A High School District Board Member Has Also Won a Seat on the Shasta County Board of Education. She Says She’ll Hold Both.
Jackie LaBarbera hopes to concurrently hold elected seats on two local school Boards. Whether or not she can legally do so depends on whether the offices are “compatible”, something that’s defined under state law.
Jackie LaBarbera currently serves as a member of the Anderson Union High School District (AUHSD) Board of Trustees, a position she intends to continue to hold, even though she’s also been elected to the Board of the Shasta County Office of Education (SCOE).
“I’m not going anywhere,” LaBarbera told Shasta Scout on November 19, when asked if she intended to resign from her AUHSD seat after having been elected to a SCOE seat. “That’s not required or necessary. I don’t see these as incompatible offices.”
“Incompatible offices” is the legal terminology used for two elected positions that can’t be held concurrently because they pose a significant conflict of interest.
While it can be legal to hold multiple elected positions in California, Government Code 1099 forbids public officials from holding two seats at the same time if those offices are incompatible. Incompatibility, occurs, the law says, if either of the offices can exercise supervisory power over the other, if there is a possibility of a clash of duties or loyalties between the two offices, or if public policy considerations make it improper for one person to hold both.
In the case of LaBarbera, SCOE’s responsibility to exercise supervisory power over local school districts, including AUHSD, by reviewing and offering feedback on budgets and Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) could present a problem when it comes to supervisory authority.
Her dual roles on the SCOE and AUHSD Boards may also pose an issue of compatibility when it comes to what the law refers to as “a clash of duties and loyalties”. For example, LaBarbera’s recent vote to withdraw AUHSD from the California Community Schools Consortium, a grant program facilitated by SCOE that provides Anderson Union High School with the financial support to develop community services for families in need, could represent an example of such a conflict.
The Shasta County Candidate’s Guide for Running for Public Office discusses incompatible offices and refers candidates to the Attorney General’s Office as the appropriate resource for questions related to compatible seats. LaBarbera did not respond to a request for comment sent yesterday, December 9, asking if she had reached out to that Office for advice.
Last week, LaBarbera’s winning candidacy for the SCOE seat was certified by Shasta County Registrar of Voters Tom Toller, who told Shasta Scout it’s not up to his office to decide if she can hold both seats.
“We don’t investigate,” Toller said, “if they have all the qualifications of candidacy, then we certify them for the election–it’s really up to one of her challengers,” he said, explaining that there was an “opportunity at several stages for them to file for injunctive relief, to basically claim she had this conflicting role. To my knowledge, that didn’t happen.”
Filing such an action would have been difficult for one of LaBarbera’s challengers, because she did not publicly share her intent to hold both offices until after being elected to the SCOE Board. Shasta Scout reached out to the Secretary of State’s Office with more questions and was referred to the California Attorney General’s (AG) Office.
Issues of seat compatibility, a spokesperson for the AG’s Office told Shasta Scout, should be addressed through a specific legal action called quo warranto – Latin for “what authority” – meaning, “by what authority does this person hold office.” According to the AG’s Office, the use of quo warranto is a power “vested in the People, and not in any private individual or group, because the question of who has the right to hold a public office is a matter of public concern, not a private dispute.”
As part of the quo warranto complaint process, the public official named in the action is given the opportunity to advocate for their decision to hold both offices. Once both parties’ perspectives on the issue are filed, the AG will decide whether or not to “grant the leave to sue,” meaning whether or not the complaining party or parties have a legitimate case against the elected official. If approved, the complaining party or parties could proceed to file the case in their appropriate Superior Court under the supervision of the AG’s Office.
SCOE Superintendent Mike Freeman, who will be responsible for swearing LaBarbera in to her new seat on the SCOE Board has confirmed for Shasta Scout that he will do so on December 18, emphasizing wording from the law that says when two offices are incompatible, ‘a public officer shall be deemed to have forfeited the first office upon acceding to the second.’
“Therefore, with the certification of election results, we will welcome Jackie LaBarbera to the Shasta County Board of Education and I will swear her in,” Freeman wrote by email.
In other words, once LaBarbera is sworn in at SCOE, the problem becomes AUHSD’s. Brian Parker, the Superintendent of AUHSD, has not responded to three requests for comment by email and phone over the last week, regarding how the District will proceed if LaBarbera does not resign from her AUHSD position after being sworn in to her newly-elected seat at SCOE.
The next AUHSD Board meeting will occur on December 17.
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Through December 31, NewsMatch is matching donations dollar-for-dollar up to $18,000, giving us the chance to double that amount for local journalism in Shasta County. Don't wait — the time to give is now!
Support Scout, and multiply your gift
Authors
Comments (16)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
Emergency supplies available for Redding residents as flood impacts continue
City officials have not yet announced how many residents and businesses are believed to have been impacted by the flooding, which they say occurred as a result of clogs in stormwater drain systems brought on by a high volume rain falling in Redding over a short period of time.
A group of community members are hoping to start a new medical school in Shasta. Here’s what we know
Redding Vice Mayor Dr. Paul Dhanuka and Simpson University President Dr. Norm Hall are some of the leading figures behind the plan.
With more rain ahead, Redding officials explain flooding, urge caution
This weekend, the city’s stormwater infrastructure became clogged with debris due to the speed and volume of rain, officials said, leading to serious flooding in parts of Redding.
I really wish Jackie had done the mature thing and dealt with her personal trauma through therapy instead of turning into some Mean Girls version of the Simpsons’ Helen “Won’t Somebody PLEASE Think About the Children” Lovejoy and making it everyone’s problem.
Sounds like the Atty General needs to give more input on this scenario. LaBarbera is just one of those stubborn M4L radicals that like to see their pix and cute comments in the media. A female version of Mr. Gallardo. Her goal is to disrupt the public school system and bring in vouchers. She’d relish a lawsuit in court, so let the challenge begin. Now SCOE has 3 M4L board members, see what we get for not doing research on candidates ?
It will be interesting to see where the money will come from if and when La Barbera and her M4L try to take this to court. M4L , a Trump – Steve Bannon Culture War favorite, identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center extremist hate group, funded and supported by national extremist activist groups, including the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that wrote Project 2025, and the Oath Keepers, whose chapter members quote Hitler, has national money. Will they send some of that money to Shasta County for a La Barbera court case to fight the war on democracy and civility?
Moms for Liberty is a recognized 501.4 organization that values patriotism, the family/parents leadership over their children, academic excellence and the Constitution.
Those who label this voluntary service as a hateful group do so to shame free citizens from participating in advocating for patriotism, family rights, academic excellence and the established rule of law.
The Southern Poverty Law Center is the extremist group. They undermine and shame citizens who exercise their First Amendment rights, their parental rights, their right to supervise the curriculum and the right to political indoctrination free public education.
As proven by the 2024 election results the SPLC and their policies are out of favor. They are desperate for funding and relevance given Moms for Liberty protects the rights of minor children to experience the natural process of puberty, the right of girls/women to compete in sports with only other females and for schools to always be truthful and transparent with parents about their children’s mental and emotional health.
People can visit MomsforLiberty.org for themselves and decide to join for free or not.
They are absolutely incompatible. Aside from her already being in violation of the Oath School Board members swear with her little stunts on the AUHSD Board, if she doesn’t understand the facts of holding both seats then she isn’t morally nor mentally qualified to hold either. She should have been removed after trying to fire the Anderson High Principal for following the Ed Codes, not promoted to President of that Board and then allowed to land a SCOE seat. The “woman” cares only for herself and not a whit about what’s best for her community, the students, or the County she serves.
A Siskiyou County Board of Education member was unceremoniously removed from office a few years back when he accepted an appointment to the Scott Valley Unified board.
County boards hear appeals of district decisions. It’s the straightforward definition of an incompatible office.
Thank you Nevin and Annelise for this in depth report!
Not only is there a conflict but I do believe Jackie LaBarbera no longer lives in the AUHSD district.
Sherry: I don’t believe moving out of the District after election requires her to requires resign her office but I have reached out to the Elections Office for confirmation.
Wait. Is it acknowledged that she moved?
A local elected official is very much not eligible if they move out of the district they represent.
Redistricting is a partial exception. If districts were drawn and you don’t live in the new one, you can finish a term. Anderson recently switched to trustee areas. Is that the issue?
Shasta Rocks: Her address on the SCOE application for candidacy (as well as her former application for candidacy for AUHSD) was redacted but we’ve asked the elections office to clarify.
I think normally she could stay until her term is up and then would not be able to run again if she doesn’t live in that area anymore. But with her now being sworn in for SCOE , legal options would need to be explored to see if she can even legally sit on the Anderson board.
It seems apparent that holding both positions is incompatible How is this solved?
Judy: one or more community members would file a quo warranto as described in the article, with links to the application, after which the AG’s Office would issue a statement which could be taken to court.
This is going to be an ongoing issue with future elections. The only resolve is a clear and mandated piece of legislation on this subject.
But…but…La Barbera doesn’t “see these as incompatible offices.” Case closed! Everyone can rest easy!