Watertown school board votes to remove Wind Symphony selection after hours of public comment

The Watertown Unified School District Board of Education voted May 12 to remove the Wind Symphony selection "A Mother of a Revolution," after an extended public-comment period in which hundreds of community members, students, parents and alumni urged opposing outcomes.

Supporters of the piece said the band director followed district procedure and that students had rehearsed the composition for months. "These students deserve to showcase the results of their time and their talents," said Jim Mitchell, who described notifying families and urged the board not to interfere with the scheduled concert. Multiple students also testified about the musical difficulty and emotional impact of the selection.

Opponents argued the teacher framed the unit as "music as activism" and cited district policy restricting instruction that "tends to indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view." Sam O'Neil, chair of the educational services committee, said the teacher's original letter described goals such as fostering "empathy, resilience and pride" tied to Stonewall and called that intent inconsistent with policy 22-40. "This is a perfect example of what everyone sitting at this table ran on — ending indoctrination in the classrooms," he said.

The board first considered a motion to empower the administration to add a program disclaimer in concert materials stating the selection "reflects the composer's opinion and does not reflect the views or opinions of the Watertown Unified School District." That motion was seconded and taken to roll call; the transcript records roll-call responses and the chair announced the motion failed.

After additional discussion, the board then approved a separate motion to remove the piece from the upcoming Wind Symphony concert. The motion passed on a roll-call vote recorded in the meeting transcript; the chair announced, "Motion passes." The transcript shows board members debating the trade-offs between protecting students from perceived indoctrination and the harm to students who had rehearsed the piece for months.

Parents, alumni and students repeatedly urged the board to allow the concert to proceed, saying last-minute removal would unfairly punish students who had invested months of rehearsal time. "This is horrible and unfair to the kids," said Camille Steven List, a student in the district. Multiple speakers described the musical selection as lyricless, technically demanding, and educational in historical context.

The board's actions addressed both the performance and broader policy questions. The record shows vocal disagreement among board members about whether the piece's educational framing violated district rules and whether program materials should include a disclaimer. The transcript shows the board settled on removal of the piece as the final action taken during that agenda item.

No further disciplinary actions concerning staff were recorded in the meeting minutes; the district said in the meeting that materials and documentation related to the selection are available in the board docs portal. The board moved on to other agenda items after taking the vote.