Who is the Republican candidate in this race? I am. In Utah, local school board races are nonpartisan, which means that school board candidates cannot run under a specific political party. However, the Republican Party did invite me and the incumbent (Mark Clement) to their convention to compete for their endorsement. At the convention, I received the most votes (56) and Mark received the least (19). (See Convention Results). Therefore, the Republican Party is supporting me in this race, and is NOT supporting Mark.

Why does your door hanger refer to Mark as "woke"? The term "woke" refers to a political philosophy that supports various radical causes such as radical critical race theory and radical gender ideology. (See Wikipedia article on woke) Describing someone as woke is similar to describing someone as conservative or liberal or libertarian - it is a description of his or her political philosophy. Mark has recently taken public positions that can fairly be described as woke. For example, earlier this year when the Utah legislature was considering a bill (which later passed and became law) that took steps toward protecting women and girls by banning biological males from entering female shower rooms, locker rooms, and bathrooms, Mark publicly opposed this bill on his Facebook page. Supporting biological males being in women's shower rooms, locker rooms, and bathrooms is woke. Similarly, at the same time, when the legislature was considering another bill (which also passed and became law) that scaled back Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in the Utah education system because they are inherently discriminatory and racist, Mark also public opposed this bill on his Facebook page. Supporting inherently discriminatory and racist DEI programs is woke. When Mark opposed these bills, he also indicated that anyone who supports these bills is rude, bigoted, violent, and hateful. (See Mark's Facebook page). I disagree with Mark. I supported these bills (although I don't think either went quite far enough) because I believe women and girls have a right to female-only private spaces and as a society we should not allow biological males into these spaces, and because I believe that the discrimination and racism are wrong and as a society we should not use taxpayer dollars to support inherently discriminatory and racist DEI programs. These are traditional conservative positions, and I don't think these positions make me rude, bigoted, violent, and hateful, but Mark does. So yes, I think it is fair to refer to Mark as "woke." 

Why do you say that Mark wants to be a "career politician"?  Mark is currently serving his 3rd term on the school board and is running for his 4th term. I think 4 terms on the school board is too many.  I agree with the general sentiment expressed by Mark's fellow school board member Sarah Beeson in the comments to a post on her Facebook page, where Sarah said "my personal belief is that board members should only serve two terms and allow different people with various backgrounds and experiences to serve. It would do districts well to have new people with fresh ideas." The fact that Mark is running for his 4th term makes me think he wants to be a career politician. 

Why do you criticize Mark's involvement in USBA and NSBA? - Mark is proud of the fact that he is the President-Elect of the Utah School Board's Association (USBA), which is Utah's state chapter of the National School Boards Association (NSBA). However, if the general public knew how radical and woke these organizations are, I suspect voters would not see Mark's involvement in these organizations as a positive. For example, you might recall that during COVID the US Justice Department labeled mothers and fathers who expressed concerns at school board meetings as domestic terrorists. This domestic terrorist label originated in a letter from the NSBA that urged the use of domestic terrorism laws to stop parents from complaining at school board meetings. And in light of this controversy, many state chapters of NSBA severed ties with NSBA. (See discussion in this Washington Post article). But not Utah's chapter (USBA) where Mark is the President-Elect, which proudly continues to send Utah tax dollars to support NSBA, and proudly sends its USBA leadership (including Mark) to regular NSBA conferences around the country on the Utah taxpayers' dime, including highly controversial and inherently discriminatory and racist DEI conferences. Mark's Facebook page has multiple posts of him attending these NSBA conferences, sometimes with other school board members and staff of the Alpine School District. (Here is an example). And USBA has its own problems, including refusing to be transparent by complying with Utah's open records law (GRAMA), and encouraging school districts to adopt a policy that hides a student's gender transition at school from the student's own parents, which resulted in Alpine School District adopting this radical policy. (See National Review article). My position is that the Alpine School Board should have severed all ties to NSBA and USBA years ago, and should not be wasting our tax dollars by sending our tax dollars to these radical and woke organizations. 

What are your thoughts on the potential split of Alpine School District? - This November, voters in the West and Central areas will vote on whether to split Alpine School District into two or three new districts, regardless of what voters in the South area want. Because I support conservative principles of smaller and more limited government, I generally favor smaller school districts over larger school districts. Therefore, if Alpine School District is split into two or three smaller districts, these two or three smaller school districts can be superior to the current single larger school district, if we elect competent school boards to lead each new district. Some advantages of two or three smaller school districts (over the current massive school district) might be less wasteful spending on fewer bureaucratic layers of district administration and better representation with each school board member being responsible for one-half or one-third of the current number of schools. If a majority of voters choose a district split, as with most any big change, the devil will be in the details. My career negotiating complex business deals makes me the best candidate to negotiate the best deal if a district split happens, to make sure students, families, teachers, staff, and taxpayers are all better off after the split. For example, the pay, benefits, and job satisfaction of our great teachers and staff can all get better in smaller districts, not worse, and the students in the smaller districts can have access to more resources and opportunities to learn and grow, not less. And instead of taxes going up on the south end of the current school district, which is a false assumption that Mark and others at the school district are pushing, the truth is that property taxes can stay the same or even go down. Given that the property taxes raised will remain constant while the number of students continues to decline (a trend that has been steady for several years in the south end of the current school district), it's simply common sense that having the same property tax revenue with fewer and fewer students means we can lower taxes and still spend the same amount per student or we can keep property taxes the same and continually increase how much we spend per student. Either way, taxes don't need to go up - they can instead either stay the same or go down.