“The school corporation  does not discriminate in its educational or employment activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex (including transgender status, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression), disability, age, religion, military status, ancestry or genetic information, nor on any basis prohibited by applicable federal or state laws.”

That language was the subject of a long and heated debate among members of the Hamilton Southeastern (HSE) School Board Wednesday night.  After an argument that seemed to never end, the board finally voted down the language above proposed by Board Member Julie Chambers.  Board members Chambers, Janet Pritchett and Michelle Fullhart supported the amendment language , but board member Sylvia Shelpler and Brad Boyer argued that the proposed amendment’s language was unnecessary.

When it came to a board vote, Amanda Shera, Mike Bottorff, Sylvia Shepler and Brad Boyer voted to reject the Chambers amendment.  Julie Chambers, Janet Pritchett and Michelle Fullhart voted for it.  As a result, the amendment was voted down 4-3.

The board then voted 4-3 to accept the following language instead:

“The school corporation will not discriminate in its educational and employment activities on any basis prohibited by applicable federal or state laws.”

Shera, Bottorff, Shepler, and Boyer voted yes on that measure.  Chambers, Pritchett and Fullhart cast no votes.

The vote followed some of the sharpest verbal exchanges this reporter has witnessed in the over 7 years I have covered the HSE School Board.  10 members of the public spoke passionately before the board in the public comment period, all but one arguing in support of Board Member Chambers’ amended language, which they felt was a strong statement of protection for all students in the HSE School District.

A majority of board members did not see it that way, and once Chambers’ amendment was voted down by 1 vote, there were outbursts from the audience, some in anger, some breaking down in tears over the board’s decision.  Many left the meeting room after warnings from Board President Bottorff about public outbursts during the session.

And there is one more thing.  This was just the first reading of this nondiscrimination policy.  It is not officially approved until voted on once again by the board in second reading, likely at the next regular board meeting.

(EDITOR’S NOTE:  This story was corrected at 9:20pm pm on 4.25.2019.  The previous version cited the original proposed language for the policy.  Brad Boyer moved to change the wording of the nondiscrimination policy passed on first reading Wednesday night.)