Episode 31: Former DPS board Vice President Auon'tai Anderson on board member censures, other topics

Transcript

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 0:08

Hi everyone. Today on the podcast we are welcoming Aon Anderson, who served on the board from 2019 to 20 23, 2 of those years as vice president of the Board of Education. During his time on the board, he led many efforts that included things like the no justice, no peace resolution. He led the effort to remove school resource officers from schools back in 2020. As many of you who listen know, I ran and actually lost tete to Ante in 2019. Over the years I've been both aligned with him and some of his policy ideas and resolutions. And also in firm opposition to some of his views as well. Alan and I have people on the podcast with whom we disagree often, and we are fortunate to have a platform where we can get into the weeds and seek to understand our guest perspectives. In a time that is deeply divided, it is more important than ever to have courageous conversations with those with whom you disagree. This past Friday, I'll just say as a point of privilege, I was fortunate to spend my day in professional learning through the Leadership Denver program and heard many wonderful speakers talk about the importance of having courageous conversations. To seek understanding what those you disagree with politically. I was inspired by Dr. Katie Anthes, who was the most recent commissioner of education for seven years to really focus on moving from polarization to progress. And that is what I am committed to do in this conversation. So with that in mind, welcome to the podcast Deante. Thanks for being here.

Auon'tai Anderson: 1:31

Thank you for having me.

Alan Gottlieb: 1:33

I just wanna say welcome as well. And just that you reached out to me after a couple of recent podcasts where we were talking about the John Youngquist Center and other issues, and you said, as the only other board member who has been centered, you had, you'd like to come on the show and share your point of view, which we welcome. So glad you're here and just want you to feel free to go ahead and share that point of view.

Auon'tai Anderson: 1:54

Thank you for having me today. I reached out because there's only one person in 170 years of DPS being in as a institution that knows what John Youngquist is going through, and it's me. And so I wanted to be able to share a perspective. But also to ensure that we point out some of the key contrast. As I have been listening to the folks that are supporters of of Secretary Youngquist and who have tried to. Make comparison and contrast. I want to ensure that we are having a space where we're operating in honesty and not political pundit or poli trying to score political points. And, at the end of the day, dPS having to investigate another one of their board members is a is an unfortunate use of taxpayer dollars. And I can understand the frustration of taxpayers that are sitting by and asking why is this happening? However, the precedent was set and it was set by the current person who is the board president. She was the board president during the first. Investigation in CEN of a board member, and she is the outgoing president of the second investigation. And I'm unsure if the Denver School Board has made a decision yet to vote for cen at this time. But I do know that there is supposed to be a meeting on the 13th where this could come up.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 3:28

You may what are your perspectives on the fact that it was actually the superintendent, Dr. Marro, that was asking for the censure.

Auon'tai Anderson: 3:38

I think that for it to have gotten to that point, it is that means he has had employees express discomfort about their involvement or engagement with Secretary Youngquist. And the superintendent has a duty to protect his employees from anyone that is causing them any sort of harm whether that be psych psychological. Or physical harm. And I believe that he believes he was doing the right thing as an employer. And as a supervisor when his employees are asking him to say, Hey, we have an issue. We have addressed this issue directly with the secretary. We have had these exchanges and this has been the response. It wa from what I understand and reflecting of the superintendent's message, it wasn't a once person a. Said, director Youngquist was disrespectful to me. Therefore, superintendent Morero writes an email and says, all right, this is what I'm gonna do. And at least from my reading of the investigation report, that this was repeated behavior that was addressed on numerous occasions with Secretary Youngquist, both in private and in public. And continued. Thus, what prompted the board to move forward with their process under GP 13, which I was not afforded.'cause the GP 13 was not in a policy that we followed in 2021 as it was not existent. But Secretary Youngquist has had numerous opportunities. From the investigation report to to have his behavior addressed and to atone for it.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 5:18

And for our listeners who don't know, can you just give a quick overview of what GP 13 is?

Auon'tai Anderson: 5:23

Yeah, governing policy 13 is the process in which to address board member violations. So the first process is when a substantial allegation or complaint is made against a board member that it should start with a conversation strike. One should start with a conversation between the board member and that has been alleged of CR doing ex conduct. And the board president. If the behavior continues then you enact step two. Step two would be now the full board of education. We'll have a public conversation at a work session to address the behavior that is still continuing. If the behavior then continues after step one and step two. Step three is for the board to be able to take any reasonable means up to the only thing that they can do is a censure, a public censure. It's a formal disapproval of one's actions. And that is where. The board is currently in their, in their process. And I would say in the step two and a half, that's not written on paper. But that is clearly evident as written is that that giving the board member the opportunity to go through and investigation process if that's what it warrants. But that does come at the expense of the taxpayer.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 6:40

Thank you.

Alan Gottlieb: 6:41

And in your case, a the, there was not the conversations, the investigation as I understand it was launched and was it at the request of board members or I'm just having a hard time remembering the specifics of that, of how it was launched.

Auon'tai Anderson: 6:53

I think we all are still trying to figure out how it was launched. There was never a meeting held. There, there was a complaint lodged on social media in March, at the end of March and the board opens an investigation At the first week of April. There was not a vote to launch set investigation. There still has yet to be. Any sort of meeting minutes or any sort of executive session to discuss the possibilities of going into the 2021 investigation into myself. And there's that process is still I think. Myself, and I think probably even Director Youngquist would ask where is the the timestamps of where these decisions are made? Because in my case, when you're spending a quarter of a million dollars and in Secretary Youngquist case when you're spending 75 plus thousand dollars who's approving that, those funds? Because if the board did not vote to authorize those funds to be spent and to launch that investigation. And somebody just wrote it off and said, this is what we're doing. That gives some dangerous power to an individual as a board president who could potentially be elected and then weaponize their power against board members that have conflicting views or opinions.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 8:06

And I would say it's not even just the board president because I agree with you on that. Also, anybody who wants to make a false claim or allegation against somebody who maybe is a political enemy or who with whom they disagree. So in your case, for example, there was a woman who made what we came to find out was incredibly horrendous allegations against you, which turned out not to be true. In front of a I think a house committee legislative hearing or something. Yeah, legislative hearing. And then from my understanding that is what prompted some of this to begin. In the case of Director Youngquist, obviously it was something with a superintendent, although now those are two different things, but it's still originated with somebody making a claim or feeling some kind of way. I'm very curious to hear your perspective in that moment when you heard that allegation from that woman. How did you feel? I can't imagine.

Auon'tai Anderson: 9:00

So I would just say that, the feeling was gut punching because I was in the middle of a graduation. When that had happened at at one of our schools at a high school and had to get called by, I was getting called by state representatives that were in the hearing. I was getting called by the district that this had been. Maid leveled against me. And, I first I was just like, we all know that we don't keep the documentation.'cause this individual said that there were over 60 plus individuals that arrived on their doorstep, spoke no English, had needed to have medical procedures done on their rectum. And this indivi, they all said that one person had been the perpetrator of. Their said assault, and instead of DPS simply saying. There's, we don't keep the documentation status of any child or of any reporter as simply asking DPS has, director Anderson ever requested any information about a specific student? We then allowed that to become a media headline. And run with it versus addressing the absurdity of the initial claim. And it also took away from the initial reason why we were having this conversation in the first place and allowing us to have a full and fair and independent investigation and to the claims now proven false to that of BLM 52 80. Making their claims against me on a social media platform which again was not properly investigated, sort out sought out whatsoever on their end. It was, we are I'm grateful to the journalism of Yellow Sea Map Magazine. We are working this individual that. Made the complaint of 60 plus was found to have been the person who helped push the first claim as well. And so her hand being in this entire situation was unfortunate and yes. Did this that process, show that I have made poor judgment 100%. And I made sure that I atone for those things that I did. And when engaging with somebody on social media and you don't know everything about them, but when you do learn the full picture of that individual, I did what everybody else should have done in that situation and stopped talking to that person. And. I am just unsure what else folks would have wanted in that situation. The alternative was to learn information and then continue a conversation. But instead I decided to end that conversation with that individual, and then I was the one who went to the investigators. And said, here you go. I want you to see this and see what I did to, so you can see that I made the choice to stop talking to this person.

Alan Gottlieb: 11:56

And ante, just to be clear, you're talking about the 16-year-old DPS student who said you had been flirtatious with her online and that you stopped. She was 16, I think, at the time. And that you're, what you're saying is as soon as you found out that's the age she was, she stopped. You

Auon'tai Anderson: 12:11

stopped this when I was You stopped. You stopped. I stopped when And that, yes. When I was 20 years old in the middle of COVID met somebody online. Engaged in a, in conversation with them. And when I learned their age, I stopped. And it is actually important to note for the record, she didn't, she never once cooperated or went to the investigation. They actually reached out on numerous occasions and she declined to participate. But she never once went to the investigators with that information. It was me who turned over that information.

Alan Gottlieb: 12:40

There. There was one other girl, I think it was 17, who maybe was in Douglas County or something who also had some complaints about you flirting with her. I know she wasn't directly under you because she wasn't a DPS student, but do you feel the same way about that one?

Auon'tai Anderson: 12:54

I was 18 and in a height and in a organization of teenagers. And again, made comments and along with other teenagers that at the time when you look back in retrospect, were they could they have been perceived as flirtatious or overtly flirtatious? 100%. But if that individual would've ever expressed and said, Hey, I don't appreciate, this comment would've corrected it just the way that I did in that high school organization or that out outside of high school organization. Excuse me. When individuals brought and said, Hey, we've had some of these comments or et cetera that have been made specifically by you as our leader of this organization, and we don't necessarily appreciate that my response was a resignation and be holding myself accountable and removing myself from that situation. Be and apologizing to those impacted. And that was done in 20 18. When I, a year after I had graduated from high school. But this the, again the differences between Director Youngquist and I is Director Youngquist has not had been put through the fire that I was put through. They didn't go back to his time at East. They did not go and ask they did not allow that sort of, if a former character employee who. Yes. They did not allow, they did not try to go and have anybody assassinate his character. And I except the

Alan Gottlieb: 14:18

board members, I would argue, I think the board members have assassinated his character. And the other thing is, he offered them he said in his statement, 21, witnesses of people, he's worked with people of color over the his long. Career. And they, and the investigators declined to interview any of them. So he would've welcomed that, at least that's what he said. And they dec declined to do that, and instead basically relied on the testimony of the closest inner circle of Alex Marrero about things that these people said Yitz said or did to them by, that would seem disrespectful or biased. So I'm not sure they

Auon'tai Anderson: 14:51

say within the scope of the investigation. And I I think that is what. The investigators should have done is stayed within the scope of the investigation. The scope of the investigation was not to do, to get testimony about folks outside of Director Young Quista, board service on who about his character. And same, I would say the same situation for me is that. We should have stayed within the scope of my investigation. The investigation was launched on a complaint if I was the perpetrator of an assault of an individual, of a single individual that then turned into sixties, five individuals. And we continued to expand the scope of the investigation. So much so that my teachers when I was in high school, were interviewed in my investigation asking about my character. And so I wish that my. Process would have stayed in the scope of the investigation instead. Hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars were drug out over a series of months because we were d dealing with. Alright, what did Anonte do when he was a senior in high school? What did he do when he was his first year outta high school? What did he do when he was running for school board? And that was, I still will hold. Firm is saying that still was unfair to me, but also unfair to the taxpayers. We should have stayed within the scope of the investigation because once we started veering off, we lost focus on what this, what we were initially seeking, quote, justice for.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 16:16

I think I agree with you on that. And this is what I was trying to relay Alan when we were, I think we were interviewing with Jimmy Se Berger, sorry if I got his name wrong, is if you go back far enough into anybody's history, especially when they're young, you're going to find things. If somebody were investigate me about something that wasn't true and you go back into my high school or my behavior when I was 19 or 20, there's probably things I probably wouldn't have done and regretted doing and would take accountability for. I think where I am struggling is two things. One, we're still talking about elected officials and a andante like I, I agree. Some of the decisions you made, it sounds like you, you took accountability for, and I appreciate your candor here. And you were an elected official. Just because somebody's an elected official doesn't mean, that they aren't subject to some level of critique, I think where, what I struggle with in, in both the DPS situation with the media, and also as I think about just the broader political infrastructure with which we operate, and I'd be curious to get your perspective on this is how different people respond. Along racial lines and I'm sorry to bring it up that way as, but something that you said really stuck with me when you were going through your instance and it was a modern day lynching. Do you still believe that's true?

Auon'tai Anderson: 17:35

Yes. And I believe it's true because I've watched painfully for months, John Youngquist not get any of the attention that I got. And granted our, again, the situations are two different situations, but to have an investigation of a board member again, and we are spending thousands, tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars and. There. We don't have Kyle Clark doing almost every other day segments about it. There isn't a newspaper from the Denver Post article or excuse me, an article in Denver Post every other day about John Youngquist. There isn't there were, I've not seen anybody call for the resignation of John Youngquist. I've not seen the any sort of organized protest against John Youngquist. I'm not sure if John Youngquist has had a death threat. Or have been told he needs to leave hi and leave his, vacate his home because they have received a credible threat against his life, or not being able to see his children for the first six months of their life. Because of the now spotlight put on to to, to him. And people don't understand, like I went through a mental health. Back and forth when that was going on because. Every day I woke up and it was, there was just something new. It was some social media post about me. It was somebody, that I deeply cared for and respected, turning their back or abandoning me. And quite frankly I would say that. John Youngquist did, has not had the, has not had the experience of what it was to be a 20 plus, 21-year-old black man elected to the Board of Education. And I am not, again, I'm not saying that I am above. Making any mistakes and I'm not trying to say and rewrite history and saying that I, am totally never made a mistake and, this was just a witch hunt. But when I look back at John what's happening, what's happened with John Young Quis and what happened to me, man, I wish I would've been able to have the John Youngquist experience throughout all of this. Yeah. Because every single day. I've woke, I've woken up over the last few months and I see even a news article written about him and I'm like, that was a really fair piece. But for me it was speculation if I was essentially a 21-year-old Jeffrey Epstein. And that has not only damaged my career, but it's damaged my reputation and something I continue to have to defend every single day of my life.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 20:15

Thank you for sharing that. As I've talked to people about the contrast between the two investigations some would argue like the details of them are obviously drastically different. One is some would argue more egregious. Others, said more, one is more on policy. I think both still for me come down to the power of an individual to. Make allegations that may or may not be true, and how, to your point, how many taxpayer dollars are spent on that? And then what is the accountability of the party that is accused? So I, I will say I appreciate you sharing what you shared, and I didn't realize that you had turned that information over to investigators yourself. And I don't know if most people know that. So thank you for sharing. Another question. Yeah.

Auon'tai Anderson: 20:52

I would encourage people to, if, I would, sorry to cut you off, but I would encourage people the 96 page report is still readily available. I would go and have folks read it and I would say that one thing that I will, in reflection of 2021, when. Students across the district were preparing to protest against me and me staying on the board. There were several principals that simply just walked into those who were organizing and SIM and gave them the 96 page report and said, you need, you read this for yourself and whatever decision you make thereafter, I will support you and. I know for a fact there were three different schools that had planned mass mobilizations, but principals walked in the room and said, just read the report. You make the decision if you're walking. And those three schools did not walk and even told their principals, they said, we did not know. This about, we didn't know this or that. And I encourage people to still, if they, that's what they choose. I have not read the report since 2021. But I encourage people to go and to do so because I. Was not CD for anything that I was initially accused of, period. I never once had anybody that came to the investigators that said Aon Anderson did exactly what he was what he was accused of by BLM 52 80 or by Mary Katherine Brooks Fleming. Instead, I was CED on. Messages I turned over and admitted that I made poor judgment and stopped communication. I was Ed over a Bugs Bunny meme on Facebook, and I was ed over a post on Facebook that simply said. I will not retaliate in verbatim. I will not retaliate against anybody that participated in this process. However, I do know who who has provided various testimony or who has slandered my name and I will not speak to you. And I have that right. Because they again, caused so much reputational harm and damage to me. That I have the right to not want to speak to somebody, but I made it very clear in the first sentence, I will not retaliate, and those were the three things I was ed for, not about assaulting any individual.

Alan Gottlieb: 23:04

Andante in the, you were talking about the report and the however many pages it is. There are quite a few at least a few pages. One section that, where a lot of it's redacted that nobody's ever seen. I'm sure you have because it's about you. So I would assume they let you see that. Why has that been redacted and would you be comfortable with that coming out or is that stuff it's, it creates a lot of opportunity for. For rumor, and this is all a long time ago now. Probably most people have forgotten about that but that's one thing I'm curious about is like, what's in there and why is it, why was it redacted and would you be comfortable with it coming out?

Auon'tai Anderson: 23:35

No.'Cause I've put 2021 behind me and we all know that Ante's name in the media is simply clickbait. I think we just had that conversation. I have actually never seen the unredacted version of the report. They only provided to my legal counsel the redacted version and said that they were not going to show me the unredacted version. So I have not. Ever once read the unredacted version and I have never requested it. I never once wanted to really go through it. My attorney said that they were not going to give it to me. They did not give it to me. And that's the, and that's the reason. That's the rationale there. I know that there was a con conversation about releasing the unredacted report and we did, my team pushed back on it'cause we were moving forward. And this would again, just only drug more of this nonsense out. If there was something in that redact in the redactions that would've confirmed that I had been. This monster, these people said they would, it would not have been redacted, and these individuals would've turned me over to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to CVI, Colorado Bureau of Investigation and to the Denver Police. And Denver Police had a months long open investigation into this to these allegations, and not one person. Came to them and said, Aon Anderson did this. So I don't know what's behind those black lines. But I know that it, I know that if it were something so incriminating, then they would've released that. I just don't necessarily want to continue to relive that portion of my life.

Alan Gottlieb: 25:02

Okay. That

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 25:03

makes sense. Thank you. So I'm curious to hear from you, ideally, what does due process look like for board members who are accused of something,

Auon'tai Anderson: 25:13

the voters? The voters put us in there. And the voters are the ones who are elect are the ones who will, who choose to take us out. And I think that we saw that this week or this past week, is that the voters made a decision to go one way with the Denver Public Schools Board of Education. And they told two people who I hold very dearly to, to my heart. They told those individuals that they're going home in December. And that I believe is where, our accountability really lies with the voters. If somebody has violated the law, then the police are the ones whom are supposed to take on those sorts of investigations. Because that is where you are afforded true due process under the law. And you will have the opportunity if you if the, there is a preponderance of evidence. That says that you need to be tried for a crime or for this for something, then the, you have the opportunity to fight those sorts of those a, those allegations in a court of law in a jury amongst your peers. But I don't believe that, truly, I don't believe it's the role of the Board of Education to do these inquiries without some sort of. Approval from the voters or some sort of clear system of how these things are pushed forward. Because we still don't know like where is this secret board member investigation fund and how much money is actually in it. I think that's a great question people need to be asking is now how do we, and also I would say that. When do we get to say a board member is going to be investigated? Because in 2021, there were individuals that did make claims against Directors Baldman and Brad lvi in the midst of my investigation. And were told that, oh, these individuals are just right wing conspiracy theorists, so we're not going to give them the same sort of energy that we are currently giving to this process, and DPS has those records. They elected not to look into them and brush them off as conspiracy theorist and crazy Republicans, but it wasn't, again, the same sort of process was not given to the 21-year-old black man that was going through that process as well.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 27:30

Yeah, so I appreciate that comment. And I would also say no elected official is above reproach. Myself, Alan, you we've all criticized elected officials. I think there's, a fine line between what the first amendment is, and then when people go into places where you're making people feel unsafe you're, when you're threatening somebody with their life, when you're threatening their children, like those are obviously, things that, that nobody should be doing, even if they have the First Amendment. My, my question to you is, as somebody who has been critical of other elected officials, what is the role of the electorate or as individuals when you disagree with a board member?

Auon'tai Anderson: 28:12

I think that there I think board members need to open themselves up to having those opportunities where they can have public forums for folks to be able to disagree with them. I think that I was likely the only school board member that had as frequent of town halls. I, I would. Open myself up for coffee at a coffee shop or director Esman. And I literally toured the city. We went through the entire situation that was happening at McCullough and still held open forums for those parents that vehemently opposed us. And there's one thing. You know where it is. Let's have a con constructive conversation in a town hall that where there are, we are able to have those dialogues and it's another for us to have this, unproductive. And I will a, again, take accountability. I'm king king. If we wanna do this over social media, let's do it. But I'm also, but much rather my per preferably, I would actually to just sit down and have the conversation because most of the folks that I've encountered where I've had disagreements with as an elected official. That really, talk the most stuff about me or really degrade my name or my reputation. Nobody, none of them have ever said anything to my face. And we've been in the same spaces same buildings, same meetings, and nobody's ever said, you know what? I want to address this issue with you and let's have this conversation versus let me try to score some likes on social media. And then when somebody responds. It is. Oh, why would you respond like that? You just called me a rapist, so of course I'm going to go from zero to a thousand because we were having a, we are, we're having a conversation and then out, out of this conversation. It's a act of desperation, and we're now gonna throw this wild allegation out there that just is not true. Versus let's have the conversation in person. And I offered that several times to folks that were towards the end of my board tenureship that had opinions about what was going on. And McCullough and I some took me up on it. We had great productive conversations. We still disagreed. Others were just like, I'd rather do the social media war. And there's only so much, and we're also human too. It is like elected officials are also human. Yes, we ran to be public servants. Yes, we are need to be accountable to what we do and say as elected officials, but we still have emotions, the same emotions that normal folks have. We still have families and, our reputations are still very much necessary because elected title, unless you're in Congress, is not a forever job.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 30:50

And Alan, I wanna I know you have one, but I just, I'm dying to ask this follow up and I promise I'll let you and Alan I'm certainly not blameless. I have devolved into the social media fights with people on school board stuff and school board elections. My, my view on social media is it's a great way for people to engage with folks they wouldn't otherwise engage with. But I also worry, especially with the anonymous, like people now posting anonymously, I think it's actually incredibly dangerous. And it's in a lot of ways harm democracy and democratizing information more than it's health. What's your perspective on social media and. In this age. It's such a broad question. I get that. But you are also somebody I would argue who's probably the best position to answer this because you, you harness social media in such a positive way for your, campaign and others as well.

Auon'tai Anderson: 31:39

Yeah I think that folks have seen me really toned down significantly to from when my time was on the board to, being an employee of the district of knowing, when and where. There are definitely some times where I still regress into those very confrontational conversations with folks. But I don't I I would say I agree with. Not having these anonymous comments'cause that is just again, it's, I feel like it's just providing somebody a cape for to be able to make false statements against people without any sort of accountability. And I would just wish that we can find, unless we are like, at we're talking if, let me say this, is that if. We are disagreeing about somebody's humanity. And and you are trying to tell me somebody's humanity is less than the, than, less than what it should be. I don't see, I don't see the net, the need for us to have. A conversation in person. You have already told me you don't believe a group of people should exist. I don't need to talk to you about that, but I do believe that publicly people, for example I don't think I held back on Jeremy Harris when he ran for, while he ran in for school, running for school board. He called a black woman a, an. He talked about banning LGBTQ plus people. He, his campaign was built off of hate. There was no need for me to talk to Jeremy Harris at a coffee shop. Jeremy Harris has shown us who he is and continued to show us who he was without any sort of apology. And therefore, I looked at that as the as a space of, I'm not, I don't need to meet with you. You've already told me this numerous times.

Alan Gottlieb: 33:16

So you're not having dinner with Nick Fuentes like Donald Trump did?

Auon'tai Anderson: 33:20

No, I won't be doing that.

Alan Gottlieb: 33:22

Okay. Ante, I just a quick follow up on one thing, but I do wanna say, I, I really do appreciate the way all through all the years you were on the board and everything and, I think I, I. I know you probably think differently. I think I treated you fairly even when I was critical of you, but you always, even if you were pissed off at me, you always were willing to talk to me and come on. And I, that's something I've always appreciated about you.'cause I think that's how public officials need to be when they're dealing with either commentators or media or whatever. So I, I appreciate that about you. I just wanted to double back'cause you said something about McCall because that is one place where I personally felt like you and probably Scott Esserman and Michelle. Personally felt like you went way over the line making some accusations against Kurt Dennis that were very harsh and that are now I'm, I don't know if you can talk about this or not because they're probably, they're part of his lawsuit, but do you have any regrets about the extent to which you made accusations that seemed not totally born out by the facts as they came out later?

Auon'tai Anderson: 34:17

I, I don't know if I agree with the phrasing of the question. I would say that, okay. I have no regrets. Defending students that were placed in an improper seclusion, which were a violation of policy, I have no regrets of amplifying a voice of an individual who. Wa who reached out and wanted to remain anonymous through that process because they were seeing what was happening. And I have no regrets for voting to terminate Kurt Dennis whatsoever because my vote was on the basis of. We had kids that were impacted by those decisions. And I look forward to the court of law being able to bring, hopefully bring out the testimony of those actually impacted. And I've read that the statements from those students and I know they're protected. So all I can say is I look forward to the rest of the Denver community reading directly. The testimony of the children that were placed in that room.

Alan Gottlieb: 35:17

Okay. And then I have a couple more quick questions that are on different things before we go, Alexis, if if that's okay. And then,

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 35:23

Yeah, on the confinement rooms, I have really mixed feelings on the one hand when that came out. I think confined or a abhorrent, the idea of students being locked in a room. By themselves where they could cause themselves harm and the argument they would cause others harm if they weren't in there. I can app, I can certainly appreciate the pushback against a leader who would use those confinement rooms. And I think as I've gotten to learn more about this situation, I didn't realize how I should say what I've heard is how other principals and other leaders have felt powerless when the district hasn't provided. The supports to train people to take seriously issues when students are maybe causing harm for themselves or others. So for me at least, where I've landed on, on, not necessarily the Kurt Dennis situation, but the confinement room is two things can be true at once. Students absolutely are harmed and in my view, should never be put in that situation. And two, what can also be true is principals and school leaders feel. Like they don't have many other options available to them because the district isn't listening to their pleas for help. So that's all I'll say on that. And feel free to push back, but I think, convey.

Auon'tai Anderson: 36:39

I would just say that in my experience of returning to school since my service on the board of education there has only been one student that has that I have dealt with that needed some extra love and attention, but nothing in my mind as the first person to respond was to. Leave that student in the room alone. And for me it was having conversations, deescalation talks utilizing deescalation tactics and then getting that student to a place where they felt safe enough to walk out of the room and figuring out what is a different location for us to finish this conversation so that other students can get back to their learning. And i've, I will, I can only speak for my experience. I can't not every school leader has the knowledge of what it means to be a school board member. And not every everybody as you're as you're as you stated, has been given or felt as if they've been given the adequate trainings to address those sorts of needs. I would say that for me it was. Patience is, was the biggest thing that helped me through that situation was ensuring that student understood. I'm not going to leave you here alone and I'm not going to allow you to hurt yourself or hurt your classmates. But they just needed somebody that was going to be there and and support them through a hard time.

Alan Gottlieb: 38:02

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Just a couple more quick questions. One more about the sort of whole censure world and then one, I actually wanted to ask you a political question about last week's election. That's our, my follow my final question. The one more related to the censure is that, John Young is being accused basically of treatment. Bias in his treatment of senior staff members of color. When we had Jimmy Seinberg on the show a couple weeks ago, I don't know if you listened to that or not, but he brought up a, an incident when you and Scott Esserman went to Manuel and publicly berated A-J-R-O-T-C instructor and. Accused him of racism. And then a time when you berated staff when they cut off Michelle Quale, Baum's microphone. So not that you should have been centered for those things, but if people are gonna be accusing John of bad treatment of senior staff and two school board members mistreated more junior staff, how do you jive those two things?

Auon'tai Anderson: 38:52

I would say that those situations aren't comparable. The situation of the manual high school JOTC instructor was listening again to students and their impacted stories about an individual who created an environment that chased them out of a program. And specifically the students that were being chased out were black or brown. And those individual, we, there was a community meeting. Around those things and I stood up for my community and I made sure that those students knew that their school board member was going to have their back. When it came to Michelle Alba's mic being cut off, I stood up for a black woman who was being silenced at the time by a individual who was not exercising their power in ways that we have ever seen before as a school board president. I've never seen a school board president silence the mic of another board member because they didn't want to hear what they had to say or believed, or they disagreed with what they had to say that. Is what we see out of Washington DC and the current administration outta Washington, dc That is not a part of our democratic institutions here in Denver. We are better than that. And so I definitely. Stood up for a black woman who was silenced. Did she need me to stand up for her? No. She's a strong, capable black woman. However, I knew that there were, there are women in my life like my grandmother, who is a 35 year plus educator who has taught me never to just sit by and stay stay silent as other board members did when something of an injustice has happened. And so I didn't I wasn't cussing at the staff. I didn't create an environment to where they didn't wanna work with me the next day. And I didn't have any of them file any complaints against me about standing up for Michelle. I think they understood why. I was standing up for Michelle and they were in a shitty position because the board president said to do X and they were following the board President's demands.

Alan Gottlieb: 40:49

Okay. Thank you for answering that. And then the last question is really is just about last week's election. You touched on this ante a while ago, but Scott Esserman and Michelle Qba, who are the two you mentioned that you hold very dear and you're very close to. They were both, pretty soundly defeated in their re-election bids. A as were the incumbents two years ago. What does this tell you about the public's view of how they. And maybe even that whole board that was voted out, I know you didn't run for reelection, so you weren't voted out, you chose not to run again, but what does that just tell you about the sort of hangover that must be out there still about, about what was going on a couple of years ago or how do you explain Other than the fact that they weren't backed by either the DCTA or Denver families. That Scott and Michelle were, so roundly voted out.

Auon'tai Anderson: 41:34

If Scott and Michelle would've earned the endorsement of DCTA, I believe they would've had the same election victory that Sochi Gaitan did, I think last night or last week's election, showed us that the pendulum swung again back to the other side. And those with the union endorsements would ha that would won. And I do think that the voters that voted, for DJ Torres, maybe not all of them, but I think a significant amount of them, enough of them would've voted for Scott Esman as the union candidate. And I do think that those folks that would've voted for Monica Hunter would've overwhelmingly supported Michelle Qba and they would've been cruising into reelection. They lost an endorsement because they stood up to the union. Let me be very clear about that. They told the union in two different areas around this is not what's best for kids. And one was about innovation. I voted with Michelle to protect innovation. I work at an innovation school. I listened to the educators, specifically black women educators at innovation schools in district four with Michelle that said, do not vote for this policy. And they were DCTA employee unionized employees. And so it's unfortunate that Michelle stood up. DCTA said that was the reason why they didn't endorse her that she stood up for black women and black educators and innovation schools because under the innovation plan that was passed that we voted against, would've destroyed Denver Green School and almost shuttered its doors the next and following school year. So we voted against closing two schools in community. That would've been a tremendous loss to Northfield and to central Denver. And they were punished for not being beholden to the union Scott was very clear. He will follow whatever the arbiter says that they should do. In the case of the COLA adjustment he was, he said that in numerous board meetings, so I don't understand why it was a surprise or folks were acting as if they were betrayed when Scott upheld what he said he was going to do. And unfortunately we have to get out of this. Us versus them mentality. I was disappointed that throughout the campaign trail that I saw as just somebody on the sidelines was the, we're going after the old line about charter schools, bad public schools or traditional district run schools. Good. Kids go to both schools that live in Denver. We are a family of schools and my opinion of our family of schools has evolved since being the radical 2019. Candidate that I once was because when I got elected to the board, I visited 90% of our schools and those even in charter schools, those kids wanted just somebody that was going to represent them. They weren't looking for somebody who was trying to destroy their school model. And so it's my hope for the 2027 elections that we can get out of this union versus reform speak, and we can say what's best for kids, what is be, what is working for our children, what is. It. There are district run schools that may be a different color band, a lower color band, but are doing great work for our students. But if we invest in them, you can see some of the results that happened. For example, at Academy 360 when the superintendent wanted to close, it was Michelle kba who led that fight. And said we want to keep a 360 open from the board level. And I was like, great, I'll join you. And they now are, have bounced back and have done everything that they needed to do. I would end with this on this part portion, is that if anybody believes that. They are 100% safe from losing an endorsement one way or the other. They are not the, those individuals that got elected will know that they are going to have to vote to reauthorize several charters that voting against the reauthorization of charters will only put us at odds with the State Board of education and will get overturned. It's not politically smart or or with within the district's best interest. To fight over reauthorizations of charters. They will have to reauthorize several innovation schools they are going to, and that will waive parts of the DCTA contract. So I am appreciative of the campaign jargon that was out there. However, they're going to piss off DCTA and now I will be looking to seeing if DCTA in four years will be willing, or I'll be wanting to throw them out of office over one vote that they disagree with. That's not fair to that individual, but it's also not fair to kids, Scott and Michelle. Like them, hate them. They were avid champions for children. They stood up for kids. And there are times where even me and them have disagreed. And I have told we've had our public, or I mean our disagreements publicly and privately, but at the end of the day, I do believe that if they were reelected, DPS still would've been served adequately and exceptionally by their leadership.

Alan Gottlieb: 46:37

Okay. Ante. Thanks. I know Alexis has one follow up and then I think we're done. Thank, and again, thanks for your coming on. Really appreciate it.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 46:44

Yep. I agree with almost everything you said at the very end. When you said they would be served well if those two had been elected, and I obviously have my bias of who I wanted to be elected. But other than that, I agree with everything you said at the end there and what I will say about Scott, Michelle. And you is, while I may disagree with your tactics and may disagree with your approach to certain things I will say it. I agree that none of you have been beholden to any one power broker in this city, whether it is the union, a reform organization, another elected official, and so I, I applaud the three of you. For staying true to your values and being really clear on where you're at and I do believe that you all are doing what you think is best for kids. So I certainly appreciate that and I would just encourage anybody looking to run for office is make sure you're really clear on who you are and what your values are and what is best for kids, because it's really easy to get pulled in different directions when you get into the seats. And when you're in the races too.

Auon'tai Anderson: 47:46

Yeah. And if I may I would just say that I think that, we are due for a conversation as a community about what is next for DPS because it can't be one side versus the other. We, in my opinion, and I wrote a medium post after the election. We have been through a civil war, in my opinion, in DPS. We've had folks that have had their vested interest in ripping apart the district because of an individual. DPS is not about Alex Marrero. DPS will always be bigger than a superintendent or a board member. And it is up to us as individuals around the city. To fight for the DPS that will be able to get kids to read at grade level, to be able to make sure that we have a family of schools that supports all kids charter innovation or traditional. And we must be a district that upholds the rights of our teachers, but also is the best district when it comes to compensation for hourly workers and our teachers. And that's due for our conversation. And I look forward to having the conversation with voters over the next few years.

Alexis Menocal Harrigan: 48:49

I think that's a great note to end on.

Alan Gottlieb: 48:53

Anderson, thank you once again for coming on the podcast. We appreciate it and I hope we can have you on again sometime. Thanks.

Auon'tai Anderson: 48:59

Thank you.