Misinformation versus morality in Paso Robles schools

November 20, 2025

OPINION by KENNEY ENNEY

Paso Robles Joint Unified School District trustees Jim Cogan and Joel Peterson published an op-ed in the “Paso Robles Daily News” on Nov. entitled “Misinformation hurts our schools and wastes taxpayer dollars,” in which they accused me of “fearmongering and misinformation to scare parents into worrying about the safety of their daughters in Paso schools.”  They accused me of shirking my “fiduciary responsibilities” and engaging in “hate speech” against transgender students.

Their opinion piece highlights what I resigned myself to some time ago, that the PRJUSD Board of Trustees no longer have shared morals.

Following the murder of Charlie Kirk on Sept. 10, and the horrendous post by a part time PRJUSD employee, celebrating his assassination, the board turned a blind eye because it was “free speech.” After several board members even echoed similar sentiments to the post, it was obvious to me that there was no longer any hope of reasoning with them regarding “culture war” matters.

When celebrating a murder is “acceptable speech” because you disagree with the victim’s opinions, but stating that there are only two sexes, or misgendering someone is “hate speech;” we no longer have shared morals.

When you treat a biological male in a dress as normal, and allow him into girl’s private spaces, and then humiliate girls by telling them they need “counseling” and are not “tolerant” if they object to his presence; we no longer have shared morals.

When you think perpetuating the dangerous delusions of vulnerable children is “love,” but that working to ground them in reality is “hate;” we no longer have shared morals.

Meriam Webster defines moral as “conforming to a standard of behavior that is considered right and good by most people.” It defines immoral as “not moral, morally evil or wrong; broadly – conflicting with generally or traditionally held moral principles.”

A Jan. 2025 nation-wide poll conducted by the New York Times found that 79% of Americans believe men should be barred from competing in women’s sports/spaces including 94% of Republican respondents, 64% of Independent voters and 67% of Democrats.

A similar April 2025 poll conducted by Fox News found that 79% of Californians and 71% of parents in California believe boys should be barred from girl’s sports/spaces.  If this poll were conducted in Paso Robles, I suspect the numbers would be similar.

Cogan and Peterson’s unwillingness to protect “traditionally held moral principles” regarding protection of the innocence, dignity and emotional and physical safety of young girls, places them squarely in the immoral camp in this matter. What makes it worse is that they have shirked their moral duties out fear of losing state funding, prioritizing dollars over daughters.

“I, do solemnly swear, that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the State of California, against all enemies, foreign and domestic” is the opening line of the oath every board member took at the beginning of their term. By knowingly violating the Title IX civil rights of the young women in PRJUSD, I believe Jim Cogan and Joel Peterson have broken theirs.

Cogan and Peterson say that the district’s discriminatory practices against girls are supported by U.S. and California law.

Title VI of the U.S. Constitution, also known as the “Supremacy Clause” clearly states that when state and federal laws are in conflict, federal law is supreme. Since his inauguration in January, President Trump has made clear that he and his administration will defend the civil rights of young women and girls as outlined in Title IX.

Through a series of executive orders, and legal actions, President Trump has clearly defined male and female in U.S. law and warned California and other states that “it is the policy of the United States to rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, which results in the endangerment, humiliation, and silencing of women and girls and deprives them of privacy. It shall also be the policy of the United States to oppose male competitive participation in women’s sports more broadly, as a matter of safety, fairness, dignity, and truth.”

Loss of Federal funds for the PRJUSD could equal $5.9 million for fiscal year 2025-2026.

On June 18, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law banning certain medical care for minors related to treating “gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder, or gender incongruence.” In so holding, the Supreme Court acknowledged that a person’s identification as “transgender” is distinct from a person’s “biological sex.” This reinforced the Trump Administration’s position that Title IX only protects individuals based on their “biological sex.”

A subsequent July 9 U.S. Department of Justice federal lawsuit against the California Department of Education (CDE) and California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) alleges “[CDE and CIF] policies and actions are harming girls by denying girls the opportunity to compete in student sports on a level playing field in which they have the same opportunities as boys. Defendants’ athletics policies and practices unfairly force girls to compete against boys in competitions designed for girls. These policies and actions discriminate based on sex and harm female student athletes. Not only do defendants’ policies and actions eviscerate equal athletic opportunities for girls, but they also require girls to share intimate spaces, such as locker rooms, with boys, causing a hostile educational environment that denies girls educational opportunities.”

PRJUSD is guilty as charged.

This raises the question as to what should girls do when they know that their God given rights are being violated by the very elected officials who swore an oath to protect them? According to Jim Cogan and Joel Peterson, they should shut up and take it.

Because I know that this board will take no action to protect the dignity and emotional and physical safety of these young ladies unless forced to do so, I have publicly recommended several options to the families: (1) Withdraw from the district. Not a viable option for everyone; (2) File formal complaints with the district and the U.S. Department of Justice; (3) Take legal action against the district. Advocates for Faith and Family, Liberty Council, Pacific Justice Institute and Thomas More Society are all legal groups that are taking cases like this pro bono; (4) Take civic action. Organize and continue to publicize your plight. Protest. Boycott.

And, ultimately, in 2026, remove the board members like Jim Cogan and Joel Peterson who refuse to stand up to protect you.

Because we believe the public needs the facts, the truth, CalCoastNews has not put up a paywall because it limits readership. However, we are seeking qualification as a paper of record, which will allow us to publish public notices, but it requires 5,000 paid subscribers.

Your subscription will help us to continue investigating and reporting the news.

Support CalCoastNews, subscribe today, click here.