
- …
- …
2024 Dripping Springs ISD School Board Candidates
In light of ALL FIVE May 2024 DSISD School Board Trustee candidates having disappointingly and publicly indicated that they supported the May 2023 DSISD Bond Proposition in survey responses to Dripping Springs' local Democratic Party Club, CEEDS has again decided against conducting candidate surveys and endorsements/ratings this year.
Remember that the May 2023 DSISD Bond Proposition was virtually identical to—and an even more expensive repeat of—the November 2022 Bond Propositions that were rejected and defeated by the silent majority of our community's voters and taxpayers, who numbered over 10,000 strong. After that widespread and resounding rejection—to pass the May 2023 Bond, DSISD resorted to abhorrent political gamesmanship and the politics-of-division that's inimical to CEEDS' foundational values. So not only is all five May 2024 DSISD School Board Trustee candidates' support of the May 2023 DSISD Bond in direct conflict with the November 2022's bond election mandate of and by a majority of our District's voters, but also in direct conflict with CEEDS' commitment to increasing DSISD's fiscal responsibility and accountability.
Indeed, we at CEEDS are disappointed that NONE of these 2024 school board candidates have the political courage to proudly and resoundingly stand up for and with our community's silent majority of fiscal responsibility and good government voters, and as such, we will not evaluate or recommend candidates based on "lesser/least objectionability."
Unfortunately, this means the DSISD School Board will remain a fundamentally unrepresentative and special-interest driven body of RULERS, not REPRESENTATIVES, for the foreseeable future, and a body in which taxpayers and the majority of our community's voters lack meaningful advocates and true representation. THAT also means DSISD's forthcoming bond proposition(s) will almost certainly be another fiscally irresponsible assault on the pocketbooks of the hardworking taxpayers of our community, and the best interests of students, parents, and teachers!
Additional information on the May 2024 DSISD School Board Trustee Candidates and their positions can be found at the links below.
And while we are not advocating for or against any particular candidate, we will however reiterate the following facts:
- Shanda DeLeon is the only candidate who voiced public concern, if not opposition, to the November 2022 Bond after it was put on the ballot (for instance, HERE).
- Incumbents Mary Jane Hetrick and Stefani Reinold TWICE voted for and supported the most expensive bond in DSISD history.
- Incumbent Mary Jane Hetrick on Election Night 2021 disparaged we at CEEDS and our supporters in implying that anyone who was not among her "supporters" in that election was guilty of fear-mongering, allowing "themselves to get drawn into the mob-like fervor," and even engaging in "insurgency." To date and to the best of our knowledge, Ms. Hetrick has not retracted, apologized for, or even attempted to clarify/roll-back those "victory" statements. Less than a month following Ms. Hetrick's statements that were largely directed at a least a majority of Ms. Reinold's supporters/voters, Ms. Reinold at her first meeting as a DSISD Board Member nominated Ms. Hetrick as DSISD School Board President as one of her, if not her very, first action on the Board.
- Since that surprising and disappointing nomination of Ms. Hetrick, Ms. Reinold has failed to meaningfully attempt, let alone achieve, the vast majority of the campaign representations and commitments she made in our 2021 Candidate Survey—promises that earned her third place in our candidate rankings that year, and our endorsement, which was essential for her successful election to the Board.
- Ms. Hetrick sits on the Board of TASB, which it and its many entities is one of, if not THE, largest vendor of/to Dripping Springs ISD, which is an inherent and irrevocable conflict-of-interest/fiduciary duty.
- Ms. Hetrick is also the only 2018 School Board candidate who failed to respond to our inaugural candidate survey, and she also did not respond to our 2021 candidate survey—both of which are counter to true good-government transparency and accountability.
- John Adams is a de facto Incumbent, due not only to his role as a DSISD Board Member, but also due to his roles in intervening years as former President of the Dripping Springs' Teachers Union as well as his role as former Hays County's Democratic Party Boss/Chairman, where we believe he worked closely with State Representative Erin Zwiener, former DSISD Board President Barbara Stroud, and others to drive policy and decision-making in DSISD Schools, especially as related to COVID-19 protocols/shutdowns/remote learning/masks/etc. So while Mr. Adams may have left the Board roughly a decade ago, been without a seat at DSISD's decision-making table since.
Terri Purdy has publicly advertised her support of both the November 2022 and May 2023 Bond Propositions, as well as that she is proud of her leadership role in the special-interest and DSISD-vendor-funded Friends of Dripping Springs Education PAC that outspent us at CEEDS by multiples and was pivotal to ultimately achieving passage of the May 2023 Bond, despite a majority of our community and over 10k strong opposing it just months before
So in situations such as this, what is a good-government voter and CEEDS-supporter to do?
Unfortunately, given candidate selection and the up-to-three votes but without three candidates we can recommend, we are left with four options:
1) Don't vote, and hope decreased turnout sends a message;
2) Go to the polls and cast a blank ballot, and hope your "undervotes" send a message;
3) Go to the polls and cast your votes against the three actual/de facto incumbents (i.e., the Dripping Springs Uniparty status quo), and hope that and what would be one undervote sends a message; or
4) Go to the polls, cast your ballot for any minimally acceptable candidate(s) having done your due diligence, and hope that and any undervotes send a message—importantly, "minimally acceptable" is a purposefully greater measure/higher standard than the "least bad/objectionable" metric advocated by some.
And regardless of which option one (1) through four (4) you select, please know that if we, collectively, want to avoid being taxed out of our homes by the special-interest and bureaucrat-controlled Dripping Springs School District, then we must be prepared to stand up and wholeheartedly oppose—with our wallets, time, and energy—DSISD's future bond propositions that are swiftly coming down the pike, likely before or concurrent with the next DSISD school board election!
And finally, we must to elect true fiscal-responsibility and taxpayer advocates to the school board in the future, instead of the self-serving and special-interest-beholden individuals that currently comprise much of our school board and the 2024 list of school board candidates.
Don't forget to cast your a ballot, regardless of its contents!
Election Day is Saturday, May 4th.
About Our 2022 Candidate Survey
Beginning in 2018, Citizens for Excellent Education in Dripping Springs (CEEDS) began our annual survey of Dripping Springs ISD (DSISD) school board candidates as a service to our Dripping Springs community and in fulfillment of our mission of greater transparency, increased accountability, and more responsible stewardship of our tax dollars by DSISD’s School Board and School Administration.
Our broad range of supporters include parents, teachers, and taxpayers—Republicans, Democrats, and Independents—who originally joined together to fight Dripping Springs ISD's wasteful and misguided $132 million 2018 Bond, and to once again make students and teachers, instead of special interests, our School District's top priority. We were the only organization to oppose DSISD's 2018 Bond, and accordingly represent the interests and beliefs of the 49% of voters who cast ballots in the May 2018 DSISD Election AGAINST that Bond Referendum.In 2022, our fight continues as we work to elect common-sense and fiscally responsible leaders to our school board, so that the hard-working families and fixed-income seniors of our community no longer need to fear being taxed out of their homes, while also returning our School Board's and School Administration's focus back to ensuring that all of our community's children receive an excellent and world-class education.
Our 2022 Survey questions reflect what we believe are the top fiscal, transparency, accountability, and other issues currently facing DSISD—information which should be communicated to and help inform every voter before they cast their ballot for School Board.
All candidates were given seven days to submit responses to each Part 1 and Part 2 of this Survey (collectively including across two weekends and thirteen days total with only one day overlap), which should have taken them approximately two hours complete in the candid/straight-from-the-heart/conversational format requested. Survey instructions were explicit and outlined that only those responses submitted through the Survey form would be published, exactly as received, and short answers were limited to a maximum of 600 characters, including spaces, per response.
Candidates were further informed that CEEDS would advertise the Survey responses, and that not responding would result in a "FAIL" rating for Transparency and only responding to Part 1 or Part 2 would result in a "C" rating for Transparency, while not responding to any questions in either the Fiscal or Accountability categories would result in an "Incomplete" rating for each respective category. CEEDS also stated that the Survey responses would determine any decision(s) to support or oppose candidates in this election and that any support/opposition decisions would also be advertised.
Note that in the interest of fairness and in order to ensure an even playing field for incumbents and challengers alike, we treat our annual candidate surveys and endorsement decisions as a blank-slate by limiting our assessment of candidates to only the responses provided on our Candidate Survey. That is, only candidates' responses or nonresponses to our Survey's questions are taken into consideration.
We appreciate all candidates' desire to serve on our community's School Board.
However, we thank those who took the time, had the political courage, and were willing to be truly transparent and forthright with voters by responding to our Survey.
Our School Board is intended to serve the best interests of all voters and taxpayers in this community, not just personal agendas and special interests—and being transparent with voters about where one stands on all the top issues of concern is the first step in that, as well as a clear indication that a candidate is seeking to represent, not rule.
Disappointingly, incumbent Joanna Day did not submit responses to this Survey—just like she has failed to be responsive to so much of our and our supporters' repeated outreach and advocacy since her 2019 election. Unfortunately, doing so is not only failing to be accountable to one's constituents, but also presents an air of entitlement. Challenger Thaddeus Fortenberry also failed to submit any answers to our Survey. This is now TWO elections in which each candidate has failed to respond to our annual survey (2019 and 2021, respectively).
And we are only "conditionally supporting" challenger Olivia Barnard as her Part 1 - Rapid Fire responses largely align with our organization's positions; however, her failure to respond to Part 2 - Short Answer prevents us from accurately assessing her logic and understanding of the many complex, nuanced, and troubling if not alarming issues facing DSISD to the extent necessary for us to endorse—as well as transparency and accountability concerns by not responding to Part 2.
Please note that due to DSISD's plurality at-large election format, we have an obligation to identify and recommend the two candidates whose responses best align with our mission of greater transparency, increased accountability, and bringing fiscal responsibility back to the DSISD School Board.
To that end and again: we endorse Tricia Quintero and conditionally support Olivia Barnard for DSISD School Board this May!
You can view all responses to our 2022 Candidate Survey by clicking on the buttons below.
Survey topics for Part 2 - Short Answers are also listed below, and you can click any topic to go directly to that section, without scrolling through.
In order to allow for easy candidate comparison by question, candidate responses to Part 1 - Rapid Fire all listed in ballot order, while Part 2 -Short Answers are listed in revolving ballot order.
At the bottom of this page are additional candidate surveys and interviews conducted by other organizations that may also help voters make an informed decision prior to casting a ballot in the 2022 DSISD School Board Election.
2024 Candidate Contact Information
Candidates listed below in ballot order.
Fiscal Responsibility Rating
Joanna Day
Incomplete
Olivia Barnard
To Be Determined
Thaddeus Fortenberry
Incomplete
Tricia Quintero
"A" Rating
Transparency Rating
Joanna Day
Incomplete
Olivia Barnard
"C" Rating
Thaddeus Fortenberry
Incomplete
Tricia Quintero
"A" Rating
Accountability Rating
Joanna Day
Incomplete
Olivia Barnard
To Be Determined
Thaddeus Fortenberry
Incomplete
Tricia Quintero
"A" Rating
Our 2022 Dripping Springs ISD School Board Candidate Survey
Or to view a specific portion of the Part 2 - Short Answer survey, please click on the desired section below:
General Introduction Questions
DSISD Candidate Interviews and Information
Dripping Springs ISD
Community Impact Southwest Austin
Vote 411 Voter Guide
Dripping Springs ISD Council of PTAs
League of Women Voters of Hays County
iVoterGuide (Conservative - Liberal Scorecard)
Dripping Springs Democratic Action - DSDA
Dripping Springs Democratic Action - DSDA
POL. AD PAID FOR BY CITIZENS FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION IN DRIPPING SPRINGS
Copyright © 2018—2025 Citizens for Excellent Education in Dripping Springs. All Rights Reserved.