For at least three years, the Hamilton Southeastern School Board has postponed a decision on the wording of a nondiscrimination policy, and Wednesday night, after a spirited discussion by speakers from the public and among board members, the board decided to once again send the proposal back to the school corporation’s policy committee. There was also talk of the board members undergoing training to better understand nondiscrimination issues throughout the school district.
Jennifer Chavez appeared unhappy when she was told her presentation would be limited to 3 minutes, but she shared her entire planned speech with LarryInFishers. She believes board members should receive annual training on a number of issues, including equity and/or diversity issues.
Her most pointed comments were about the board’s lack of enforcement in their own code of ethics. “We have school board members who are presenting personal criticisms of leaders in our district including fellow school board members on social media, in texts, in emails,” wrote Chavez. “All of this is detracting from the goals of our public school board. As per your current policy, school board members should present any personal criticisms directly to the Superintendent. As per your current policy, school board members should recognize the integrity of prior elected officials and current board members.”
Chavez also wrote about her argument as to what should happen when a board member fails to meet the ethical standards. “Any School Board Member that is found in violation of the School Board Member expectations for ethics will be removed from service. How that happens can be further identified by the district policy committee, however it is imperative that this happens. You have disappointed your community. If you want our trust back you will ensure us that the type of behaviors that we have witnessed over the past few years are stopped and no longer tolerated.”
Chavez also cited recent court decisions saying they “have found that schools ARE required to accommodate gender identity among their non-discrimination policies, and that schools are legally barred from discriminating against any student (including those that are transgender). Given recent actions (albeit proven or perceived) of board members that have done unnecessary harm to parents and children in our community it is imperative that the board reset their commitment to ALL children by means of adopting policy that does not allow for personal belief systems determine the inclusion (or lack thereof) of every student in our community that deserves to be treated as a respected and important member of our public schools.”
The recommended language before the school board Wednesday from the policy committee cites state and federal statutes and says the following – “The school corporation will not discriminate in its educational or employment activities on any basis prohibited by applicable federal or state laws.”
Some board members did not find that wording strong enough, arguing that language means something to the school community. Board Member Julie Chambers wants specific language with protections for sexual orientation and transgender students and employees. “If our district is going to talk about mental health, we cannot leave this out,” Chambers said.
Chambers said a parent did some research on 26 school districts in the general area of HSE schools and found…18 include sexual orientation in their nondiscrimination policies, 16 include gender identity and 15 include transgender students. Only 6 of the 26 disticts do not include any of these protections and HSE is one of the 6. “How dare we say we are forward-thinking?,” said Chambers.
The board voted unanimously to send the nondiscrimination policy language back to the policy committee.
There were two high school students and one adult that used the nondiscrimination policy discussion to criticize school administrators for allowing a male swimmer to compete in a key swim meet after allegations of sexual misconduct. Board Member Brad Boyer said he was told that student would not be competing in the swim meet, but those speaking before the board insisted the swimmer in question will be competing.
