Liberty Hill ISD board votes not to adopt daily prayer period after public opposition
Loading...
Summary
After two public speakers urged refusal, the Liberty Hill ISD board voted Feb. 16 to decline adopting a districtwide daily period for prayer and religious text reading authorized by SB 11, citing legal and logistical concerns and noting students retain individual rights to pray.
Liberty Hill ISD trustees voted Feb. 16 to decline adopting a districtwide daily period for prayer and religious-text reading under Senate Bill 11, after community speakers and several trustees warned the requirement could create constitutional and operational risks.
At the meeting, resident and former teacher Kimmy Fink urged the board to oppose SB 11, calling it “an egregious example of government overreach” and warning that the law’s waiver and monitoring requirements could open the district to lawsuits and disrupt instructional time. Genevieve Bischoff, another resident, told trustees she had gathered 73 signatures opposing adoption and said a formal prayer period could make nonreligious and minority-faith students feel excluded.
Trustees discussed logistical hurdles and legal exposure before voting. Trustee Neighbors said he supported prayer personally but criticized the bill’s “gotchas” and compliance burdens, arguing the state law’s procedural requirements could create needless risk. The motion to decline passage, made by Trustee Hargrove and seconded by Trustee Neighbors, passed by voice vote.
Board President Parsons read a statement after the vote noting that under existing law students and staff “already possess well established rights to pray and religious expression,” and that the board’s decision was intended to preserve those protections without adopting a new district policy.
The board’s action stops short of a formal policy change either way; trustees said the decision preserves students’ individual rights while avoiding the additional monitoring, consent and designated-space obligations spelled out by SB 11. The resolution’s defeat does not affect students’ existing right to sit quietly and pray or read religious texts individually, the board emphasized.
The board did not set a timetable for revisiting the topic; trustees suggested they would monitor any state guidance or court decisions that could affect local obligations.
The meeting packet, public hearing materials and the board’s post-meeting statement are available on the district website.
