Three months into her second stint as president of the Denver Board of Education, it’s becoming clear that Xóchitl Gaytán’s leadership skills have not improved since her tumultuous first tenure, and that she bears sole responsibility for the strife that has begun plaguing this new board.
Under Gaytán’s leadership from 2021-23, the board was highly dysfunctional, despite being unanimously aligned ideologically. Gaytán’s dictatorial, confrontational style led to frequent, public clashes with other board members. As a result, the board accomplished little of substance during those two years.
Other personalities on that board contributed to the ugliness, but she bore a large share of the responsibility, especially given her leadership role.
When Gaytán won reelection last fall, she was joined by three new board members also endorsed by the Denver Classroom Teachers Association: Monica Hunter, DJ Torres, and Amy Klein Molk. It appeared once again that a majority of the board was aligned on policy priorities.
On a secret balťot, Gaytán won the presidency late last year. I’m guessing those who voted for her have learned to regret that decision.
So far the three new board members have demonstrated they are independent thinkers who view their jobs as representing the students and families of Denver Public Schools. They aren’t acting as though they are beholden to any interest group or to Superintendent Alex Marrero.
Gaytán, on the other hand, said during her first meeting as president that her tenure would mean that “Dr. Marrero is in for some good times over the next couple of years.” That’s an odd statement to make about your sole direct-report, and I’m guessing it struck the new board members as off-key.
For a variety of reasons, Gaytán’s relationships with her three new colleagues have gotten off to a rocky start. In the first two months of 2026, Gaytán has found herself on the losing side of a series of 6-1 votes.
In one instance she attempted to add to an agenda at the very last minute special public comment sessions on immigration issues and an attempt to further curtail the autonomies of the district’s one remaining innovation zone.
This blatant violation of board policy did not meet with her colleague’s approval.
More recently, Gaytán was the lone vote supporting the district’s bungled attempt to remove Kaiser Permanente as one of the health insurance options for district employees.
She appears to be, as she promised, carrying Marrero’s water, as well as driving her personal, ideological agenda without any attempt to build board coalitions or consensus.
This all spilled into the open the night of Thursday, March 5, when board member Torres got into a 50-minute dispute with Gaytán over her refusal to put an item he had requested on the meeting agenda. Board member Hunter said she had experienced the same kind of disrespect from Gaytán.
Read this Chalkbeat article for a more detailed description of the back-and-forth. For those wanting to take a deeper dive, the conversation begins at roughly the one hour, 26 minute mark of this recording.
Under board policy, an item will be placed on the agenda if three board members request it. But the board president has the authority to remove items unilaterally. Single board members can request an item be placed on the agenda, but the president has broad latitude to reject such requests.
Gaytán has herself repeatedly tried to place items on the agenda at the last moment, and has rejected on more than one occasions board members more legitimately timed agenda requests, For that reason, Torres asked early in the week of the meeting to place an item on the agenda to discuss agenda-setting parameters.
Gaytán turned down that request. That’s what led to Thursday’s protracted argument.
I frequently criticized the board under Gaytán’s first presidential stint as dysfunctional. The current board has shown no signs of dysfunction. But Gaytán’s leadership has been dysfunctional.
Gaytán should recognize the damage she is doing and step down from the presidency. But it’s almost impossible to imagine her taking such a selfless action.
Unfortunately, there is no simple mechanism for removing her from the board presidency. So her colleagues will have to find ways to work around her defensive, dictatorial, and capricious management style.
I wish them luck.
