Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Schools Of Hope Book Removals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community speakers urge board to resist 'Schools of Hope' expansion and to maintain local control of library selections
Summary
Multiple community members raised concerns about the state rule allowing "Schools of Hope" charter operators to establish in underperforming or underenrolled schools and criticized recent book removals that they said were driven by social media pressure rather than evidence-based decisions.
Several residents used public comment time to ask the Hillsborough County School Board to push back on the state Schools of Hope policy and to preserve local control of school libraries and curriculum choices.
Michael Angemayo said the Schools of Hope rule, which allows some charter operators to take over schools that meet specified underperformance or underenrollment triggers, "tramples on parents' rights, undermines local control, and is already causing real harm to students, parents, and communities." He warned that if the policy is applied locally the district would lose control over school space and resources.
Other speakers, including Rachel Doyle and Cindy Richards, focused on recent removals of library books. Doyle criticized the district's handling of a book removal tied to a single social media post and said she feared similar removals affecting books about LGBTQ+ themes. "You govern not based on evidence, but based on the whims of bigots," Doyle said, referencing a specific tweet that preceded a removal.
Board staff noted the Schools of Hope law passed at the state level on June 30 and that the state board rule arrived Sept. 24; the superintendent told the board that November 11 is the earliest date the state will accept Schools of Hope applications to districts. Speakers urged the board to preserve local oversight and requested accountability and equity analyses before allowing charter or feeder agreements that could reduce public school capacity or funding.
Why it matters: The Schools of Hope framework allows state‑authorized or designated charter operators to intervene in struggling schools; district leaders and community members differ on oversight and impacts to local resources and enrollment. Public commenters also urged the district to resist book removal processes they described as politically driven rather than evidence‑based.
District response: The superintendent and staff reiterated the statutory timeline and said the district is monitoring the state rule and its implications; no policy vote occurred at Oct. 28.
Next steps: Commenters asked for equity audits before charter approvals and for the board to maintain local control over curricular and library decisions.
