Public speakers urge San Angelo ISD board not to adopt SB 11-style prayer resolution

Taylor Kingman, president of the San Angelo ISD Board of Trustees, heard public comments Feb. 9 on a proposed resolution tied to recent state legislation presented in meeting materials as SB 11.

Dr. Nicole Lozano, a member of the public, told trustees the district should decline adopting the resolution. She said the proposal—by creating a designated time and place that requires parental consent—would permit separation of students based on consent status and could exert subtle peer pressure on students who do not participate. “Students who are not religious, who belong to minority faith traditions, or whose families choose not to sign consent forms may feel othered,” Lozano said, adding that existing constitutional protections already allow students to pray or read religious texts without a new policy.

Another public commenter, Wade Meyer, urged trustees not to approve a dedicated religious-study period. “If you want your child to learn about religion, send them to a religious school,” Meyer said, invoking the separation of church and state and arguing the district’s instructional time and academic priorities should take precedence.

District staff explained the resolution’s mechanics during a staff presentation. The materials described a statutory-resolution process that would establish a time and place (outside the instructional day, to be set by the district) where students with parental consent could assemble for prayer or the reading of religious texts; staff said students without parental consent may not be present in that designated area during the time. Staff stressed that adults assigned to the location would monitor for safety but would not lead prayers or guide religious activity.

Trustees asked staff whether the proposed resolution would duplicate existing district policy (FNA legal) and sought details about who would supervise the meetings, how consent forms would be distributed and tracked, and whether teachers could be compelled to participate. Staff replied the resolution sets a formal process the legislature has asked boards to consider and that supervised, chartered student groups of various kinds already meet on campus under monitored conditions.

The board did not vote on the item at the pre-agenda meeting; administrators told trustees the district must record a decision by the state deadline (materials referenced a record vote prior to March 1). The board will continue the discussion at its regular meeting next week.

The meeting materials and staff presentation labeled the legislative item in different ways; staff presented it to trustees as “SB 11” in the public comment section and later repeated an administrative summary. The board packet and on-the-record exchanges referenced FNA legal policy and the Open Meetings Act for procedural steps needed if the board chooses to adopt a resolution.