Two ballot measures to fund Colorado鈥檚 universal school meals program, the only statewide contests in the 2025 off-year election, were approved by voters Tuesday night, according to unofficial results.

The Associated Press called the race in favor of Proposition MM, which would raise $95 million annually for school meals by limiting tax deductions for filers with higher incomes, at 8:25 p.m. With more than 1.4 million votes counted, nearly 65% of voters had cast a ballot in favor of Proposition LL, and 58% voted in favor of Proposition MM.

Both measures were by the Colorado General Assembly earlier this year. Together, they will shore up funding for Healthy School Meals For All, a state program that provides free breakfast and lunch to all students regardless of their family鈥檚 income level.

鈥淭hank you to every voter, volunteer, community partner, and endorsing organization who turned out to pass Propositions LL and MM, ensuring every child in Colorado can continue to get a healthy meal at school,鈥� Joe Kabourek, campaign manager for the Keep Kids Fed Colorado campaign, said in a press release. 鈥淧ropositions LL and MM will keep kids fed in school, leading to better grades, higher graduation rates, and better outcomes for Colorado students.鈥�

Colorado voters approved a to create the program three years ago. It was funded by limiting income tax deductions for filers earning over $300,000 per year. The program鈥檚 funding mechanism raised more than expected in the 2023-2024 fiscal year, but its costs also exceeded projections, resulting in a budget gap that rose to roughly $50 million this year.

Proposition LL will allow the state to keep the $12.4 million in excess 2023-2024 revenue that would otherwise be returned to voters under the 1992 state constitutional amendment known as the Taxpayer鈥檚 Bill of Rights.

Proposition MM aims to permanently fund the full program by further limiting tax deductions for filers earning over $300,000 a year. About 194,000 Coloradans in that high-income category would pay an average of $486 more in income taxes yearly, according to nonpartisan state fiscal analysts.

Keep Kids Fed Colorado reported $739,200 in contributions since June, mostly from the nonprofit Hunger Free Colorado. The measures were endorsed by a long list of organizations including Children鈥檚 Hospital Colorado, Great Education Colorado, Mi Familia Vota, Rocky Mountain Farmers Union and Save the Children Action Network. The measures did not draw an organized opposition campaign.

During a special legislative session in August, Colorado lawmakers to allow the additional revenue to be spent on broader efforts to reduce food insecurity, once the Healthy School Meals For All program鈥檚 costs are covered. That would help the state partially offset the impact 鈥� estimated at up to $170 million annually 鈥� of reduced funding and higher administrative costs for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, as a result of  in July.

鈥淲hile we celebrate this victory for Colorado kids and families, we also cannot ignore that, for thousands of Colorado families, this remains a time of deep economic hardship and food insecurity, made worse by USDA鈥檚 refusal to provide full funding for SNAP and the devastating cuts to SNAP Congress approved this past summer,鈥� Anya Rose, director of public policy at Hunger Free Colorado, said in a statement.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Colorado Newsline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Quentin Young for questions: info@coloradonewsline.com.

They can in the General Assembly. They can drive a car. They can . They can consent to , or . They can in a week and pay taxes on these earnings. They can put that money in a they鈥檝e opened.

These are some things 17-year-olds can do in Rhode Island, and a few apply to 16-year-olds as well. A recent pair of bills brought to the State House would give older teenagers one more privilege: the ability to vote in elections for their local school committees.

鈥淪tudents go to the meetings, they can talk at the meetings, they can give all the ideas that they want,鈥� said Henry Siravo, 17, a senior at Smithfield High School. 鈥淏ut at the end of the day, how often do they get listened to? We get brushed off as kids.鈥�

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

A pair of bills sponsored by two Democratic lawmakers 鈥� by Rep. Leonela Felix of Pawtucket and by Sen. Tiara Mack of Providence 鈥� would make it harder to brush off kids.

The identical bills do not mandate any statewide changes. They would create the statutory outline to allow 16- and 17 year-olds to vote in school committee elections, but the key phrase in the bills鈥� language is that municipalities 鈥渕ay provide鈥� this privilege 鈥� it wouldn鈥檛 be required. Additional stipulations are that the 16- or 17 year-old would have to be a resident of the municipality for at least 30 days, and register at least 30 days before the school election itself.

鈥淲e always talk about people not being engaged in elections as adults,鈥� Felix said in a phone interview. 鈥淲hat better way to get them engaged than starting early?鈥�

Siravo started early: He originally became involved with Young Democrats of Rhode Island, who have also pushed for the current legislation, after he rallied against the Smithfield School Committee in 2023, who were considering a disclosure policy that could potentially out transgender and LGBTQ students to their parents.

鈥淚 organized over 100 students, but mostly parents, teachers and just community members to come out against that, because as powerful as the testimonies of the students were, they didn鈥檛 vote. They didn鈥檛 get to hold them accountable at the ballot box,鈥� Siravo said.

鈥淲e really don鈥檛 have financial power to donate to candidates,鈥� Siravo continued. 鈥淭he bare minimum that we鈥檙e asking for is a voice, so that we can say, 鈥業f you slash our department funding, if you make school really hell to go to 鈥� we鈥檙e gonna vote you out.鈥� Right now, we don鈥檛 have that voice. We don鈥檛 have that say.鈥�

The legislation mirrors efforts in other states to see youths represented in electoral processes. Maryland state law leaves it up to municipalities to lower the voting age for local elections 鈥� and the city of enacted their youth voting legislation over a decade ago in 2013 when they approved 16-year-olds鈥� participation in local elections.

Earlier this year in Newark, New Jersey, municipal officials OK鈥檇 16-year-olds鈥� votes in school committee elections 鈥� although Chalkbeat in February that the law wouldn鈥檛 be in effect until 2025 because of voter registration issues. KQED that Berkeley and Oakland passed measures allowing 16-year-olds to vote but that the law hasn鈥檛 been satisfactorily enacted yet either.

Meanwhile, campaigns similar to Rhode Island鈥檚 are underway in Michigan, Hawaii, Illinois and Massachusetts as well as a number of California cities, according to advocacy organization . A successful passage of youth voting laws in New York that will take effect by July 1, 2024, has led the to offer guidance on the rollout.

Data from the shows that 18 is the standard voting age for many countries, although suffrage begins earlier in some places than others. Nicaragua, Cuba and Austria provide universal suffrage starting at age 16. Estonia and Germany allow 16-year-olds to vote in some local and state elections. If you鈥檙e 16 and employed, you can vote in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Argentina and Brazil up the ante by requiring citizens ages 18 to 70 to vote in elections or face fines and penalties 鈥� but 16- and 17 year-olds can voluntarily vote, too.

At the March 26 hearing of Felix鈥檚 bill in the House Committee on State Government and Elections, two Republicans and one Democrat were unconvinced. Rep. Brian Newberry, a Smithfield Republican, worried about students having say over municipal bodies who make budgetary decisions.

Rep. Patricia Morgan argued against 16-year-olds鈥� mental readiness to vote. 鈥淎t the age of 16, they really are not adults,鈥� said Morgan, a West Warwick Republican. 鈥淎nd they don鈥檛 have that capacity. As much as whatever, you know, research you got, it鈥檚 just not true.鈥�

Rep. Arthur Corvese, a North Providence Democrat, was more specific in his criticism: 鈥淚 don鈥檛 buy that the same individuals who would support allowing teenage and young adult murderers to either get out of jail or have a reduced sentence because of their inability to understand what they did 鈥� but you want 16-year-olds to vote in elections? I鈥檓 sorry.鈥�

Felix told Corvese that cognitive processes involved in crime and voting are hardly the same. Comparing impulse decisions like crime is entirely different from the decision making they would use at the ballot box, she suggested.

鈥淭he research has shown that youth, when it comes to non-impulsive behavior, they鈥檙e just as rational as adults,鈥� Felix said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 astonishing to me to hear folks talk about that.鈥�

The Secretary of State Gregg M. Amore supports the legislation, offering a few reasons why youth voting is worth considering.

鈥淯ltimately, we believe that our youth should be directly engaged in their communities and in the democratic systems and structures that govern them so that they become lifelong citizens and active participants in our democracy,鈥� Amore wrote in a submitted in support of Felix鈥檚 bill.

Potential issues with the bill involved ballot preparation and implementation, but Amore noted his office would be happy to help tweak the law and make it more logistically viable.

Both Felix鈥檚 bill and Mack鈥檚 have been held for further study since their respective hearings in House and Senate committees.

Larry Berman and Greg Par茅, spokespeople for the House and Senate respectively, offered a statement via email.

鈥淭hese bills were heard in their respective Senate and House committees earlier this session,鈥� they wrote. 鈥淭he Senate President and Speaker will be reviewing the testimony and communicating with the chairpersons as part of the normal committee review process.鈥�

This is the second year Rhode Island鈥檚 General Assembly has seen this legislation, said Mary-Murphy Walsh, the president of the Young Democrats of Rhode Island. But the idea is still young.

鈥淚 think next year might be easier considering all the other priorities that the legislature has,鈥� Felix said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Rhode Island Current maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janine L. Weisman for questions: info@rhodeislandcurrent.com. Follow Rhode Island Current on and .

Gonez, who raised $500,000 and major endorsements including the United Teachers Los Angeles,  last month, garnering 51.27% of the vote. Marvin Rodr铆guez, an LAUSD teacher of 17 years with no previous political experience or major endorsements, raised just over $11,000 and trailed closely behind with 48.73%. In a message to his supporters, he  last week.

LAUSD parents, politically active Angelenos and education policy experts have suggested several reasons why Gonez鈥檚 Board District 6 win was so narrow, including her support from charter advocates and dissatisfaction with mask mandates, lengthy school lockdowns while Gonez served as school board president. 

Many of the reasons trace back to a shared theme 鈥� that her clear advantages may not have worked fully to her benefit. It鈥檚 the money that supported her and her experience on the school board that turned off some voters.

鈥淭he most interesting thing is, this is a situation where she鈥檚 getting fire from both her left and her right,鈥� said Rob Quan, an activist and founder of Unrig LA. 

On the left, Quan said, there are those who are more inclined to support public schools and had concerns about Gonez鈥檚 position on charter schools. On the right, he said there have been two primary concerns 鈥� her  and  to scale back police presence in LAUSD schools. 

The anonymous founder of LA Parent鈥檚 Union (@UTLAUncensored), a parent advocacy group with nearly 5,000 followers on Twitter, said the group endorsed Rodr铆guez because 鈥渉e鈥檚 an outsider, right?鈥� 

鈥淪o many people in L.A. are feeling like a career politician and the establishment is really just looking out for their own next seat and to keep their group in power,鈥� the founder said.

They also said that for many parents in Board District 6, support for Gonez dropped when she voted to reduce school police. Many parents saw it as a threat to their childrens鈥� safety 鈥� a type of 鈥減olitical grandstanding鈥� they also saw in her leadership through one of the longest Covid-19 school closures and mask mandates in the nation, UTLAUncensored said. 

Wavering faith in Gonez鈥檚 alliance with the people stemmed from her hefty funding, too. 

Billionaires Reed Hastings, the founder of Netflix, and businessman Bill Bloomfield,  of both Kelly Gonez and Nick Melvoin (who was re-elected to represent Board District 4) through the PAC Kids First. 

鈥淚 do think voters are paying attention more and more to who is supported financially by the people and who is financially empowered by the very rich,鈥� said Kris Rehl, who voted for Rodr铆guez. 鈥淚 believe that Marvin Rodr铆guez wants to be on the LAUSD board because he wants to make the lives of students and teachers better. I can鈥檛 say that I think Kelly Gonez is only running for this position for those same reasons.鈥�

Gonez鈥檚 support from pro-charter advocates, like Hastings, as well as her support from the California Charter School Association in 2017, when she was initially elected to the seat, has some skeptical about her resolve in holding charter schools accountable. 

Although Gonez, a former charter school teacher, has attempted to distance herself from the stance of her pro-charter donors in interviews, apprehension remains. Rehl said the primary reason he voted for Rodr铆guez was his strong anti-charter stance. 

鈥淚 really feel like LAUSD needs bold leadership that doesn鈥檛 cave into special interests like the charter school association, and I鈥檓 a strong supporter of UTLA, so I was really disappointed to see UTLA endorse Kelly Gonez, who in the past has been pretty friendly to the charters,鈥� said Arturo Gomez, a tenant defense attorney.

The Board District 6 race was not the only LAUSD election where the politics of public school versus charter schools came to a head. In the Board District 2 race, candidates Roc铆o Rivas and Maria Brenes, who ran on similar platforms, vied to represent parts of central and east L.A.

Rivas, who was backed by UTLA and has been more outspoken in her anti-charter stance, won with 52.49% of the votes. Brenes, backed by SEIU Local 99 鈥� LAUSD鈥檚 second biggest union 鈥� as well as Bloomfield and Hastings鈥� PAC, had 47.51% of the votes. 

Gomez said he voted for Rivas because of her stance on charter schools: 鈥淚 wasn鈥檛 a big fan of Brenes who seemed to have backing from a lot of charter adjacent organizations,鈥� he said. 

On Nov. 23, Rivas took to Twitter to declare her victory, tweeting that 鈥減eople power wins over billionaire money.鈥� 

鈥淗er message was certainly tapping into a bit of the charter school narrative, that this was charter school money trying to defeat her and that public schools won,鈥� said USC Rossier professor Marsh. 鈥淭his has happened in the past in LA Unified, that when outside money comes in, or money that鈥檚 perceived to be on one side or the other, sometimes it actually does the opposite and motivates some voters to say 鈥榳e鈥檙e not going to let this money influence how we vote.鈥欌��

Marsh added that both the District 2 and District 6 elections show a continuation of elections 鈥渂eing a proxy war鈥� for teachers unions and charter interests. She also pointed to another takeaway that stood out to her from the November election. 

鈥淛ust because you have the funding doesn鈥檛 necessarily mean you鈥檙e gonna win the votes,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hat stands out to me in both of these races.鈥�

This article is part of a collaboration between 蜜桃影视 and the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.

While 82% of parents said they are very or extremely likely to vote in the election, just 14% called K-12 education a top concern 鈥� well below the economy (53%) and slightly behind abortion (21%) and health care (17%).

Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union, the advocacy group that sponsored the poll, said the numbers reflect parents鈥� hunger for change.

鈥淲e have moved into a position where we鈥檙e not going to be ignored,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e’ve seen too much.鈥�

, experts began seeing that parental outrage over closed schools, COVID protocols, and district handling of race and gender issues had given way to more immediate concerns about groceries and rent. While almost two-thirds of parents say the quality of their local schools still affects their family, 86% are more troubled by 鈥渢he rising cost of everyday purchases.鈥� 

鈥淚t’s understandable that inflation would dominate voter concerns since they encounter it every day,鈥� said John Bailey, an advisor to the Walton Family Foundation and a fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. 鈥淭hese extra costs will crowd out other spending for the kids like afterschool programs and summer camps.鈥�

Just a third of parents said they know a lot about where House and Senate hopefuls stand on education. In fact, they鈥檝e heard less about schools than any other topic. 

That doesn鈥檛 mean that parents no longer care about politicians鈥� plans to improve schools. On poll questions related to education, Rodrigues noted that fewer parents are blaming the pandemic for low academic performance. They are more focused on fundamental questions about whether schools can prepare students for the future and deliver an adequate education. 

鈥淭he tide is turning,鈥� she said.

Sixty-two percent of parents said they are very or extremely concerned about schools鈥� ability to provide quality teaching and instruction, compared with 55% who feel that way about schools鈥� handling of learning loss. 

Congressional candidates might not be talking about education, but it鈥檚 still a prominent issue for gubernatorial candidates, with Republican incumbents such as Florida鈥檚 Ron DeSantis and Oklahoma鈥檚 Kevin Stitt blaming Democrats and their union supporters for long school closures, mask mandates and classroom lessons they say confuse students about race and gender. They鈥檝e sought to portray themselves as the party most concerned with parents鈥� rights. 

At least one organization is drawing attention to conservative policies some Republicans have proposed or supported, such as banning transgender students from participating in sports and restricting what students read in school. Last week, , a nonpartisan group, announced it鈥檚 spending $300,000 on ads in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Missouri. 

The Pennsylvania ad focuses on a district banning books and the Missouri spot calls out a school board member for comments about transgender students and students with disabilities. But the Ohio ad denounces a bill that would require female athletes to undergo a genital inspection if they were suspected of being transgender. Following a backlash, lawmakers the language. The state board of education is also considering urging districts not to comply with the Biden administration鈥檚 plans to extend federal protections against discrimination and harassment to transgender students. 

鈥淎cross the country, families and students are being failed by extremist politicians who care more about pushing divisive culture wars than providing a high quality age-appropriate education,鈥� Heather Harding, the organization鈥檚 executive director, said in a statement.

鈥業ndifferent and unresponsive鈥�

The campaign was formed to combat efforts by groups such as Moms for Liberty and the 1776 Project PAC, which have mobilized to elect conservative school board members. And over the summer, polls suggested that Republicans were gaining an edge with voters on education. 

But this latest survey 鈥� based on a sample of 1,022 registered voters with school-age children 鈥� shows Democrats could be regaining voters鈥� trust as the disruptions of the pandemic slowly fade.

Forty-one percent of respondents said they have more faith in Democrats to handle the challenges facing K-12 schools, compared to 29% who chose Republicans. Rodrigues said those earlier polls didn鈥檛 focus specifically on parents. Even if they don鈥檛 always approve Democrats鈥� decisions, if the question is who parents think can 鈥渢ake us into the future on education, Democrats still have that lead,鈥� she said.

The overall sample of parents leans to the left, with 51% saying they would probably or definitely vote for Democrats and 40% choosing Republicans. 

But a year ago, that might have been different, Bailey said. 

鈥淭his time last year, parents were still juggling school quarantines, which in some ways were more disruptive than school closures,鈥� he said. Either way, a 鈥渃ommon theme is that parents are frustrated by a system they think is indifferent and unresponsive to their needs.鈥�

Disclosure: John Bailey is an adviser to the Walton Family Foundation, which provides financial support to .

As analysts dissect the data from a political race they may try to lump all parental choice supporters into the same messaging box. To be clear, we are not one monolithic voting bloc who disagrees with a fair accounting of our country鈥檚 history being taught to our children. We do want our children to learn about slavery and the ongoing effects of racism.

There are people out here who believe the school environment that is best for their child is one in which Toni Morrison novels are not part of the curriculum. And that鈥檚 fine. They can have their choice, just like we can have ours. However, my plea to my friends in the education reform movement is do not allow a highly respected, well-regarded, and, in many ways, revered author in the Black community to be demonized as a political hot potato.

I implore those of us in the parent choice community to make it abundantly clear that we stand for parents having the right to choose and educators having the power to create curriculums that tell the truth in ways that will empower our children to be braver than we were, poised and prepared to take on the future because they have learned about their ancestors鈥� past.

This year鈥檚 political campaigns would have you believe that parent choice advocates side with one political party over the other, simply because our interests converge over public charter schools. That is simply not true. Let鈥檚 not let politicians twist our advocacy to best fit their needs.

As a Black parent and leader of the Freedom Coalition for Charter Schools, it is very clear to me that education choice is a winning political platform and sound policy. Our coalition is an organization that currently has 250 organizational members across 21 states that collectively serve more than 1 million Black and Brown families. We believe in parents having the freedom to choose the best schools for their children, regardless of their income or zip code. We fight for these liberatory freedoms every day. 

We cannot allow parent choice to be muddied by the voices out there arguing against CRT, especially considering they are at best unaware that it is an academic theory that is being discussed in graduate schools and at worst, using this as a proxy argument against children learning about the honest history of our country.

I am one who believes that children will be better citizens if they learn both the dark and beautiful facts that make America the promising country that it is.

RaShaun Kemp is the executive director of the Freedom Coalition for Charter Schools, which promotes public charter schools and chartering to advance and protect the right of self-determination for Black and brown people.

From top to bottom, our governing institutions have been significantly eroded by on the of our , the growing influence of , conservative , of governing norms, legislative processes, and a bevy of other worrying trends. 

The depth and breadth of the problem are most visible at the elemental level, where the American democratic spirit is ostensibly most fervent: our thousands of school boards. These little local legislatures have been revered as cornerstones of American democracy . In theory, they provide local schools with democratically elected leadership that is maximally responsive to local needs and the public interest.

And yet, the has brought where local school board have into screaming matches with threats of violence over issues both (e.g. ) and/or (e.g. over or ). Things have gotten that the National School Boards Association , asking for the federal government to do more to protect elected local leaders from . Rather than calming the waters, this just prompted further outrage 鈥� particularly from conservative politicians in Washington, D.C. who cast it as an assault on parents鈥� free speech 鈥� and from the NSBA. 

Problems like these are why, in recent decades, some major cities 鈥� places like Washington, D.C., Chicago, , and New York City 鈥� moved away from elected school boards. The idea had a three-part theory of action: 1) it makes school governance more coherent by unifying control of city schools under mayoral leadership, 2) it insulates education decision-makers from political pressure and 3) it gives mayors a reason to prioritize school funding and improvement. 

The returns from this experiment have been largely encouraging. According to , Chicago schools are 鈥渄ramatically outperforming not just the other big poor districts, but almost every district in the country, at scale.鈥� Research on public schools in D.C. 鈥� 鈥� has also found . 

And yet, , the mayoral control in cities has faced from a cacophony of claiming that returning public education to school board control would an elemental part of U.S. democracy 鈥� representative government at its most profoundly local level. 

As the country wrestles with a national crisis of democracy, it seems odd to focus outrage and energy towards shifting local school governance from the control of elected mayors to elected school boards 鈥� precisely at a moment when school boards across the country are providing daily proof of their weaknesses as institutions. 

Aside from the novelty of , there is nothing particularly exceptional about this latest spate of outrage. Remember the furor a few years ago over how the Common Core State Standards were ostensibly going to push schools to conduct mass retinal scans, promote student promiscuity and advance the cause of global communism? Sure, school board meetings are often sleepy for months 鈥� even years 鈥� but whether it鈥檚 or or or or , periodic eruptions of dysfunction are pretty much a given.

And those are just recent examples. . School boards have long been complicit, for instance, at designing and maintaining racist, inequitable structures in public education 鈥� including decades of segregated schooling. Who did Oliver Brown and his fellow plaintiffs have to sue to begin the long, slow, difficult, haphazard work of integrating American schools? . It was the same in Washington, D.C., where Spottswood Thomas Bolling . Indeed, over and over again, the required (and still regularly requires) 鈥� and appealing to a higher authority over 鈥� local school boards.

It鈥檚 a reliable rule of education politics: elected school boards are almost always most responsive to vested and/or interests in their communities. Consider, for instance, the Los Angeles Unified School District. For most of the last decade, their school board has faced criticism from experts, from community groups, and pressure from the to focus more resources on historically marginalized communities. And yet, nonetheless, the board has to away from those communities. School boards 补谤别苍鈥檛 designed to prioritize the less powerful, organized and noisy.

So 鈥� why, in light of significant educational progress in places that have experimented with other forms of school governance, is it suddenly so important to shift more power to local school boards? Notably, pushes in this direction in Chicago and . have sparked as are . In , at least, a move away from mayoral control would almost assuredly strengthen the voices of white, privileged voters 鈥� who would have a better chance of swaying the outcomes of a handful of , ward-by-ward school board elections than the citywide mayoral race.

Indeed, what constitutes a democracy? Can it really be reduced to whether the public elects a mayor or a board to run the schools? Of course not. Institutionally speaking, modern democratic governance requires choosing leaders through regular, free, and fair elections 鈥� but it also requires the expertise of civil servants and other experts chosen by those leaders. That鈥檚 why, for instance, we don鈥檛 hold a national referendum every time the Mine Safety and Health Administration wants to adjust its regulations, nor do we establish elected panels to determine how much radium is safe to drink in our water supply. 

So: you should absolutely be concerned about the state of U.S. democracy. It cannot long sustain when voting rights are selectively narrowed to grant partisan advantage, or when bills with majority support in both houses of Congress are regularly filibustered dead, or when lawmakers efforts to a on the .

But if you鈥檙e looking for a way to ensure that our schools have elected leadership that鈥檚 fair, equitable and democratically accountable, school boards pretty obviously 补谤别苍鈥檛 the way to go. 

If this video isn鈥檛 playing,聽click here to watch.

鈥� Edited by James Fields

鈥淵ou better grow eyes in the back of your head,鈥� she said one person wrote in an email. 鈥淵ou鈥檙e going down,鈥� wrote another.

Toy-Dragoni said the vitriol began to intensify after the pandemic shuttered classes at the Pennsbury School District in Bucks County. What began as anger over school closures and mask mandates quickly turned 鈥� amid national pushback to critical race theory 鈥� to outrage over the district鈥檚 diversity and equity efforts. A barrage of hateful and violent emails left Toy-Dragoni, the school board president, feeling harassed and threatened, including by people who lived in other states.

鈥淚t鈥檚 unnerving because someone is saying they want nothing but harm to come to you and they鈥檙e emailing you 30 times about it,鈥� she told 蜜桃影视. 鈥淵ou start to think 鈥榃ell, how long are they going to wait for this harm to come to me?鈥欌��

As public education leaders from across the country come forward with stories about receiving death threats amid political strife over the pandemic and classroom lessons on systemic racism, a partisan feud has coalesced around the free-speech rights of infuriated parents. In a recent letter, the National School Boards Association warned of an 鈥渋mmediate threat鈥� against school leaders and called on the Biden administration to clamp down on what it referred to as 鈥渄omestic terrorism.鈥� In a follow-up memo, Attorney General Merrick Garland instructed federal law enforcement to create a plan to combat a 鈥渄isturbing spike鈥� in threats against school board members. Republican lawmakers and conservative advocacy groups, meanwhile, have accused the Biden administration of stifling frustrated parents in violation of the First Amendment. 

The issue has highlighted a tension between ensuring school board members are safe while protecting the free-speech rights of aggrieved citizens.

Because of the Justice Department memo, parents are afraid to speak up at school board meetings due to a 鈥減oisonous chilling effect,鈥� Sen. Chuck Grassley, Republican of Iowa, said during a Senate hearing Wednesday. And while the national school boards group has since used in its letter, Garland didn鈥檛 back down on efforts to investigate what he called an increase in violent threats against educators and other public servants. 

As the Senate hearing was underway, activists held a rally outside the national school board group鈥檚 headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia.

A spokesperson for the national school boards group declined to comment. Several state school boards groups, including the one in Pennsylvania, over the issue.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a rising tide of threats of violence against judges, against prosecutors, against secretaries of state, against election administrators, against doctors, against protesters, against news reporters,鈥� Garland said. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 the reason we responded as quickly as we did.鈥�

A 鈥榯rue threat?鈥�

The Constitution doesn鈥檛 guarantee 鈥渁 dialectical free-for-all,鈥� and the Supreme Court has long held that true threats of violence are not constitutionally protected speech, said Clay Calvert, the director of the Marion B. Brechner First Amendment Project at the University of Florida. But the issue at hand, he said, isn鈥檛 鈥渂lack and white.鈥�

鈥淭here鈥檚 a difference between how we colloquially think of a threat versus the legal standards for what really is a threat, which are going to be much higher,鈥� he said. 

Parents have a First Amendment right to criticize government employees through offensive speech, he said, and officials must analyze on a case-by-case basis whether someone鈥檚 speech goes beyond protected dialogue.

鈥淎 true threat is a statement that would place a person in fear of imminent bodily harm or death,鈥� he said, but does not include 鈥減olitical hyperbole.鈥� In a 1969 case, the Supreme Court who was arrested after he said that if he were drafted into the Vietnam War and forced to carry a rifle, 鈥渢he first man I want to get in my sights鈥� is then-President Lyndon B. Johnson. The statement was crude political hyperbole rather than a true threat, the court ruled. The line between true threats and hyperbole, Calvert said, are not always clear and the Supreme Court has yet to offer a concrete definition. He said that police often err on the side of silencing speakers in the interest of public safety and debating the issue in court later.

Meanwhile, police departments are 鈥渁lways walking the tightrope鈥� when investigating whether someone鈥檚 statements go beyond those permitted by the Constitution, said attorney John Driscoll, a former New York City police officer who served 11 years as head of the NYPD Captains Endowment Association. Officers are in charge of preventing immediate threats and most departments employ legal experts who determine whether someone broke the law, he said.

鈥淵ou can voice your opinion, even if you鈥檙e the only one who thinks that way, but you don鈥檛 have the right to physically threaten and intimidate people,鈥� said Driscoll, who taught constitutional law at NYC鈥檚 John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He said the tense political environment has made it more difficult for officers to do their jobs. 鈥淏ecause of social media, the schism in the country has gotten a lot more extreme on both sides. There doesn鈥檛 seem to be too much moderation and police, as usual, are stuck in the middle trying to navigate this and protect people at the same time.”

But Toy-Dragoni, the Pennsylvania school board president, said the statements she鈥檚 faced reached the bar of being considered death threats and were clearly designed to incite intimidation. Among the messages, she was warned to 鈥渟leep with one eye open,鈥� and that 鈥渨e will never stop until you are done.鈥�

鈥淚t鈥檚 a level of hate, it sets you on edge,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut did they straight up say 鈥楴ext week I鈥檓 going to kill you?鈥� No. But I鈥檝e never heard of anyone saying that to anyone ever, even when they do get killed by that person.鈥�

Threats reported nationwide

The messages delivered to Toy-Dragoni are part of a national trend. School board members have reported receiving threatening letters, being followed and screamed at in board meetings. 

After Las Vegas school district employees were mandated to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, the school board president saying she should be hanged or shot. In New Jersey, two board members in the mail with their photos in the crosshairs of a gun.

Sami Al-Abdrabbuh, chair of the Corvallis Board of Education in Oregon, also highlighted several incidents this year that he perceived as death threats. On the same day his campaign sign was discovered at a local shooting range with bullet holes, he said a man showed up outside his friend鈥檚 house and asked 鈥淲here is Sami? I want to kill him and I鈥檓 going to kill you if you don鈥檛 tell me where he is.鈥�

Local police were notified of the incident but have not arrested a suspect, Al-Abdrabbuh told 蜜桃影视, and a friend who served in the Navy helped him develop a safety plan.

鈥淢ake sure, before you leave the house, look from the window and make sure you can go to your car,鈥� he said. 鈥淏efore I enter my house I have a way to make sure nothing has been tampered.鈥�

Protests in other communities have grown so raucous that they prevented school boards from conducting official business. That energy and activism is being harnessed by conservatives and Republicans, particularly Virginia gubernatorial candidate Glen Youngkin, who has with Democrat Terry McAuliffe in next week鈥檚 election.

In , Calvert of the University of Florida called public comments at government functions like school board meetings 鈥減erhaps the purest form of citizen political expression鈥� 鈥� the precise speech the First Amendment sought to protect. The Constitution doesn鈥檛 enshrine a public platform before school boards and other public bodies and they can impose certain rules so long as they鈥檙e 鈥渃ontent neutral鈥� and apply to all speakers evenly. For example, 鈥渢ime, place and manner鈥� restrictions can limit how long speakers occupy the podium and can prohibit people from restricting government bodies from carrying out business. 

鈥淚nterrupting does nobody any good,鈥� Calvert said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 the heckler鈥檚 veto notion that the audience should not have the ability to heckle or drown out the speaker.鈥�

During Wednesday鈥檚 Senate hearing, Republican lawmakers repeatedly noted a concern that the Justice Department memo could have a chilling effect on parents鈥� free-speech rights and that federal intervention was unnecessary. Those concerns mirrored a letter from 17 state attorneys general earlier this month, accusing the Biden administration of 鈥渟eeking to criminalize lawful dissent and intimidate parents into silence鈥� in violation of the First Amendment.

Garland maintained that his memo only focused on threats and violence and drew a clear distinction between such messages and constitutionally protected speech. 

鈥淚t makes absolutely clear in the first paragraph that spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution,鈥� he told lawmakers. 鈥淭hat includes debate by parents criticizing school boards.鈥� 

Education activist Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union, said it鈥檚 important for parents to remain engaged and they must not shy away from making themselves heard at school board meetings. In just the last six weeks, Rodrigues has attended a dozen school board meetings across the country where parents didn鈥檛 focus on mask mandates or critical race theory. Instead, she said they were concerned about unreliable school transportation and food shortages in cafeterias. Yet those voices, she said, are being drowned out by 鈥減eople who are behaving badly and who are exercising their anger in ways that are really unproductive.鈥� 

鈥淧arents have really deep, serious concerns about what is happening right now with our kids that have nothing to do with the culture war,鈥� she said. 鈥淧arents are showing up to have that conversation but it鈥檚 sexier to show white parents that are losing their minds at a microphone. It鈥檚 heartbreaking because we have real, serious and sober work to do to help our kids recover from this pandemic.”

For Toy-Dragoni, parent outrage during the pandemic forced her to reconsider her place in education policy. She said she sought her seat on the school board because she鈥檚 a mother who wanted to create additional afterschool activities in her community but will no longer serve on the board after this year. She decided not to run for reelection after the pandemic prompted parental uproar in her community. But now, after the situation has gotten even worse, she said she regrets the decision to step aside. 

鈥淗aving gone through all of this, I would have run again so that they wouldn鈥檛 feel like they ran me out of town,鈥� she said. 鈥淭his is 100 percent part of a national agenda to get decent people out of local office by making it absolutely miserable for them.鈥�