|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The San Ramon Valley Unified School District’s most recent meeting included updates to its policy on public comments at board meetings, amid an upswing of political debate at school board meetings in the district and nationally.
“Beginning tonight, we will allow 30 minutes for public comment on non-agendized items,” Board President Susanna Ordway said.
Should public comments exceed 30 minutes, Ordway said, the public comment portion will be paused, then resume prior to hearing administrative reports. She added that, in cases where this portion exceeds 30 minutes, single speakers on a topic will be prioritized over multiple speakers on the same topic.
“Pursuant to applicable law, and board policy, the board will not prohibit public criticism of the board or district,” Ordway said. “We kindly ask that when making public comments, you refrain from the use of profanity, exercise tolerance of others and their viewpoints, and exemplify model behavior. Please be mindful that district students might be watching.”
Ordway also noted that “persistent or excessive disruption by any individual or group shall be grounds to terminate the privilege of addressing the board.”
In August, an SRVUSD board meeting was shut down amid a large anti-masking protest, until remaining protestors eventually agreed to wear masks while the meeting resumed. In January, Ordway and two other board members, Rachel Hurd and Ken Mintz, were targeted in a failed recall petition effort for their decision to cancel a return to in-person classes amid the surge in COVID cases late last year.
SRVUSD is not alone in making changes to its public comment policy, with a number of other districts throughout the nation making similar changes, in an effort to grapple with their new status as ground zero for battles over topics such as COVID restrictions and curriculum diversity.
Following Ordway’s announcement of changes to the policy on public comments, there was just one comment during the portion of the meeting dedicated to non-agendized items. Mike Arata brought up what he saw as problems with a book called “Stamped: Racism, Anti-Racism, and You” which was previously approved by the board for use in schools, despite his objections at earlier meetings.
Arata said he was particularly concerned about the book quoting lyrics from hip-hop group NWA, but that he saw this as exemplary of what he called a history of “pushing grossly inappropriate materials and lessons at kids in its charge.”
While Arata was the only one to comment on an item not on the agenda, two other commenters joined him in criticizing a second text slated for approval by the board, “This Book is Anti-Racist,” by Tiffany Jewell.
“This is critical race theory, and I’d like you to reconsider approving it,” said Susan Lancaster, who’d introduced herself as the parent of two sons who’d graduated from San Ramon Valley High.
“It’s clear throughout that Jewell is obsessed with race, self-pity, and bitter disdain for whites,” Arata said.
An additional commenter, named only as Helen of Dougherty Valley, echoed Lancaster and Arata’s concerns, in one of a total of 10 comments she made on agendized items throughout the meeting.
Although the board can’t respond to public comments on items not on the agenda, according to policy, they were able to respond to comments on adopting this book, which was a consent item on the Oct. 26 agenda. Ordway and Debra Petish, executive director of curriculum and instruction, sought to address some of the concerns raised by commenters.
“A really important part of the common core ELA standards is this idea that anything you read, you are going to evaluate the sources, that you are not reading it and considering it the truth, including a textbook from a publishing company,” Petish said. “So you’re always evaluating resources, especially in ELA classes.”
Ordway pointed to the way in which this was different from how textbooks had been used in her day, in which a subject such as social studies would have one textbook that was treated as the definitive truth on the subject. In addition, she asked Petish to address concerns that children are being politically indoctrinated in classrooms.
“I have observed the ethnic studies classes, and what I’ve found is that they really do what they’ve said they were going to do,” Petish said. “They’re not telling kids how to think … we talked earlier about critical thinking skills, and that’s really what’s happening.”
Unsurprising that this group of elected officials has zero interest in interactions with the public. Have these trustees ever met with the public directly in a town hall or similar manner? No. They sit there at the board meetings, rubber stamp anything the district staff says with nothing given to the people in this community that they represent except for their resentment. These people have zero interests in listening to anything the community has to say and, as illustrated here, will go through great lengths to alleviate the heavy burden of doing the job they were elected to do and listen to the public. Narcissism and self congratulations seem to be the only reasons these people chose to be trustees.
Board President Ordway’s comment that she would “terminate the privilege of addressing the board” if speakers are disruptive would have been better phrased as “terminate the RIGHT of speakers” to address the board. The Constitution is quite clear that this is a right, not a privilege. However, in practice it needs to be done in a way that does not impede the board’s ability to perform its function.
Hermann , the board of education serves at the privilege of the community, not the other way around. Board President Ordway seems to be confused as to her role here.
Sadly the people providing an education to our children do not understand the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. All people, including parents, have the right of Free Speech.
Perhaps they should teach more about how special our Republic is, rather than teaching hate.
The Teachers Unions, the School Boards, and many of the teachers have become politicized over the years so that is a valid subject for parents and others to discuss and challenge.
Everyone does have the right to free speech, but that doesn’t include being disruptive. Thankfully, as a student and parent I still had respect for teachers. And things have become politicized. But anyone who has ever spoken publicly knows how to address someone, and if you haven’t, it’s not hard to understand. Be polite and respectful, or your message will be lost. You’re at a board meeting. You’re not in a bar.