Parents urge Putnam board to reject HealthSmart and ETR; staff says state limits HOPE choices

Several residents at a Putnam County School Board workshop on instructional materials on Monday urged the board to reject two HOPE health curricula — ETR (sometimes referred to by speakers as E‑Dynamics) and HealthSmart — and to adopt an abstinence‑centered program called Choosing the Best.

Barbara Koy, a Putnam County resident, told the board, "Putnam County families, we deserve better. Our kids and our grandchildren deserve better. We deserve a curriculum that represents biological reality, protects privacy, honors parental authority, and actually lowers teen pregnancies and STDs." Koy said Pearson and ETR have ideological ties and urged the board to "reject both E Dynamics and HealthSmart and immediately begin the process to adopt Choosing the Best."

Several other speakers raised similar objections. Marshia Mezer said a Hope curriculum assessment asked students to describe "how do you define your culture, your religion, nationality, race" and warned that prompted personal reflections could produce a "data dossier." Reverend Carl Mezer said a required podcast assignment that asks students to explain how their religion affects health practices was a compelled disclosure that "crosses the First Amendment line of religious neutrality." David Stanley and Susan Stanley criticized limited public previews and broken links, saying the district showed only early "safe" lessons while more detailed modules are withheld online.

District staff member Mrs. Zulu responded that the district verified survey traffic but had not received pre‑feedback, and she explained how Florida's adoption process works. "Currently, there are three curriculums on that list," she told the board, and she said the versions publishers submit to Florida often differ from their national editions because publishers remove elements that do not meet Florida requirements. Staff also explained that teacher editions and assessments are not publicly viewable under state procedures for security reasons.

Board attorney Mr. Holmes emphasized the legal constraint: "the state department of education essentially mandates that the districts choose a course from their from DOE's approved list." Staff said a district could explore creating its own instructional materials plan but that any locally created HOPE curriculum would still have to be submitted to and approved by DOE. Staff also reminded the board that today's session was feedback only; the adoption vote is scheduled for April 28, with procedural avenues for contesting an adoption (including a special hearing if a contest meets statutory criteria) and, if adopted, implementation slated for the 2026‑27 school year.

Speakers repeatedly referenced data for Gwinnett County, Georgia, presented by public commenters as evidence that Choosing the Best drove a 75% drop in teen pregnancies; staff noted Choosing the Best is not on Florida's approved HOPE list. The meeting included repeated requests from the public for fuller preview access and clearer transparency about which modules will appear in the Florida‑approved student edition versus national publisher materials.

No formal motions or votes occurred at the workshop. Board members asked staff to arrange follow‑up briefings and demonstrations with community representatives to help them navigate the district preview links and to identify the specific items that could form the basis for a formal contest if filed.