Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters press Bear Valley board on 'transformative' grant and religious instruction in schools
Summary
Two members of the public used the district’s public comment period to criticize a district grant described as transforming schools and to urge restoration of religious instruction; one asked for the district’s grant application and criteria.
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Two members of the public addressed the Bear Valley Unified School District board during the public comment period with sharply critical remarks about a district grant described by one commenter as a “transformative school district” award and with calls to bring religious instruction into classrooms. One commenter, identified at the meeting as Miss Dewey, urged that students be taught “true history” and said the Constitution and religious instruction should be implemented in schools. She told the board, “We need to bring God back into our lives,” and said she opposed diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, characterizing them as “satanic” and “not acceptable.” A second commenter, introduced by the meeting chair as Manuel Branson, said he wanted more information about a grant described on the agenda and asked the board to produce the criteria and plan the district submitted to obtain the award. Branson said he objected to language such as “transformative school district” and “reimagine” in the district materials and pressed the district to disclose the qualifications used to secure the grant. During public comment, the board chair reminded speakers of the district’s public-comment rules and noted that the Brown Act limits the board from taking action on items not on the agenda. The chair also outlined a three-minute speaking limit for each commenter and instructed that board members generally will not respond during the public-comment period. The public comments raised policy questions (grant criteria, curriculum choices) but the board did not take action during the public comment period. Board members later moved an existing agenda item and proceeded with the posted business of the meeting.

