not call it a "secret" -- you did.

2. Yes, that is *precisely* what I claim. That Mr. Dauber seemingly wants to do away with any homework, counter to his public support for the board homework policies. That is what his memo clearly indicates.

Incidentally, I agree with you regarding the CAPS. Yet they seem to have worked -- you finally correctly rephrased what I was trying to say.

You actually didn't "burst my bubble"--you clearly restated my conclusions, and I am thankful for that. You choose to disbelieve the clear meaning of the memo, and it is your right to do it. Other people may reach a different conclusion based on the same facts.

Finally, the purpose of PAUSD homework is clearly stated in the policy, so you don't need to reinvent it. It's actually a pretty good description: "opportunity to practice, reinforce and apply previously taught skills and acquired knowledge and prepare for future lessons, and is directly tied to classroom instruction."

All of Zev Wurman's [portion removed] about Ken Dauber and homework may be EXCITING for someone like Zev with NOTHING TO DO ALL DAY but tell [portion removed] about Ken Dauber but they are off topic because this is a thread about KATHY JORDAN and the fact that she [portion removed] HARASSED AND BULLIED OUR STUDENTS.

Get on topic, Zev and Dottie or get your own thread. I would guess that Zev thinks that posting on this thread, where all of Kathy Jordan's supporters are reading, is a good place to falsely [portion removed] about Ken Dauber since for many of Kathy supporters like Zev [portion removed] don't care in any way shape or form about sexual harassment. They care about high-stress, high-stakes high achievement. Kathy is their vessel for trying to accomplish that by mobilizing the part of the population that believes that caring about mental health is a waste of time and just hurts their own high-achieving kids. They attack Ken because they see him as having brought sleep and mental health into the conversation [portion removed.] Kathy is their ticket back onto the board where they can try to undo things like finals before winter break and eliminating zero period.

[Portion removed.]

Back on topic it is clear that Kathy has poor judgment and her close association with the high-stress advocates like Zev is just another example of her lack of real concern about our students.

Kathy Jordan isn't strong for students. She's wrong for students.

[Post removed.]

[Portion removed.]

Kathy Jordan harassed, intimidated, [portion removed] teenage children because she didn't like the policy decisions that adults were making, disagreed with the teacher, and decided to try to go around all the adults and all the parents and go straight to the children.

When the children told her she was making them uncomfortable, she kept going because she has no boundaries and no filter and believes that she is right so she can just keep going until she gets her way.

She should in no way be on the School Board.

Our students are literally asking us to keep her off the Board. Let's do it.

I am one of the victims in this case, specifically from the 2015 assault in the church bathroom.

I believe Kathy Jordan would be an excellent school board member. She has shown an unwavering willingness to combat sexual assault and rape culture at every level in the school district. Even after everyone else moved on after the initial community drama when the story came out in May 2017, Kathy Jordan has stayed the course and continued to combat the injustices in the system.

I personally contacted members of the Campanile before the offending story was published and was in touch with them throughout the entire process. They were completely out of line in listing the other victim's case as "consensual", and I called them out on that from the very start. They told me they would change it, but never did. I eventually gave up. I commend Kathy Jordan because she did not.

Furthermore, all the other media articles have stated that it isn't that the 2016 assault was deemed "consensual", but rather that the only verdict was "sex with a minor" (as opposed to 'sexual assault'). "Sex with a minor" doesn't indicate the incident was consensual. It just means that, for whatever reason, prosecutors did not or were not able to press more charges. The Campanile was 100% wrong in spreading misinformation that shamed one of the other victims and further perpetuated the rape culture at Paly.

Kathy Jordan courageously stood up to that, and has continued to do so, to the point where she has felt motivated to run for public office. I view her as a passionate, educated, and change-driven woman who would bring PAUSD - and our community as a whole - the changes it so desperately needs.

@Dotty, @Hundreds:

The students you protect are fragile, self-centered, by-standers, who, for a recommendation from their adviser, will malign a fellow student, malign an upstanding citizen, refuse to admit their mistake for *one year*, causing incredible harm to all the victims in PAUSD who will now refuse to come forward, because look at how their peers treat them.

Anyone who has an issue that needs help with would want Kathy in their corner.

@Get your facts - so your position, which sounds like Kathy's as well, is that some students just deserve abuse, and you know which ones, so it's ok. That's, well, horrifying.

There's a reason there are rules and boundaries around children. Adults, no matter how self-righteous, have to obey those rules. Kathy Jordan didn't - she harassed students she disagreed with, trying to make them knuckle under. Think for a minute if that were your son or daughter on the wrong end of Kathy's Jordan's outrage.

I don't want Kathy Jordan in my child's corner - I don't want her near my child, or anyone else's. She's got bad judgment, no boundaries, and no ability to work with others to get things done - she is an ineffective outrage machine. The idea of her on a school board should frighten us all.

@Wow: No, I did not say that the students deserved what they got, you decided to interpret it that way. I just pointed out their failings, and I am sorry if you are bringing up the students this way. I for one, hope to raise a daughter as compassionate, brave and with as much gumption as Kathy.

In addition, in case you missed it, please do respond to @Victim #1's post above also.

@Facts, you malign those students and call them names at length in your post. You know those are real people, children in fact, with parents and friends who might well read what you write? So yeah, you and Kathy figure you know which kids you should be abusing, and want the rest of us to join you - after all, they clearly deserve it, right? That's a big problem and not what anyone should want leading a school district.

@Wow: Please respond to @Victim #1's post.