Faith leaders and residents urge Salem School Committee to drop proposed ban on religious groups renting school buildings

Residents, pastors and youth told the Salem School Committee on June 17 that a proposed policy change to bar religious groups from renting Salem Public School facilities would exclude community partners who provide services to students and families.

Why it matters: Several speakers argued that faith-based organizations operate neighborhood programs—youth groups, recovery support and mentoring—that supplement school services and serve families who otherwise lack options. Some speakers raised constitutional concerns and urged the committee to adopt nondiscrimination language rather than an outright ban.

What speakers said: Anais Acevedo, a Salem resident and leader at House of Promise Church, told the committee the proposal "sends a harmful message that people of faith and the groups that they built are no longer welcome in the public square." She asked the committee to reconsider and to view churches as potential partners rather than adversaries.

Kendra Key, a pastor who said she hoped to expand ministry activities into Salem, suggested model policy language the district could add to keep access open while protecting the district’s neutrality: "the Salem Public School District does not endorse, support, or assume responsibility for the beliefs, viewpoints, or standards of any organizations that lease or use its facilities," she said, offering that clause as a compromise.

Young people who attend local congregations also spoke. Savannah, who identified herself as a tenth-grade student and a member of Calvary, described plans for Sunday gatherings at the high school and asked the committee to "reconsider your decision" to restrict rentals; she said losing the chance to host in-district events would harm community access.

Other testimony: Pastors and church leaders, including members of Calvary and House of Promise, described volunteer work—mentoring, grief groups, recovery programs, food assistance—and encouraged the committee to preserve community access. Speakers said similar partnerships operate in nearby districts.

What the committee said: The transcript shows the policy remains with the policy subcommittee. Member Bruce (subcommittee chair) and other committee members described the subcommittee process and said additional review with legal counsel and stakeholder input is planned. The meeting record notes a demand letter from the Massachusetts Family Institute had been received and that the subcommittee had not completed its review.

Ending: The committee did not adopt final policy language on June 17; the item remained with the policy subcommittee for further review. Speakers asked for more community engagement and for the district to consider neutral-language alternatives that preserve facility access while protecting the district’s position.