Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent asks Putnam board for home access and screenshots of Ripple Effects SEL materials; counsel cites copyright and trade-secret constraints
Summary
At public comment, Marsha Metzker said the district failed to provide full home access and copies of Ripple Effects SEL modules and training (request #2662). Board counsel later said staff has provided responses but legal limits (copyright/trade-secret) may prevent releasing copies.
At the June 23 meeting of the Putnam County School Board, Marsha Metzker used her three-minute public comment to press the district for fuller access to Ripple Effects social-emotional learning content and associated training materials. Metzker said her public-records request (no. 2662) had not been fulfilled and that earlier in-person reviews were tightly restricted.
“...I respectfully ask that you direct this administration to immediately provide parents and citizens with home access and the ability to take screenshots of all Ripple Effects materials and to produce all training and professional development content related to the program along with the emails that I’ve also requested and have been denied,” Metzker told the board, citing concerns about transparency and content addressing sexual consent and gender identity.
Metzker said the district had paid for professional development connected to the program and that parents were given shorter, supervised review sessions rather than the same home access other curricula had received. She said a requested deadline of June 22 had passed without compliance.
Board counsel responded later in the meeting, telling members that staff had prepared responses but legal considerations constrain what can be released. Counsel said he was reviewing the matter and cited copyright and trade-secret law as possible limits: “Trade secrets are exempt from public record disclosure,” he said, and noted Attorney General guidance about providing copies of copyrighted materials.
Status and next steps: counsel said the matter was in his court for legal review and that staff had already provided some opportunities to view materials. He indicated the board should not conclude staff was stonewalling and that a legal opinion would clarify what can be shown or copied. Metzker’s request remains unresolved pending counsel’s guidance.
What was referenced: Metzker invoked federal guidance on parental authority and cited a recent court reference (Mahmoud v. Taylor) and the Department of Justice in support of parental control over sensitive content; those items were offered as part of her rationale but did not change counsel’s emphasis that legal exemptions may limit copying or distribution of some materials.
What to expect: Counsel will provide a legal opinion and staff will follow that guidance for responding to public-records request no. 2662.
