Restoring Parental Rights, Free Speech, and Local Control: Shasta County School Boards Stand Up for Families
The Shasta County Board of Education approves updated non-discrimination policies in a 4–2 vote, establishing a single universal anti-harassment standard while protecting teachers from compelled speech.
REDDING, Calif. — In a decisive move to uphold parental authority, protect educators’ constitutional liberties, and restore common sense to public classrooms, the Shasta County Board of Education has approved a major update to its district non-discrimination policies.
Voting 4–2 during its September 9, 2026 meeting, the board replaced rigid, Sacramento-promoted model rules with a streamlined policy that treats all students equally under a single, universal standard. The updated Board Policy 5145.3 returns deeply personal questions about family values to parents, while protecting classroom teachers from compelled speech and administrative penalties over personal or religious convictions.
“Teach the biology accurately, acknowledge that people hold different beliefs, protect every child's privacy and dignity, and leave deeply personal questions about values and identity primarily to families.”— Shasta County Parent Testimony
The board’s action is part of a broader push for local control across Shasta County. As school trustees work to defend the community's traditional values against legal pressure from Sacramento, local boards are simultaneously solving staffing shortages, safeguarding taxpayer-funded bonds, and maintaining high academic standards for North State students.
A Common-Sense Return to Equal Treatment and Family Authority
For years, local school districts operated under increasingly prescriptive administrative guidelines pushed by the California School Boards Association (CSBA). Those policies created identity-specific rules that mandated employee speech, restricted staff from keeping parents fully informed about their children, and imposed contentious social concepts on public school operations.
The board's newly adopted policy removes categorical divisions, establishing a clear, universal anti-harassment standard that protects every student equally without elevating select demographic groups above others.
The 4–2 vote reflected the board majority’s commitment to academic focus, equal protection, and constitutional liberties:
Michael Orlicky (Board President, Area 1) — AYE: Championed policy streamlining, emphasizing that a unified anti-harassment standard protects the entire student body without creating redundant, identity-based carve-outs.
Jackie LaBarbera (Board Vice President, Area 2) — AYE: Argued that single-category rules create unequal treatment, asserting that a simplified, fair standard ensures dignity and safety for every pupil in district programs.
Authur Gorman (Trustee, Area 2) — AYE: Defended the First Amendment rights of educators, maintaining that public institutions cannot lawfully compel speech or penalize teachers whose religious or personal convictions prevent them from adopting mandated gender terminology.
Teresa Roberts (Trustee, Area 2) — AYE: Affirmed fundamental biological realities, noting that children naturally understand basic sex distinctions and that schools should not guide students toward contested beliefs about gender.
Jessica French (Trustee, Area 2) — NAY: Opposed the change, arguing that explicit definitions were necessary to prevent bullying against specific groups.
Laura Manuel (Trustee, Area 1) — NAY: Voted against the measure, contending that detailed operational directives provide greater procedural direction for staff.
During public testimony, local parents and community members voiced strong support for the board's initiative to refocus classrooms on fundamental academics. Multiple speakers urged the board to draw clear boundaries around family sovereignty.
"Schools should provide age-appropriate education in biology and treat every student with dignity, but they shouldn't be directing children toward a particular belief about gender or keeping important information from parents," one Shasta County resident testified during the public hearing. "Teach the biology accurately, acknowledge that people hold different beliefs, protect every child's privacy and dignity, and leave deeply personal questions about values and identity primarily to families."
Supporters also commended the board for protecting teachers' constitutional freedoms, agreeing with Trustee Gorman that public school staff should never face disciplinary action or termination for honoring their personal and religious beliefs.
While the county administration confirmed that all programs continue to follow basic state and federal legal protections under California Education Code Section 220 and Title IX, the board’s vote establishes a clear local standard that prioritizes family rights and fundamental equality.
Defending Voter Choice and Local Representation
As the county board works to keep local schools aligned with community values, Board Vice President Jaclyn LaBarbera has faced state-level legal scrutiny over her service on local educational panels.
LaBarbera, a parent advocate, was elected to the Anderson Union High School District (AUHSD) Board of Trustees in 2022 and subsequently won an Area 2 seat on the Shasta County Board of Education in November 2024, stepping forward to represent local families on both deliberative bodies.
Political critics and state officials challenged her dual service under California Government Code Section 1099, claiming that serving on both a local high school board and the county board of education presents an incompatible overlap of public duties. Additional complaints were raised regarding her family's relocation outside AUHSD boundary lines.
In response, California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued formal opinions (Opinion No. 26-401 and Opinion No. 26-802) granting legal opponents leave to sue in quo warranto.
Throughout the process, LaBarbera has defended the democratic will of the local voters who elected her. She pointed out that any potential administrative overlap can be handled through voluntary recusals on specific transfer or budget matters, ensuring full transparency.
To avoid costly litigation and ensure a smooth, orderly transition for AUHSD, LaBarbera entered into a pragmatic settlement agreement to conclude her service on the high school board in November 2026, allowing her to dedicate her full focus to countywide educational policy on the Shasta County Board of Education.
The board’s firm stance on institutional accountability has resonated with parents across the Anderson area. At recent meetings, community members urged the AUHSD board to maintain high standards of professionalism among instructional staff, including a formal complaint from a parent asking trustees to address public anti-ICE social media statements posted by a district teacher.
Parents emphasized that public educators must remain focused on academic achievement and objective instruction rather than advancing personal political agendas in the community.
Practical Solutions Across County School Districts
Beyond high-profile policy discussions, school trustees across Shasta County are delivering practical solutions to support classroom instruction, maintain fiscal health, and resolve local administrative hurdles.
In the Enterprise Elementary School District (EESD), trustees took action to address widespread shortages of specialized instructional staff. To protect student learning and fulfill requirements under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the district executed an emergency Memorandum of Understanding with the Enterprise Elementary Teachers Association on August 13, 2026.
The agreement, brought before the board on September 2, provides an extra $50-per-hour incentive for general education teachers who step forward to serve as Individualized Education Program (IEP) case carriers. By using targeted local incentives, the district ensured that students with special needs receive dedicated case management without waiting for state-level hiring pipelines.
In Gateway Unified School District (GUSD), trustees worked to stabilize governance and respect community traditions. While the board previously sought to reflect local faith values by opening public meetings with prayer, trustees demonstrated practical legal responsibility by rescinding the practice after legal challenges were raised under the Establishment Clause, keeping the district focused on classroom operations.
Meanwhile, the Shasta Union High School District (SUHSD) stands as a model of fiscal responsibility and constructive labor relations. Trustees successfully ratified balanced 2026–2027 collective bargaining agreements with the Shasta Secondary Education Association and the Educational Support Professionals Association, introducing updated salary schedules and a 1.5% flex-time payment structure.
Concurrently, the board and its Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee have maintained diligent oversight of the voter-approved Measure M $56.6 million bond, modernizing facilities across Shasta, Enterprise, and Foothill high schools to deliver modern learning environments for local students.
A Stronger Voice for North State Families
The policy updates and governance milestones across Shasta County public schools reflect a broader commitment to local accountability, academic excellence, and family sovereignty.
By establishing a single, fair anti-harassment policy, protecting the First Amendment rights of educators, and keeping parents in the driver's seat of their children’s upbringing, local trustees are ensuring that public schools remain accountable to the communities that fund and trust them.
As school boards navigate outside scrutiny, Shasta County’s elected education leaders continue to demonstrate that putting families first is the most effective path toward educational success.