Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Diversity And Inclusion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters and trustees spar over diversity assembly, 3 R's language and district messaging; board to consider an administrator resolution in April
Summary
Multiple public speakers urged clarity about a recent school "diversity assembly" and urged parental notice; a trustee requested removing a list of protected categories from the district's 3 R's statement. Superintendent said administrators will bring a resolution in April to unify the approach.
Several members of the public spoke during the call-to-the-public portion of the March 17 meeting about a school assembly and broader questions about the district's approach to diversity, equity and inclusion and the district's "3 R's" (Reason, Respect, Responsibility).
Public comments
- Kim Thompson, a parent, said a Village assembly that was posted on social media had more context than the post showed and that the assembly's themes were about fairness, inclusion and respect. She said parents should be able to opt in or out of diversity training but that the particular assembly felt aligned with the 3 R's and expressed frustration with how the event was labeled on social media.
- Other public speakers (including Barbara Tonkovich and several residents) urged teaching creationism and criticized district leadership on unrelated issues; speakers invoked constitutional and moral arguments in their remarks.
Board-level revision request
Board member Mr. Gogoleski asked the board to remove a passage that listed a series of identity categories from the district's 3 R's definition. He said the short phrase "all" should stand without enumerating subgroups in a public-facing unity statement and that the enumerated list read like legalese rather than a unifying statement. Several trustees agreed the listing made the 3 R's read like a compliance statement rather than a plain-language expectation for students.
Administration response
Superintendent Chuck Hughes said staff had included the enumerated categories in multiple documents when the U.S. Department of Education and related offices asked the district to document nondiscrimination and protected classes; staff said the insertion was meant to make clear that "all" included those groups. Hughes said administrators would bring a formal resolution to the board in April that attempts to reconcile the compliance requirements with a clear public-facing statement and would provide the board with the work the administrative team had done.
Next steps
The board agreed to discuss a resolution from administration at a future meeting (administration indicated it would be included on the April agenda) and to consider Mr. Gogoleski's revision request for the 3 R's language separately during that process.
Ending
Trustees asked administrators to file the draft resolution and the background documentation so board members and the public could review both the compliance-driven language and alternative plain-language statements before a vote in April.
