[00:10:00]
>> [BACKGROUND] IT IS FIVE O'CLOCK AND I WILL CALL THE FEBRUARY 14TH,
[00:10:06]
2023 MEETING OF THE AIKEN COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION TO ORDER.[00:10:11]
WE HAD AN AGENDA THAT WAS SENT OUT TO THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC IN ADVANCE.I HAVE NOT HEARD ANY ADDITIONS OR EDITS TO THAT, WE'LL CONSIDER THAT AGENDA APPROVED.
WHICH INCLUDES WE'RE DOING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION FIRST TONIGHT.
WE DO NEED A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING THE FOLLOWING MATTERS IN SUCH ORDER THAT THE BOARD DEEMS APPROPRIATE.
WE HAVE TWO STUDENT APPEALS, ONE FROM AREA ONE AND ONE FROM AREA THREE.
FOLLOWING THAT EXECUTIVE SESSION, WE WILL RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION TO ANNOUNCE THE MATTERS CONSIDERED AND TAKE ANY ACTIONS AS MAY BE NECESSARY. DO I HEAR A MOTION?
>> MOVED BY MR. SMITH, IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY DR. BRADLEY, ANY DISCUSSION?HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
IT'S UNANIMOUS, WHICH IS SEVEN. MOTION CARRIES.
WE WILL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE MATTER OF TWO STUDENT APPEALS, AND WITH THE INTENT OF RETURNING TO OPEN SESSION AT 06:00 P.M
[01:10:24]
WE DID THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY TONIGHT AND STARTED WITH AN EXECUTIVE SESSION,[01:10:28]
WHICH WE NEED TO DEAL WITH AT THIS POINT.[01:10:32]
WE DID HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DEAL WITH TWO STUDENT APPEALS,[01:10:36]
ONE FROM AREA 1 AND ONE FROM AREA 3.[01:10:39]
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO EXIT EXECUTIVE SESSION AND ENTER REGULAR SESSION?[01:10:44]
[01:10:44]
>> MOVED MY MS. REINHARDT JACKSON. IS THERE A SECOND?
[01:10:46]
[01:10:47]
>> SECOND BY DR. BRADLEY. ANY DISCUSSION?
[01:10:50]
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.[01:10:53]
THAT'S UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIES.[01:10:58]
BEFORE WE MOVE ON WITH OTHER BUSINESS, WE NEED TO DEAL WITH ANY ACTIONS OF ITEMS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.THERE WAS A STUDENT APPEAL A FROM AREA 1.
DO I HEAR A MOTION REGARDING STUDENT APPEAL A?
>> HOW ABOUT WE ACCEPT THE ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATION?
>> MOTION BY DR. BRADLEY SECONDED BY MR. SMITH TO ACCEPT THE ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATION. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
MR. MOLTEN, YOU'RE ABSTAINING, YEAH? OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES.
WE ALSO DEALT WITH STUDENT APPEAL B FROM AREA 3.
DO I HEAR A MOTION REGARDING STUDENT APPEAL B?
>> IN THE MATTER OF STUDENT APPEAL B, I WOULD MOVE TO ACCEPT THE DISTRICT'S RECOMMENDATION.
>> MOVED BY MR. SILAS, SECONDED BY MR. SMITH TO ACCEPT THE ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATION IN REGARDS TO STUDENT APPEAL B. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
EXCUSE ME, ABSTAINING. ONE ABSTENTION.
MOTION CARRIES SEVEN IN FAVOR AND ONE ABSTENTION.
THAT BRINGS US BACK TO OUR REGULAR SESSION.
WE START ALL OUR MEETINGS WITH A MOMENT OF SILENCE AND THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
PLEASE JOIN ME IN A MOMENT OF SILENCE.
>> BOARD MEMBERS, THIS BRINGS US TO THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
JUST A SPECIAL NOTE, WE ARE APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM A REGULAR MEETING FOR JANUARY 10TH, SPECIAL CALLED MEETING FOR JANUARY 17TH, AND THE REGULAR MEETING FROM JANUARY 24TH.
IF YOUR MEMORY TELLS YOU THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED TWO OF THESE, THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE.
THERE WAS AN ERROR CAUGHT BY MR. BROOME THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE RIGHT ATTENDEE LIST.
DR. BRADLEY'S NAME WAS MISSING FROM THE ATTENDEE LIST AND THAT WAS ADDED.
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE THREE SETS OF MINUTES?
>> MOVED BY MS. REINHARDT JACKSON.
>> SECOND BY DR. HANKS. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIES.
THAT BRINGS US TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
WHAT WE HAVE, TYPICALLY BY BOARD POLICY, WE ALLOCATE 30 MINUTES IN THE FIRST MEETING OF THE MONTH, WHICH THIS IS, TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
JUDGING FROM THAT, I HAVE APPROXIMATELY 10 REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
I WANT TO GET TO EVERYBODY, SO THAT MEANS I WILL ASK YOU TO LIMIT YOUR REMARKS TO THREE MINUTES WHEN YOU SPEAK.
THE FIRST ONE I HAVE IN THE STACK IS JORDAN MOBLEY,
[01:15:04]
AND WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT AIKEN HIGH SCHOOL CHEER-LEADING.YES, MA'AM, THAT MICROPHONE BEHIND YOU.
>> THANK YOU. OR I PICK IT UP.
I'M JORDAN MOBLEY FROM AIKEN HIGH SCHOOL.
AS AN AIKEN HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT GOING ON FOUR YEARS AND AS AN AIKEN HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETE GOING ON FIVE YEARS, I'VE NEVER BEEN IN ANY ALTERCATIONS OR TROUBLE.
THIS CHEER SEASON HAS BEEN SO UNFAIR TO MYSELF AND TO MY TEAMMATES.
WE LOVE WHAT WE DO AND HONESTLY IT'S SAD THAT PEOPLE WANTS TO TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US.
WE WORK HARD IN THE BLEACHERS AND OFF.
WE ARE TRULY HONEST AT HEART, SO WHY TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US? WHY PUNISH FOR SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN ALLOWED TO DO ALL SEASON? IS IT THE COLOR OF OUR SKIN? WHEN DID THE WAY WE CHEER BECOME A PROBLEM? I AM A WELL-MANNERED YOUNG LADY, RESPECTS ANYONE THAT COMES ACROSS ME, AND I HONOR ALL STUDENT AND MY SCHOOL RECORD IS CLEAN, AND MY FIRST AND ALL THE WRITE-UP IS COMING FROM A CHEER BATTLE WHERE NOBODY WAS DISRESPECTED AND NO ONE WAS TOUCHED.
EVEN THOUGH IT WAS NEVER INTENTIONALLY MEANT FOR NO ONE TO BE DISRESPECTED.
MY AIKEN HIGH CHEERING TEAMMATES AND SILVER BLUFF CHEERING TEAM WERE CHEERING AS WE DID EVERY GAME.
IT WAS NOTHING PERSONAL TOWARDS SILVER BLUFF CHEERLEADERS.
EVERYTHING WE PLAYED THIS SEASON, WE HAVE BATTLE.
SILVER BLUFF CHEERLEADERS WERE JUST AS PASSIONATE AS WE WERE.
WHY I'M BEING PUNISHED? WHY CAN'T NO ONE TELL ME WHY I'M BEING PUNISHED? WHY CAN'T ANYONE TELL ME WHAT I SAID DURING THE VERBAL ALTERCATION? THAT'S THE BIG QUESTION.
FOR THE PAST TWO DAYS, I HAVE SPENT ALL DAY IN SCHOOL SUSPENSION UNSURE OF WHY I HAD TO BE THERE.
I AM ASKING THE SITUATION TO BE LOOKED INTO AND REMOVED OFF MY RECORD.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LISTENING TO ME.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, I HAVE SHAUNA MOBLEY SPEAKING ABOUT AIKEN HIGH SCHOOL CHEERLEADERS AND/OR THE GAME.
>> GOOD EVENING. I AM JORDAN MOBLEY'S MOM, SHAUNA MOBLEY.
I RECEIVED THE CALL ON TWO SEVEN, WHICH IS A TUESDAY FROM MY DAUGHTER, SAYING THAT SHE HAD JUST RECEIVED THE REFERRAL FOR A VERBAL ALTERCATION AT THE AIKEN HIGH AND SILVER BLUFF BASKETBALL GAME.
I ASKED HER, "WHAT DID YOU DO? WHAT WAS THE REFERRAL FOR?" SHE TOLD ME THAT SHE HAD ALTERCATION WITH THE CHEERLEADERS. I SAID, "WHAT DO YOU MEAN?" SHE SAID "WHEN WE WERE CHEER BATTLING THAT WE HAD ALTERCATIONS." I SAID, "WELL, WHO GOT IN TROUBLE?" SHE SAID, "ME AND TWO OTHER OF HER CHEER-MATES." I SAID, "WELL, WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN BECAUSE I WAS AT THE GAME, YOUR DAD WAS AT THE GAME? WE DIDN'T SEE AN ALTERCATION." SHE SAID, "MOM, I DON'T KNOW." I SAID, "FINE, I'LL COME UP TO THE SCHOOL AND I'LL SEE WHAT'S GOING ON." I ASKED TO SPEAK TO MS. JOHNSON.
MS. JOHNSON CAME AND TALKED TO ME.
SHE SAID, "I DON'T KNOW, I WASN'T THERE.
I WAS JUST TOLD TO MAKE THE REFERRAL." I SAID, "WELL, CAN I SPEAK TO PRINCIPAL HAMRICK?" SHE'S UNAVAILABLE. SHE'LL GET BACK TO YOU WHEN SHE CAN.
SHE GAVE ME A CALL AND SHE PROCEEDED TO TELL ME THAT JORDAN GOT INTO AN ALTERCATION WITH SILVER BLUFF CHEERLEADERS.
I ASKED HER, "WHAT DID SHE SAY AND TO WHOM ON THE CHEERLEADING TEAM IN SILVER BLUFF DID SHE GET ALTERCATION WITH?" SHE TOLD ME, "OH, I DON'T REMEMBER." "WELL, HOW CAN YOU WRITE HER FOR A VERBAL ALTERCATION?" IS WHAT I ASKED HER.
THEN SHE CHANGED TO SAY THAT IT WAS HER BODY LANGUAGE.
I SAID, "WELL, HAVE YOU WATCHED THE CHEERLEADERS CHEER ALL SEASON? THEY HAVE CHEERED WITH THEIR BODY ALL SEASON LONG.
THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THEY HAVE CHEERED AGAIN SILVER BLUFF AND STILL WAS VERY EXCITING BODY LANGUAGE.
WHAT WAS DIFFERENT THIS TIME?" SHE TOLD ME THAT THERE WASN'T ANYTHING SHE WAS GOING TO CHANGE AND THEN I CAN GO TO THE BOARD IF THAT'S WHAT I CHOSE TO DO AND THAT'S WHAT I DID.
I WAS AT THAT GAME, MY HUSBAND WAS AT THAT GAME, JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM WAS AT THAT BASKETBALL GAME.
I HAVE NOT SEEN MY DAUGHTER OR ANY OF THESE OTHER GIRLS THAT WAS ACCUSED OF THIS IN A VERBAL ALTERCATION OTHER THAN THEY LOOK EXCITED ABOUT CHEERING.
THE COACH HASN'T CALLED ME, HASN'T TOLD ME THAT THEY DID ANYTHING WRONG.
[01:20:02]
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THESE GIRLS ARE BEING PUNISHED FOR THIS AND THIS EXTENT TO HAVE IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION.MOST ATHLETES, THEY GET INTO AN ALTERCATION OR ANYTHING ARE PUNISHED AND TAKEN AWAY FROM THE SPORTING EVENT, NOT PUT OUT OF SCHOOL.
THIS IS JUST UNCALLED FOR A FIRST OFFENSE, THREE YOUNG LADIES WHO'VE NEVER BEEN IN TROUBLE.
SOMETHING ELSE COULD HAVE BEEN DONE ABOUT THIS.
THEN THEY CHEERED THE NEXT GAME.
THE GAME WASN'T TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM, BUT THEY RECEIVED A SCHOOL SUSPENSION. THAT'S NOT FAIR.
THAT'S NOT THE PROTOCOL FOR THE OTHER ATHLETES.
WHY WERE THEY DIFFERENT? THANK YOU.
>> IS THIS A MATTER THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HEAR IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY TO MAKE A JUDGMENT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS ALTERCATION WHICH I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH OTHER THAN ONE EMAIL THAT I READ.
I FEEL LIKE IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS IN SOME OFFICIAL CAPACITY OTHER THAN JUST SITTING HERE LISTENING TO IT, THAT WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO PUT A STOP TO IT UNTIL WE HERE IT IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY.
OTHERWISE, WE'RE ALWAYS TOLD WE SHOULD HAVE INFORMATION BEFORE WE SIT IN JUDGMENT.
BUT HERE WE ARE HEARING A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THIS INCIDENT.
IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT, IT'S JUST THAT I'M QUESTIONING WHETHER WE SHOULD HEAR IT NOW OR WE SHOULDN'T HEAR IT, SHOULD I CONSULT AN ATTORNEY, I DON'T KNOW.
>> WELL, SO MY FIRST ANSWER MAY NOT BE THE RIGHT ONE BUT WHAT THE FOLKS HAVE TALKED ABOUT AS AN IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION AND YOU CAN'T APPEAL AN IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION TO THE BOARD.
ACTUALLY, I DON T THINK THAT GOES OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL.
FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE PROCEDURALLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD HEAR ANYTHING REGARDING IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION.
>> I MAYBE MISINFORMED, BUT I THOUGHT PEOPLE COULD APPEAL ANYTHING TO THE BOARD
>> ACCORDING TO OUR CODE OF CONDUCT SAYS THEY CAN APPEAL ONE LEVEL UP AND SO IF THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL FILLED OUT THE REFERRAL, THEN THAT WILL BE THE PRINCIPLE AS THE APPELLATE.
IF THE PRINCIPAL FOOT OUT TO REFER, IT WILL BE MR. POTTS STALE AS THE APPELLATE.
>> WE'VE GOT AND I APOLOGIZE IF I MISPRONOUNCE.
THE NEXT PERSON REQUESTING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS TORI MOBLEY, IS THAT RIGHT?
THEN THE NEXT PERSON REQUESTING FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS JOYCE FOSTER.
>> MY NAME IS JOYCE FOSTER, I'M ALUMNI OF AIKEN HIGH I GRADUATED IN '81.
I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF AIKEN HIGH SCHOOL.
I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE CHEERLEADERS AND THE PROCESS AT AIKEN HIGH.
I DID COME WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PRINCIPAL AND THE AD MIGHT NEED TO ATTEND SOME DIVERSITY CLASSES.
THE REASON WHY I RECOMMEND AND THAT IS BECAUSE, ONE EXAMPLE WAS WITH COACH PAGE WHEN HE WAS RELEASED.
IT WAS MADE ACCORDING TO THE COMMUNITY, WHICH THAT'S WHAT THEY BASE THEIR DECISION ON, THAT THE HOMECOMING OF 22 WAS TOO BLACK.
THEN THERE WAS AN INCIDENT WHERE ANOTHER LITTLE YOUNG BLACK KID, WE'RE NOT THE WRONG DOOR.
HE WAS IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION, NO WARNING, NO NOTHING.
NOW HERE THE CHEERLEADERS, BECAUSE THEY'RE BLACK, THEY ARE MAKING IT HARD FOR THEM TO EVEN ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING BECAUSE OF THE SCARRING THEM FROM WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE.
MY RECOMMENDATION IS FOR SOMEONE BECAUSE NO ONE ANSWER EMAILS, NO ONE ANSWERED TELEPHONE CALLS.
I HAVE EMAILED THE SUPERINTENDENT, I HAVE EMAILED THE PRINCIPAL AND NO ONE HAVE TAKEN THE TIME TO RESPOND TO ANYTHING THAT I HAD TO SAY SO I FELT LIKE I NEEDED TO COME TODAY TO VOICE MY CONCERNS. THANK YOU.
[01:25:03]
>> THANK YOU, MISS FOSTER. I THINK WE'RE DOING OKAY JUST ONE THING TO REMIND FOLKS IN PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS TO AVOID USING NAMES.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT SCHOOL OPERATIONS OR POLICY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR IT.
JUST DON'T WANT TO TURN INTO ANYTHING PERSONAL IN THE BOARD MEETING SO PLEASE REFRAIN FROM USING NAMES.
NEXT ONE IS MELISSA SAPP OR I MEAN, IF I GOT THAT RIGHT.
>> OKAY. YOU WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT THE BASKETBALL GAME.
>> GOOD EVENING MY NAME IS MELISSA SAPP.
WEEKS AGO AIKEN HAVE PLAYED MELANIN VALLEY.
WHEN MELANIN VALLEY CAME UP COURT, MELANIN VALLEY WAS ALREADY AGGRESSIVE.
CLEARLY, MY SON WAS EJECTED FROM THE GAME.
LOOKING AT THE TAPES, YOU CAN SEE WHERE MY SON WALKED AWAY THREE TIMES FROM THREE DIFFERENT PLAYERS THAT PROVOKED HIM.
WHEN THE LAST PLAYER, PUSHED HIM, HE PUSHED A PLAYER BACK, THE OFFICIAL EJECTED HIM.
NOW MY SON IS SUSPENDED FOR THREE GAMES.
I HAVE BEEN EMAILING, SPEAKING WITH THE COACH.
I ALSO WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A CONFERENCE CALL WITH ATHLETIC DIRECTOR.
HE SENT ME A MESSAGE BACK SAYING THAT CAN HE CALL ME BACK AFTER THE PARENT RALLY.
THE PARENT RALLY IS MORE IMPORTANT TO YOU THAN YOU CALLING A CONCERNED PARENT ABOUT THEIR CHILD.
NOW, THIS HAS TAKEN A TOLL ON MY SON BECAUSE BASKETBALL IS MY SON'S PASSION.
HE HAS BEEN TRAVELING WITH THE TEAM BUT SITTING ON THE SIDELINES AND JUST SEEING MY SON AND HOW HE'S NOT HIMSELF.
BUT BY MY SON DEFENDING HIMSELF WHEN OFFICIAL SOMEONE PUSHED THE PLAYER BACK AND WHEN THEY LOOKED AT THE TAPE AND SAW WHEN MY SON WALKED AWAY FROM THREE DIFFERENT PLAYERS THAT PROVOKED HIM BUT NOTHING HAPPENED TO THE OTHER PLAYER THAT PROVOKED HIM.
MY SON WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT GOT SUSPENDED FOR THREE GAMES, EJECTED THAT NIGHT FROM THE GAME.
I'M THINKING OKAY, BUT MY SON DIDN'T CAUSE HIS OWN, HIS OWN.
WHY THE OTHER PLAYER WASN'T SUSPENDED? THAT PROVOKED HIM. THAT'S IT. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU, MUM. NEXT, WE HAVE.
MIRIAM ZIDANE. IS THAT RIGHT? WANTED TO TALK ABOUT DISCIPLINE AND ISS RELATED TO THE CHEER PROGRAM.
>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MIRIAM ZIDANE, I'M A AVID VOLUNTEER, A PTO MEMBER AT MILLBROOK ELEMENTARY, AND A DONOR, A CONTINUOUS DONOR IN AIKEN COUNTY SCHOOLS.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT THE DIRECTION AIKEN HIGH SCHOOL WAS HEADED IN REGARDS TO DISCIPLINE, COMMUNICATION, AND CARE AND CONCERN FOR THEIR STUDENTS.
MY DAUGHTER WAS ALSO NOTIFIED ON 27 THAT SHE RECEIVED A REFERRAL.
I MET WITH MS. JOHNSON I'M SORRY, I MET WITH THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL FOR THE JUNIOR CLASS GRADE LEVEL, THOUGH REFERRAL WAS HANDED DOWN TO HER FROM THE PRINCIPAL.
THE PRINCIPAL WAS THE ONLY ONE AT THE GAME.
THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL WAS NOT AT THE GAME.
SHE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE INCIDENT, AND SHE WAS ASKING MY DAUGHTER FOR INFORMATION REGARDING THE INCIDENT.
THE PRINCIPAL REFUSED TO MEET WITH ME.
SHE IN FACT WAS THE ONLY PERSON WHO SAW THIS VERBAL ALTERCATION IS ALL MY DAUGHTER'S REFERRAL STATES.
IT'S STRAIGHT ACROSS VERBAL ALTERCATION.
I TRIED TO MEET WITH HER I STAYED AT THE SCHOOL OVER AN HOUR TO MEET WITH HER.
I LEFT AND I E-MAILED THE DISTRICT OFFICE, WITH THE DISTRICT OFFICE, HER BOSS.
HE RESPONDED TO ME THAT SOMEONE, A COACH OR THE AD SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH ME TO THIS DAY, NO COACH OR AD HAS CONTACTED ME IN REGARDS TO MY DAUGHTERS VERBAL ALTERCATION ALLEGEDLY AT THIS GAME.
HER BOSS INFORMED ME THAT SINCE THE PRINCIPAL WITNESS THE VERBAL ALTERCATION AND HANDED THE REFERRAL DOWN TO THE AP AND HAD THE AP SERVE THE REFERRAL, EVEN THOUGH SHE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT THE INCIDENT, I WAS THERE FOR SENT BACK TO THE PRINCIPAL.
IN A SENSE, IT IS A DICTATORSHIP.
I WAS CALLED BY THE PRINCIPAL AND I WAS NOT ABLE TO VOICE MY CONCERNS BEFORE HER SAYING, HI, SINCE YOU DECIDED YOU WANT TO APPEAL, I'LL DO THREE DAYS ACCESS INSTEAD OF TWO DAYS ACCESS.
[01:30:02]
I SAID I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE THIS IS AN APPEAL PROCESS.I'M SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU ON APPEAL.
YOU NEED TO HEAR WHY I'M APPEALING.
I ASKED WHAT DID MY CHILD SAY AND WHO DOES SHE SAY IT TO.
SHE DIDN'T KNOW. SHE LAUGHED AND SAID, OH, I CAN'T REMEMBER.
THEN SHE WENT ON ALSO TO TELL ME THAT WAS MY CHILD'S BODY LANGUAGE.
I HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT E-MAIL AND EVERYONE'S TIRELESSLY.
I HAVE BEEN TO THE SCHOOL AND SPOKE WITH THE AD FOR OVER AN HOUR.
HE LOVED THE WAY OUR CHEERLEADERS ARE CHEER.
EVERY SCHOOL COMPLIMENTS OUR GIRLS.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE AT NOR THE COACHES WERE ABLE TO HANDLE THIS SITUATION AT THAT SAME GAME, THERE WAS AN ATHLETE THAT HAD A SITUATION GOING ON.
THE PRINCIPAL GAVE HIM A WARNING.
THE PRINCIPAL ALLOWED THE AD TO HANDLE THAT SITUATION LATER ON THAT WEEK.
HE NEVER HEARD ABOUT OUR SITUATION WITH OUR BLACK CHEERLEADERS UNTIL I SEND OUT EMAILS.
THEN HE HAD TO CONTACT OUR VARSITY CHEER COACH AND ASK WHAT IS GOING ON? BECAUSE HE WAS UNAWARE.
HE WAS NEVER GIVEN THE CHANCE TO DISCIPLINE OUR GIRLS.
MY ISSUE WITH THIS SITUATION IS THAT IT MAY BE IF IT WAS A SAFETY PROBLEM AND THEY FELT SOMETHING WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
THEY LISTED DOWN TO HAVE A TEACHING MOMENT.
LET'S TALK TO OUR GIRLS, LET'S TALK TO OUR COACHES.
>> YES, MA'AM. YOU'RE OUT OF TIME.
>> WELL, WE'RE OUT OF TIME, IF YOU HAVE ONE SENTENCE, MA'AM.
>> I WILL TELL YOU THIS RIGHT HERE.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF OVER-POLICING OUR CHILDREN AND MS. HAMMER, BELOW THE PRINCIPAL, MISSED A MOMENT TO RELATE TO THE STUDENTS.
THEY COULD HAVE BEEN A TEACHING MOMENT FOR EVERYONE.
I'M JUST REALLY ASKING, WHEN DOES IT STOP? WHEN DO OUR CHILDREN DESERVE THE SAME TEACHING MOMENT THAT ALL OTHER SHOOTERS DESERVE, REGARDLESS OF THEIR SKIN COLOR OR BACKGROUND? OUR CHILDREN DESERVE THAT, THEY DESERVE COMMUNICATION INSTEAD OF HARSH DISCIPLINE.
I'M SURE YOU ALL ARE AWARE THAT SINCE SHE HAS BEEN OVER THE SCHOOL, IT'S BEEN MANY KIDS HAVE SEEN, IT'S A PROGRESS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
I ALSO HAVE A COPY OF THE E-MAIL FROM DR.
PASTEL SAYING THAT HE WOULD HAVE ISSUED OUR CHILDREN HARSHER PUNISHMENT WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THE FACTS.
>> I JUST ASKED, PLEASE I ASKED YOU ALL TO PLEASE REFRAIN FROM USING NAMES IN PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
WE HAVE A FEW MORE FOLKS TO GET TO.
I DON'T WANT TO MISPRONOUNCE THIS, BUT CARLIN MARSHALL, I'M SORRY.
CALEAH MARSHALL. ALSO TALKING ABOUT THE REFERRAL AND CHEER PROGRAM.
>> HI, MY NAME IS CALEAH MARSHALL.
I HAVE NOW BEEN A PART OF THE HIGH-SCHOOL CHILEAN PROGRAM, FOR NOW, TWO YEARS, THIS YEAR BEING DECEASED WOULD BE MY FIRST VARSITY SEASON WAS AMAZING WITH THE HELP OF OUR AMAZING COACH.
FEBRUARY 3RD AT OUR HOME BASKETBALL GAME AGAINST THE CIVIL BLUFF HIGH SCHOOL, OUR PRINCIPAL, DECIDED TO COME AND MISINTERPRET ART GAME DAY CHEERING IN OUR CULTURE BEHIND OF HOW WE CHEER.
FOR SOMETHING NEGATIVE, WE HAVE BEEN DOING THE SAME THING ALL SEASON AT EVERY SINGLE GAME.
NOT ONLY US, BUT EVERY CHEER TEAM WE HAVE COME AGAINST THE MACON COUNTY.
AFTER EVERY GAME, WE GET A COUPLE OF MINUTES, BUT EVERY FAN IN THE STANDS WATCHING US OUT HOW GOOD WE LOOK AS A WHOLE.
NOT ONLY THEM, BUT OUR OWN AD HAS CAME TO US AND I APPRECIATE US FOR HOW MUCH OUTGOING AND SPIRITS IN GOOD SPIRITS THAT WE ARE WHEN WE CHEER.
ME AND THE SCHOLAR ATHLETE AT HIGH SCHOOL.
KNOWING HOW POSITIVE, OUTGOING I'M BEATING KNOW FOR THE TYPE OF PERSON I'M.
IT HURTS TO KNOW I PUT MY ALL AND EVERYTHING I DO.
I TRY MY HARDEST TO MAKE THIS SEASON FOR US AS BEST AS POSSIBLE AND AS HAPPY AS POSSIBLE.
ME AND MY FAMILY HAVE DONATED, I DON'T KNOW, COUNTLESS AMOUNTS OF THINGS TOWARDS THE CHEER PROGRAM IN MANY OTHER PROGRAMS WHICH ARE NOT EVEN INVOLVED IN.
WHEN I LOOK AT MY REFER LISTED IN THE VERBAL ALTERCATION, IT'S ALL THIS IS.
IF I WAS IN A VERBAL ALTERCATION, THAT MEANS I HAD TO SAY SOMETHING THAT WAS INAPPROPRIATE TO SOMEONE.
SHE CAN'T EVEN EXPLAIN TO MY MOM, BUT WHAT I SAID, BUT IT'S OKAY.
FOR ALL WHITE STUDENTS SECTION, TO TIE THEY SAY EVERYTHING THEY WANT TO SAY, SO EVERY LAST GAME WE HAVE I HAD OUR STUDENTS' SECTION ALWAYS GET CALLED OUT FOR MISBEHAVING.
BUT IT'S OKAY. THEY GET A WARRANT, THEY GET ADULT SAY IT AGAIN.
THEY DOES WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO.
WE TRIED OUT THE CHEERING, THAT'S WHAT WE DO.
WE CHEER AT EVERY SINGLE GETTING WE PUT IT ALL INTO IT, BUT WE GET IN TROUBLE FOR DOING WHAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO DO.
IF THERE WAS A PROBLEM ALL COACHES SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED JUST LIKE THEY ARE WITH THEIR STUDENTS.
ALL STUDENTS SECTION EVERY TIME THEY GET IN TROUBLE THEIR AD IS NOTIFIED AND AD IS ABLE TO TALK TO THEM.
NO AD, NO PRINCIPAL, NO COACH, NO NOBODY TALKS TO ME.
I HAD TO FIND OUT OVER IT IN A COLUMN B AND COLUMN DOWN TO OFFICE,
[01:35:04]
AND THE PRINCIPAL, WHOSE NAME IS ALSO THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL WHOSE NAME IS ON THE REFERRAL, DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.IT'S HURTFUL AND IT'S PAINFUL NOR THE TYPE OF PERSON I AM IT BEING WRITTEN UP FOR WHAT I WAS DOING AFFORD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT MELBA SPRINGS, ALSO TALKING ABOUT AIKEN HIGH CHEER.
>> THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS THAT I HAVE RECOGNIZED THAT ARE NEGATIVE WITHIN THE TWO-YEAR PROGRAM I CAN ADD THIS YEAR.
BUT WHAT I WILL SAY IS FOR MY DAUGHTER, SHE WAS NOT SUSPENDED, BUT I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THE CHEER TEAM.
HOWEVER, THERE HAVE BEEN INCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE SEASON.
MY DAUGHTER IS ALSO A SCHOLAR ATHLETE AT AIKEN HIGH.
SHE'S ON THE AIKEN HIGH GOLF TEAM AS WELL AS THE TRACK TEAM AND THE CHEER TEAM.
THE FIRST INCIDENT THAT WAS UNPROFESSIONAL WAS THE FACT THAT MY DAUGHTER WAS TOLD BY HER GOLF COACH, THAT SHE WAS KICKED OFF THE CHEER TEAM BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT AT PRACTICE.
THIS CAME DOWN FROM THE CHEER COACH TO THE AD TO THE GOLF COACH.
HE PROCEEDED TO TELL MY DAUGHTER THAT SHE WAS KICKED OFF THE CHEER TEAM UNLIKE THE SEVENTH HOLE WHILE SHE WAS PARTICIPATING IN AN ACHING HEART GOLF MATCH, ME SITTING ON THE GOLF CART, SAW MY DAUGHTER'S FACE COMPLETELY CHANGED.
SHE WALKED TO THE GOLF CART AND SAID, APPARENTLY I'M KICKED OFF THE TEAM.
I'M LIKE FOR WHAT BECAUSE I'M NOT A CHEER PRACTICE.
SO IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ACHING HEART GOLF MATCH, MY DAUGHTER HAD TO GO THROUGH HER PHONE, FIND THE GROUP ME MESSAGE WHERE SHE SENT THE COACH HER GOLF SCHEDULE, AND SAID I WILL NOT BE AT PRACTICE BECAUSE I HAVE A HOME GOLF MATCH.
SHE THEN SENT THAT TO THE AD BACK TO THE COACH.
IN THE MEANTIME, I'M FURIOUS BECAUSE GOLF IS A MENTAL GAME NOW, SHE'S OFF HER GAME, UPSET AS WELL AS ME SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED THROUGH THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT SHE WAS KICKED OFF A TEAM FOR BEING AT ANOTHER AIKEN HIGH EVENT.
SO ONCE I GET HOME AND STRAIGHTEN IT OUT, THEN SORRY, I DIDN'T GET THE MESSAGE.
THE SECOND THING WAS SHE WAS GIVEN THE MERITS FOR BEING AT A KEY CLUB MEETING, WHICH IS ALSO ANOTHER AIKEN HIGH CLUB, 15 MINUTES, AND SHE WAS GIVEN TO MERIT AND IN TROUBLE FOR THAT.
THE THINGS THAT BOTHERED ME MOST IS HOW THESE GIRLS HAVE BEEN LABELED COME TO FIND OUT THEY'VE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH THE COACH WHERE THEY'VE BEEN CALLED AGGRESSIVE, BULLIES.
THEY'VE ALSO BEEN TOLD THAT THEY ARE NOT AN HBCU, AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY NOT KNOW HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGE UNIVERSITY, OF COURSE, THEY'RE NOT HBCU BECAUSE THEY ARE HIGH-SCHOOL TEAM, BUT THAT IS CALLED FOR YOU'RE NOT BLACK.
THE WHOLE CHEER TEAM IS AFRICAN AMERICAN.
SO THE CHEERS THAT THEY DO ARE NOT AGGRESSIVE, THEY'RE NOT BULLIES AND THEY'RE NOT HBCUS.
IF THAT WAS THE ISSUE, THEN EVERY HIGH SCHOOL IN AIKEN COUNTY WOULDN'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM.
I HAVE OBSERVED EVERY GAME I'VE BEEN AT AWAY GAMES, I'VE BEEN AT HOME GAMES.
EVERY SCHOOL IN AIKEN COUNTY IS DOING THE EXACT SAME CHEERS.
HOWEVER, THESE GIRLS ARE LABELED AS AGGRESSIVE, BULLIES, GHETTO, AND DISRESPECTFUL.
THOSE ARE THE TERMS THAT HAVE BEEN USED TOWARDS MY DAUGHTER AND HER TEAM FROM THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN ADMINISTRATION AS WELL AS THE MISTREATMENT AND THE BIAS.
I KNOW I'M OUT OF TIME, BUT I WILL ALSO SAY THAT YES, THE STUDENT SECTION WHICH IS ALL WHITE, THEY CURSE, THEY ARE VERY AGGRESSIVE, THEY ARE NEVER IN TROUBLE.
FOR A COACH THAT IS NEVER THERE, BUT CAN ALWAYS PROVIDE DISCIPLINE, BUT NO INSTRUCTION.
>> THANK YOU, MS. SPRINGS. NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MORGAN SPRINGS ABOUT AIKEN HIGH CHAIR.
>> GOOD EVENING. I'M MORGAN SPRINGS.
I'VE BEEN A STUDENT ATHLETE FOR MY WHOLE LIFE AND I ORIGINALLY CAME FROM FOX CREEK HIGH SCHOOL IN THE BEGINNING OF MY NINTH GRADE YEAR AND I TRANSFERRED TO AIKEN HIGH.
COMING IN TO AIKEN HIGH I HAD A HIGH EXPECTATION FOR CHEER WHICH HAD CAME FROM FOX CRAIG.
[01:40:01]
WE HAD A COMPETITION CHAIN WHICH I TRIED OUT FOR AND MADE A CHEERING SIDELINE IN A COMPETITION AND I ALSO PLAYED GOLF.WHEN I CAME TO AIKEN HIGH I WAS VERY EXCITED TO CHEER, BUT WHEN I GOT TO THE SCHOOL IT WAS NOT WHAT I EXPECTED OR WHAT I WAS TOLD.
I WAS TOLD WE HAD A COMPETITION TEAM WHICH I TRIED OUT FOR AND I MADE AND WE GOT PUT INTO A ROOM AFTER HAVING ONLY TWO PRACTICES WITH NO COACH.
I GOT PULLED INTO A ROOM AND TOLD THAT WE "WEREN'T READY.
AND SHE SHOWED US VIDEOS OF COMPETITION TEAMS FROM OTHER SCHOOLS AND TOLD US WE WEREN'T PREPARED, BUT SHE'S THE ONE THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE COACHING US AND PREPARE US TO CHEER.
I WAS ALSO TOLD IN THE MIDDLE OF MY GOLF MATCH, I'LL BE KICKED OFF THE TEAM BECAUSE I WASN'T AT PRACTICE WHEN I TOLD HER ABOUT A WEEK PRIOR TO THAT I WOULDN'T BE THERE AND SET HER WHOLE SCHEDULE.
I'M COMMITTED TO MY TEAM, SO WHEN I MISS PRACTICE IT'S JUST TILL ALL THE GAG OR BE LAZY.
I'M ALWAYS THERE AND I ALWAYS PROVIDE MATERIAL FOR OUR TEAM BECAUSE OUR COACH DOESN'T.
ALSO, GOING INTO THE TENTH GRADE OUR CHEER DANCE TO TRY OUT WAS A BUNCH OF TIKTOK DANCES MASHED UP.
IT WAS A BUNCH OF SHAKING AND A BUNCH OF HIP HOP SONGS.
I TOOK THAT AS SOMEONE JUST ASSUMING THAT WE WOULD LIKE THAT DANCE BECAUSE OF THE COLOR OF OUR SKIN AND NOT BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT CHEERING.
OUR COACH, OUR HEAD COACH, SHE IS IN A RAP PRACTICE, BUT SHE ALWAYS TELLS US THAT WE GET GOOD REPORTS FROM EVERYONE.
BUT SHE NEVER SHOWS UP UNLESS SHE SHOWS UP FOR HER OWN PERSONAL COMPETITION TEAM THAT SHE USES THE SCHOOL BUILDING FOR TO TEACH OTHER GIRLS.
SHE ALWAYS COMES TO THE PRACTICE OF GIRLS THAT ARE PAYING HER AND NOT THE GIRLS THAT SHE SIGNED UP AND IS GETTING THEIR PAYCHECK TO TEACH.
WE GET GOOD REPORTS FROM EVERY SCHOOL WE GO TO, FROM FANS AND PARENTS.
EVEN WHEN WE'RE ALL THE WAY OUT IN COLOMBIA, IN HILTON HEAD, WE GET GOOD REPORTS FROM EVERYONE, BUT THE ONE TIME THAT OUR PRINCIPAL DECIDES TO COME TO THE ONE GAME THAT WE CHEER AT, WE'RE PUNISHED.
WHEN THE STUDENT SECTION CONTINUOUSLY LOOKS UP THE ATHLETE, SOMEONE MARKS SCRIPTS AND TALKS ABOUT THEIR FAMILY CALLS THEM NAMES, TRIES TO COME ON TO THE COURT, BUT THEY NEVER GET PUNISHED LIKE WE DO AND WE JUST WANT TO SUPPORT OUR SCHOOL AND CHEER AND DO WHAT WE DO.
MS. WILSON, WHO WANTS ALSO SPEAK ABOUT CHEER.
>> GOOD EVENING. CHEER IS ALREADY LOOKED AT AS NOT A SPORT OR NOT IMPORTANT ALREADY, SO AS BLACK CHEERLEADERS WE TRY OUR BEST TO PUT ON THE BEST SHOW.
LIKE THEY SAID, WHEN IT CAME TO US FIRST, IT WAS A CHEER BATTLE.
IT WASN'T A PROBLEM, NOTHING HAPPENED.
WE WENT ON ABOUT OUR LIVES, DID WHAT WE HAD TO DO.
THEN WE CAME UP TO THE SECOND GAME.
WE DID EXACTLY WHAT WE DID THE FIRST TIME.
WE BOTH BATTLE, WE BOTH DID WHAT WE LOVE, AND LIKE SHE SAID WE BOTH WERE PASSIONATE ABOUT IT.
AS A CHEERLEADER SINCE WE DIDN'T GET ISS OR ANYTHING, I FEEL LIKE THEY SHOULDN'T EITHER BECAUSE WE BOTH DID THE SAME THING.
THERE WAS NO VERBAL ALTERCATION.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME FROM BECAUSE WE BOTH DID NOTHING.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY I FEEL BAD FOR THEM BECAUSE THAT'S NOT FAIR AND WE JUST DO WHAT WE LOVE TO DO.
LIKE SHE SAID, THE HBCU COMING, THAT WAS VERY HURTFUL BECAUSE WE ALWAYS ARE LABELED AS GHETTO TRASHY ALL KINDS OF STUFF THAT WE DON'T.
WE'RE JUST HERE. WE'RE HERE TO SUPPORT THEM 100 PERCENT BECAUSE WE ARE BEHIND Y'ALL BECAUSE THAT'S NOT FAIR.
WE'RE CHEERLEADERS AND WE DO WHAT WE DO.
IT'S LIKE THEY SAY, THEIR STUDENTS SECTION ARE WHITE KIDS AND THEY DO ALL TYPES OF LIKE ONE GOT INTO SOMETHING WITH OUR ONE PLAYER BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY'RE SAYING TO THEM, AND THAT'S NOT FAIR.
IF WE GET IN TROUBLE, THEY SHOULD TOO. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. OUR LAST PERSON FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS TAYLOR SMITH, ALSO SPEAKING ON CHEER.
[01:45:05]
>> GOOD EVENING. I'M TAYLOR SMITH.
I'M THE CAPTAIN OF THE SBHS CHEERLEADERS, AND I CAN VOUCH THAT EVERY GAME WE BATTLE LITERALLY EVERY SCHOOL WE'RE PLAYING AT AIKEN COUNTY.
I CAN SAY THAT NOT WAS IDEAS RIGHT BUT IT'S LIKE WE BOTH PASSIONATE, SO WE BOTH BRINGING THE SAME ENERGY.
THE GAME WAS BORING SO IT'S LIKE THE CHEERLEADERS IS WAY OF BRINGING LIFE TO THE GAME.
I CAN VOUCH THAT, IT WAS NO VERBAL ALTERCATION.
THEY NEVER SAID ANYTHING OUT A WAY TO MAKE US FEEL RESPECTED.
IAD FEELS A TYPE OF WAY ABOUT US CHEERING, BUT IT'S LIKE TO AN EXTENT IT CERTAIN THINGS WE CAN DO LIKE WE HAVE RULES.
IF WE GET IN A FIGHT, WE WILL BE BANNED AND WE DID GET PUNISHED.
IT'S LIKE WE CAN'T COME OUT AND BLEACH BUT WE NEVER GOT ISS OR ANYTHING.
THE STUDENTS SECTION, LIKE THEY SAY ALL STUDENTS SESSION THAT IT'S VERY DISRESPECTFUL.
I FEEL LIKE YOU ALL HAVE THE MOST DISRESPECTFUL STUDENTS SESSION IN AIKEN COUNTY, BUT NONE OF THEM WAS BEING PUNISHED AND IT IS UNFAIR TO THOSE GIRLS BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T SAYING ANYTHING OUT A WAY TO MAKE US FEEL ANY WAY.
BUT STUDENTS SESSION CONTINUOUSLY TO CHEERLEADERS, TO PLAYERS, MEMBERS INTO FANS OR ANYTHING AND WE DON'T HAVE A B STUDENT SECTION, BUT THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING, IT'S NOT FAIR BECAUSE THEY GET AWAY WITH IT AND THEN THEY GET PUNISHED.
IT'S LIKE YOU ALL GOT IT BLOCKED OFF.
THEY'RE ALREADY ON A COURSE SO THEY COULD JUST WALK OVER TO THING AND GET ON THE COURT ANYTIME YOU PLEASE WITHOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES AND THAT'S VERY UNFAIR.
MY HEART GOES OUT TO YOU ALL BECAUSE I KNOW, YOU ALL FEEL NO SOURCES, WE FEEL NO WAY TOWARD YOU ALL IS ALL A LITTLE BIT INTO THE DAY.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. I'M GOING TO GIVE TO DR. MURPHY, THE FLOOR FOR A MINUTE.
>> FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO SAY, WE REALLY DO APPRECIATE DISCOURSE ON THE FEEDBACK, THE PASSION AND ENERGY AND JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT AS CHEERLEADERS, YOU ALL ARE REPRESENTING YOUR SCHOOL AT ALL TIMES.
WE TYPICALLY DON'T HEAR ISS OR EVEN ATHLETIC ISSUES LIKE THIS.
BUT WHEN YOU COME IN, YOU GIVE TESTIMONY LIKE THAT.
IT DID NOT FALL ON DEAF EARS AND SO WE WILL TAKE EVERYTHING UNDER ADVISEMENT AND WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THE SCHOOL AS WELL AS THE ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT THERE.
BUT THAT BEING SAID, WE DON'T STAND IN JUDGMENT EITHER WAY AT THIS POINT OF THE DISCUSSION SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU GUYS UNDERSTOOD THAT WE DO APPRECIATE YOU.
WE HEAR YOU, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE A VALID CONCERN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT DR. MURPHY, I WANTED TO SAY TO THE YOUNG LADIES AND THE PARENTS AND THE CROWD, WE AS BOARD MEMBERS, WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO RESPOND AFTER PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, BUT I COULD NOT SAY SOMETHING.
THE EMOTION IN THIS ROOM BOTHERS ME SO NOW THAT IT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE BOARD, MR. NESTLE, I WOULD LIKE THE BOARD TO GET FEEDBACK AS WELL ONCE THE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN HAD.
OR SOMEONE CAN SAY WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN, WHAT IS NOT HAPPENING, JUST WHATEVER CLARIFICATION, LIKE I SAID, NOW THAT THE BOARD HAS BEEN GIVEN THIS, I'D ALSO LIKE TO BE ON THE RECEIVING OF WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.
I SINCERELY WANT I APOLOGIZE TO EACH OF YOU, YOU ARE NOT WHAT PEOPLE CALL YOU.
DO NOT ALLOW WHAT PEOPLE SAY TO YOU TO BOTHER YOU, YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE BETTER THAN, YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE.
THANK YOU FOR BEING ABLE TO COME TO US AND EXPRESS HOW YOU FEEL AND STAND UP FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE.
YOU ARE HEARD TONIGHT, I WANT EACH OF YOU TO KNOW THAT AND I RESPECT EACH OF YOU AND I FEEL FOR EACH OF YOU.
I FELT EVERYTHING YOU SAID TONIGHT, I HEARD EVERYTHING YOU SAID TONIGHT AND I AGREE WITH DR.
HANKS THAT WE WOULD LIKE A FOLLOW UP ON WHAT IS GOING TO BE SAID AND COMMUNICATED TO THE DISTRICT SO I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW YOUNG LADIES I APOLOGY YOU FOR YOUR BRAVERY.
[01:50:03]
>> NEXT, I JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT WHILE WE WERE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A SLIDESHOW FOR PEOPLE ON HOME, BUT JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE KENNEDY MIDDLE SCHOOL'S FOOTBALL TEAM AS THE COUNTY FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS AND COAT SHE REFERS TO 100 FLYNN AND MS. REINHARDT JACKSON, YOU WERE TELLING ME ONCE YOU HELP ME OUT THIS MONTH.
>> THIS WEEK IS ACTUALLY BUS DRIVER APPRECIATION WEEK.
YOU-ALL KNOW, I LOVE THE BUS DRIVERS, I RESPECT THEM DEARLY THEY ARE OUR FRONT-LINE.
THEY KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH OUR KIDS, THEY GET OUR KIDS TO AND FROM SCHOOL SAFELY SO TO EACH AND EVERY BUS DRIVER AND THE DISTRICT THANK YOU AND WE APPRECIATE YOU.
>> I COULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT BETTER THAN YOU.
OFFICE ABOARD, CHAIRMAN, I HAVE NOTHING TONIGHT AND THAT MEANS WE'LL MOVE INTO WHAT IS OUR B ITEMS TONIGHT? INDIVIDUAL ITEMS SO B1 IS PERSONNEL APPOINTMENTS AND THE ADMINISTRATION HAS PRESENTED A LIST OF CERTIFYING CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL THAT WERE SCREENED BY HR AND RECOMMENDED TO HIRE.
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PERSONNEL APPOINTMENTS MOVED BY MS. REINHARDT JACKSON? IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECONDED BY DR. HANKS, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS THE MOTION CARRIES TO APPROVE THE PERSONNEL APPOINTMENTS.
THE OTHER ONE, WE HAVE A SECOND READING OF A POLICY REVISION.
WE WENT THROUGH THIS LAST REGULAR MEETING, POLICY, IJK, SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS SELECTION, ADOPTION.
THIS IS THE SECOND READING WE MIGHT HAVE DISCUSSION, BUT DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE POLICY ON SECOND READING? BOOT MINUS REINHARDT JACKSON IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND. BY MR. WILSON EXCUSE ME, MR. MOLTEN, SERINE DISCUSSION.
>> I DIDN'T VOTE FOR IT LAST TIME, I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR IT AGAIN.
WE HAVE A LIST OF APPROVED MATERIALS.
NOW, ALL THE MATERIALS ON THESE APPROVED LIST GO THROUGH A PRETTY EXTENSIVE PROCESS WHERE THEY'RE REVIEWED BY A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO'VE BEEN SELECTED, AND THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DISCUSS THIS, SHARE THEIR OPINIONS, THOUGHTS, AND SO FORTH.
WHAT THIS POLICY DOES IS IT BYPASSES ALL OF THAT PROCESS AND ALLOWS TWO PEOPLE TO APPROVE MATERIAL FOR USE IN THE CLASSROOM, THE TEACHER AND THE PRINCIPAL, AND WE'VE GOT 40 PRINCIPLES.
YOU NOW IMAGINE, ONE OF THE LINES IN THIS REVISION IS THAT, THE MATERIAL BEING REVIEWED SHOULD NOT INCLUDE EXCESSIVE PROFANITY.
WHAT'S EXCESSIVE? IF WE WENT AROUND THIS ROOM AND ASKED EACH BOARD MEMBER WHAT IS EXCESSIVE, YOU WOULD PROBABLY GET, HOW MANY OF US ARE HERE? EIGHT DIFFERENT ANSWERS.
NOW IMAGINE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET WHEN YOU LET 40 PEOPLE MAKE A DECISION THAT IS JUST AS POWERFUL AS THE DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COMMITTEES, EVEN DISTRICT COMMITTEES.
I JUST THINK THIS IS SETTING US UP TO MAKE FOOLS OF OURSELVES.
NOW THAT IT'S OUT THERE IN THE PUBLIC ATTENTION, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE LONG BEFORE WE'RE GOING TO BE HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC.
SOME KID IS GOING TO TAKE HOME A BOAT THAT SOME PERSON DIDN'T ADEQUATELY CONSIDER AND IT'S GOING TO CONTAIN SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT WE FIND OBJECTIONABLE AND IT'S GOING TO COME BACK AT US.
I WOULD SUGGEST AN ALTERATION TO THE POLICY SAYING THAT WE'VE CONFINED THE USE OF MATERIALS TO THOSE THAT ARE ON THE APPROVED LIST.
I DON'T SEE WHY WE NEED TO KEEP ADDING THINGS.
YOU SEE THE LIST OF ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE THERE.
IF YOU CAN'T TEACH THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT COUNTY USING THOSE MATERIALS, THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG.
[01:55:04]
I WOULD OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO STRIKE THE PART OF THE POLICY IN RED AND PUT LANGUAGE INTO THE POLICY SAYING THAT IT WOULD BE THE CHOICE OF SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS TO BE CONFINED TO THE APPROVED LIST, BOTH STATE AND DISTRICT.>> DR. BRADLEY HAS MADE A MOTION TO AMEND THE ORIGINAL MOTION, AND I'M TRYING TO SUMMARIZE, INSTEAD OF HAVING THE PRINCIPAL MAKE A DECISION ON THESE SUPPLEMENT MATERIALS, THAT IT WOULD BE COMING FROM THE ALREADY APPROVED LIST OF SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS.
DO I HEAR A SECOND? [BACKGROUND]
>> I WOULD SECOND THAT JUST FOR SOME DISCUSSION.
>> I WOULD SAY THAT I'D VOTED ON FIRST READING TO APPROVE THIS, BUT I DID HAVE A CONCERN AND I THINK I QUESTIONED AT THAT TIME IF WE HAD OTHER POLICY THAT WOULD PREVENT TOPICS THAT DID NOT GO ALONG WITH THE CURRICULUM, AND I THINK AT THE TIME THE ANSWER WAS YES.
AFTER HEARING DR. BRADLEY DISCUSS IT MORE AND HAVING TO GIVE IT MORE THOUGHT, I THINK I WOULD BE IN FAVOR FOR A LITTLE MORE CONSIDERATION OF THE POLICY, JUST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.
I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT [NOISE] I WOULD NECESSARILY AGREE WITH AN AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME, I DON'T KNOW THE PROPER PROCEDURE.
>> WELL, I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT THAT, MR. SILAS, BUT GO AHEAD FINISH.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO VOTE ON THE SECOND READING AND IF IT WAS TURNED DOWN, THEN THAT WOULD THEN TAKE US BACK TO MAYBE A REWRITE, SO IN MY OPINION, MAY BE AN APPROPRIATE STEP DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF A VOTE, BUT I DON'T WANT TO [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'LL STOP FOR A SECOND FOR PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE CHECK, BECAUSE AS YOU WERE TALKING, MR. SILAS, I WAS THINKING THE SAME THING, I DIDN'T THINK OF IT RIGHT AWAY.
I'M LOOKING TO MS. MAHONEY, THIS IS A SECOND READING OF A POLICY REVISION.
OBVIOUSLY, WE CAN VOTE AGAINST THE POLICY REVISION ON THE SECOND READING THAT WAS SUCCESSFUL THE FIRST TIME, BUT CAN WE REALLY AMEND IT?
>> THERE'S NO POINT IN HAVING IT.
>> I UNDERSTAND. I'M NOT THAT EXPERIENCED AND WE VOTED ON SOMETHING ONE WAY THE FIRST TIME AND ON THE SECOND WAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE STILL ARE IN DISCUSSION ON THAT AMENDMENT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A POINT BECAUSE I'M FEELING SAME AS MS. [INAUDIBLE] AND DR. MURPHY OVER HERE.
WE WENT THROUGH A SITUATION WHERE WE HAD ONE BOOK BEING USED, IT HAD BEEN USED FOR THREE YEARS.
>> WE HAD OURSELVES A SITUATION WHERE A BOOK WAS USED IN TEACHING OF A CLASS FOR THREE YEARS THAT HAD A LOT OF INNUENDOS, LANGUAGE THAT I WOULDN'T WANT MY CHILDREN READING AND NOT TO IMPOSE MY VALUES ON ANYONE ELSE, BUT I JUST THINK BY DOING IT THIS WAY, WE'RE SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR THAT AGAIN, AND I LIKE THE IDEA OF UTILIZING AN APPROVED LIST, AND POSSIBLY IF SOMEONE WANTS TO ADD SOMETHING TO THE APPROVED LIST, THEN IT'D BE THIS INFORMATION, THIS LITERATURE, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, BE TAKEN BEFORE A COMMITTEE AND LET IT BE APPROVED THERE.
THAT'S THEIR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY WOULD BE TO APPROVE UPCOMING READING, AND THAT MAY NOT BE THE BEST WAY, BUT OFF TOP OF MY HEAD, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY THAT WOULD WORK FOR ALL OF US, TO GIVE US AN IDEA, GIVE US AN OPEN DOOR TO GET SOMETHING IN THAT'S NEEDED, IT MAY BE VALUABLE. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? DR. HANKS.
>> I JUST WANT TO DITTO WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE SAID AND I THINK THE ISSUE IS, WE'RE ALL SAYING THE SAME THING.
NOT TO TAKE AWAY FROM WHAT A PRINCIPAL DOES, BUT IN GIVING THE PRINCIPAL OF ALL 40 SCHOOLS OR WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS, THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT ONE PARTICULAR MATERIAL YOU CAN GET VARIOUS OPINIONS.
MAYBE A COMMITTEE OR THAT SPECIAL MATERIAL THAT IS NOT ON THE APPROVED LIST GOING TO SOMEONE OTHER THAN THAT INDIVIDUAL PRINCIPAL WOULD PROBABLY BE A BETTER IDEA.
[02:00:01]
>> I PROBABLY HAVE MORE OF A QUESTION FOR DR. MURPHY.
DR. MURPHY, HAVE YOU HEARD OF THIS SITUATION WHERE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS ARE REALLY NEEDED FOR SOME PARTICULAR REASON THAT WE WOULD NOT GO ABOUT THE PROCESS OF ADDING THEM TO THE APPROVED MATERIAL LIST?
>> I WOULD DEFINITELY DEFER THIS QUESTION OVER TO DR. EDWARDS SO SHE CAN CHIME ME.
I WILL SAY DURING MY TIME IN THE CLASSROOM, I DID DRAW MATERIAL FROM VARIOUS SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS, SUCH AS PERIODICALS AND NEWSPAPERS, CURRENT EVENTS IN ORDER TO KEEP MY CONTENT RELEVANT WHEN I WAS TEACHING CHEMISTRY BACK IN THE DAY, BUT DR. EDWARDS, PLEASE.
>> I WILL CLEAR SOMETHING UP FOR YOU ALL.
DR. BRADLEY THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT [OVERLAPPING].
>> DR. EDWARDS, I'M NOT SURE YOUR MICROPHONE IS TURNED ON.
>> GOOD. THE ADD ON ACTUALLY WAS NOT FOR ALL 40 PRINCIPALS TO APPROVE, BUT THE TEACHER TO TAKE TO THE PRINCIPAL AT THE SCHOOL SO THAT THEY COULD THEN REVIEW OR READ THE MATERIAL PRIOR TO IT BEING ADDED FOR THAT PARTICULAR SCHOOL BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, IF ALL 40 PRINCIPALS HAD TO AGREE ON THAT PARTICULAR SUPPLEMENTAL ADDED, IT WOULD BE A TOUGH THING TO DO EVEN TO CALL A MEETING OF THAT SORT.
BUT THE BACKGROUND ON THAT WAS TO ALLOW TEACHERS THE AUTONOMY TO BE ABLE TO USE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL.
AS A CLASSROOM TEACHER, I CAN SEE WHERE SOMEBODY ALL OF A SUDDEN FOUND SOME MATERIAL THEY WANTED TO USE IN THE NEXT MONTH IN THEIR PLAN.
THAT WOULD GIVE THE LEEWAY BASED ON THE POLICY THAT'S EXISTING RIGHT NOW, THAT HE COULD TAKE THE MATERIAL TO THE PRINCIPAL TO HAVE IT REVIEWED FOR USE.
>> YES, SIR. BECAUSE I THINK YOU MISHEARD DR. BRADLEY.
>> I'M NOT ASKING THAT WE HAVE A COMMITTEE OF 40 PRINCIPALS TO APPROVE ANY ONE TEACHER'S REQUEST.
MY CONCERN IS THAT IF YOU HAD 40 TEACHERS MAKING ANY REQUEST AND ONLY ONE PRINCIPAL HAD TO APPROVE IT, AND THEN IT'S GOLDEN.
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT YOU COULD HAVE TWO TEACHERS MAKE THE SAME REQUEST AND ONE PRINCIPAL TURNED IT DOWN AND ONE ACCEPTED IT.
IT'S A TERRIBLE INCONSISTENCY.
I AM NOT DISPARAGING PRINCIPALS AND THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE JUDGMENTS AS A GROUP.
IF I WERE A PRINCIPAL, THE LAST THING IN THE WORLD I'D WANT IS THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS BECAUSE IT'S RIDDLED WITH PROBLEMS. I THINK THEY'VE GOT MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO DO THAN TO WORRY ABOUT PROVING AN OFF-LABEL BOOK FOR USE IN A CLASSROOM THAT'S REQUIRED FOR 14-YEAR-OLDS.
I JUST THINK THAT IT'S A VERY DANGEROUS THING.
THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DEMONSTRATED. IT CAN BE A PROBLEM.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT MY FIGHT HERE IS NOT WITH THE PRINCIPALS IT'S WITH THE LOOSENESS AND I THINK COWARDICE.
SOMEBODY NEEDS TO STEP UP AND SHOW SOME LEADERSHIP AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS THAT GUIDE NOT WITH VAGUE REMARKS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN OPERATIONALLY DEFINED AT ALL.
EXCESSIVE. WHAT IS EXCESSIVE? YOU WOULDN'T GO TO A DOCTOR THAT OPERATED ON THAT PRINCIPAL.
UNFORTUNATELY, THEY RUN SCHOOLS AND THOSE KINDS OF POLICIES AND DECISIONS. I'VE SAID ENOUGH.
>> FOR ME THIS IS A DECISION I AGREE WITH BOTH SIDES OF THIS.
IF YOU LOOK AT IT CREATIVITY IN THE CLASSROOM IS SOMETHING THAT I FEEL LIKE A LOT OF TEACHERS ARE FORCED TO LOSE BECAUSE OF JUST THE WAY THE WORLD IS TODAY YET, I THINK IT TAKES A LOT OF THE PASSION OUT AND A LOT OF THE ZEAL OF WHAT A PERSON DOES WHEN THEY'RE STIFLED WITH CREATIVITY THAT THEY TRIED TO DO TO TEACH THE CLASSES.
FROM THAT SIDE, I AM MORE WILLING TO FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO PUT SOME MORE CREATIVITY BACK IN THE CLASSROOM.
I DO AGREE THAT WITHOUT IT BEING ON A APPROVED LIST, THERE IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR TIMES WHERE THINGS ARE GOING TO OUT LIKE THE BOAT DID,
[02:05:02]
IT WAS OUT THERE, I GUESS TWO OR THREE YEARS.I'M SURE THAT IS THE CASE AND YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON CERTAIN BOOKS LIKE PROBABLY RUN UP TO THE LINE, I'M SURE.
THAT BEING SAID, I THINK WE HAVE TO PUT TRUST IN OUR PRINCIPALS TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS AND ALLOW THAT CREATIVITY.
I THINK WE'RE CONTINUING TO STIFLE WITH SO MUCH RED TAPE.
THAT'S REALLY ALL I GOT TO SAY.
I SEE BOTH SIDES, BUT I'VE NOTED AS A PERSON THAT I'VE WORKED WITH KIDS A LOT, I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO HAVE MY ABILITY TO PUT MY ZIN ON THINGS AND IT'S HARD TO DO WHEN YOU'RE HAVING TO GO BACK TO RED TAPE EVERY TIME YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING BECAUSE THE TIME YOU FINALLY GET APPROVAL THEN YOU PROBABLY MOVED ON TO SOMETHING ELSE, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
MY STATEMENT IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO TAKE AWAY PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO BRING AUXILIARY MATERIAL IN.
BUT WHEN IT'S ONLY ONE PERSON, THE TEACHER, AND THE PRINCIPAL.
AS DR. BRADLEY SAID, WE'RE GOING TO BE OPEN IN THE CANON WARS BECAUSE THIS PRINCIPAL OF A CERTAIN SCHOOL PROVED IT AND THIS ONE DIDN'T, AND GO BACK TO THE GENESIS OF THIS PROGRAM.
IT WAS APPROVED BY A PRINCIPAL AND A TEACHER AND WAS UTILIZED FOR THREE YEARS BEFORE IT WAS BROUGHT TO SOMEONE'S ATTENTION.
I DON'T WANT TO QUESTION ANYONE'S VALUES IT'S NOT UP TO ME.
BUT I DO WANT TO QUESTION WHY WE ALLOW SOMETHING LIKE THAT INTO A CLASSROOM SETTING.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE AS WHOLESOME AS WE POSSIBLY CAN KEEP IT AND MAKE IT.
YOU CAN SAY, "WELL, TODAY'S SOCIETY, THEY'RE SO USED TO HEARING THAT STUFF".
TODAY'S SOCIETY IS WHAT IT IS AND IN MY OPINION, IT'S BECAUSE OF LITTLE CRACKS IN THE ARMOR ALONG THE WAY THIS GOT US TO THIS POINT.
I DON'T WANT TO BE TOO OVERALL, I WON'T TEACH YOU TO HAVE A CHANCE TO GET WHAT THEY NEED.
I WAS A SCHOOL PRINCIPAL, I HAD TO GO THROUGH A LOT OF THAT STUFF MYSELF.
BUT ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOESN'T OCCUR AGAIN AND AGAIN.
THAT'S HOW WE GOT INTO THIS SITUATION. THANK YOU.
>> YEAH. MY COMMENT IS THAT I AGREE.
ESPECIALLY FOR CERTAIN MATERIALS, THE LACK OF STANDARDIZATION IS A CONCERN AND YOU'RE CREATING A SINGLE-POINT FAILURE.
THE ONLY THING I HAVE ON THE FLIP SIDE IS THAT THIS POLICY COVERS THINGS LIKE NEWSPAPERS, SO LIKE BRINGING NEWSPAPERS AND CURRENT EVENTS INTO CLASSES.
I HAVEN'T COMPLETELY THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.
ABOUT HOW TO HANDLE THINGS, BUT THAT'S MY ONLY COMMENT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?
>> I JUST FIND IT INTERESTING THAT WE CAN ALLOW A BOOK SUCH AS THE ONE THAT'S BEEN UNDER DISCUSSION TO EXIST FOR THREE YEARS.
YOU TRIED TO PUT THE 10 COMMANDMENTS ON THE WALL AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
>> OKAY. WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AND I'M SUMMARIZING, WE'VE HAD OUR DISCUSSION.
THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION WAS TO REPLACE THE LANGUAGE, AND TO UPDATE THE REVISION OF THE PROCEDURE I, J, K, SUCH THAT THE LANGUAGE AND READ WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE PRINCIPLE OF PROVING THE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS WITH SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THERE TO BASICALLY USING THE APPROVED SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS LIST.
THAT'S THE AMENDMENT THAT WE HAVE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
MOTION CARRIES TO AMEND THE MOTION. WE'LL HAVE ONE MORE VOTE.
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDED MOTION ON THIS READING OF THE POLICY IJK? MOVED BY MR. SMITH, IS THERE A SECOND? BY MR. REINHARDT JACKSON.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
>> I HAVE A DISCUSSION CHAIRMAN.
>> OH, I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T SEE YOU, MA'AM.
>> NO, JUST A RECAP WHAT THE AMENDED SOLUTION TO THIS IS GOING TO BE [NOISE]?
[02:10:08]
>> YES, MA'AM. THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION WAS STRIKING THE LANGUAGE IN RED ON THE POLICY REVISION THAT WE WOULD SELECT MATERIALS FROM THE APPROVED DISTRICT LIST OF SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ALL UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I GET CONFUSED HERE SOMETIMES.
I APPROVE THE AMENDMENT BY APPROVING THIS, ARE WE SAYING WE'RE STILL GOING FORWARD WITH THE AMENDMENT? IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE'VE APPROVED THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.
NOW WE'RE APPROVING THE MOTION AS AMENDED.
>> YES, SIR. OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION?
>> I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS WE'RE STOPPING GOING FORWARD WITH THE MOTION THAT WAS APPROVED LAST MEETING AND PUTTING ANOTHER ONE OUT THERE, WHICH WOULD HAVE TO BE VOTED ON THE SECOND TIME.
IF WE RESTRICT IT TO JUST THE ALREADY APPROVED MATERIALS.
THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT WE CAN'T COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT PROCESS FOR SELECTING DISTRICT-LEVEL MATERIAL.
IT'S JUST GOING TO GIVE US TIME.
WE'VE GOT TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE SECOND READING OF THE POLICY.
>> WHAT I'M DOING IS CHANGING THE POLICY SO WE CAN HAVE TIME AND TAKE A SECOND READING ABOUT ON THE SECOND READING AT THE NEXT MEETING.
OR WE CAN PASS THE SECOND RATING, TAKE TIME, AND PUT TOGETHER SOME WAY OF IMPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS, OTHER THAN HAVING TO BE, HELD ALL THIS TO THIS DAY TO APPROVE THIS.
THAT ACTUALLY PROVIDE AN AVENUE FOR TEACHERS WHO ARE REALLY PASSIONATE ABOUT USING SOME MATERIAL THAT'S NOT ON THE LIST TO GET THAT OUT THERE AND PERMISSION TO USE IT, BUT I THINK WE GOT TO PUT THINGS ON HOLD.
PUT THE ORIGINAL POLICY ON HOLD.
>> I AGREE WITH YOUR INTERPRETATION THAT IF THIS MOTION PASSES, THAT THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE FIRST READING AND WE'D HAVE TO BRING IT BACK FOR A SECOND READING.
OTHER DISCUSSIONS? DR. HANKS? NO, I'M SORRY.
>> I THINK YOU'VE ANSWERED MY QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE A NO-VOTE HERE TO THE SECOND READING WOULD ESSENTIALLY CARRY US BACK TO OUR FIRST READING OR AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVISE IT FURTHER.
I THINK THERE'S THE SAME THING.
EVEN IF WE APPROVE IT, WE STILL HAVE A CHANCE TO COME BACK AND MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS.
CORRECT. OR IF WE DID A NO VOTE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE VOTING ON AN AMENDED MOTION WHICH AMENDS THE POLICY REVISION, WHICH IN MY MIND EFFECTIVELY MAKES THIS A FIRST READING IF IT PASSES.
THEN IF FOR SOME REASON IT FAILS, I GUESS WE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO DO SOMETHING ELSE, INCLUDING THE SECOND READING OF THE ORIGINAL REVISION.
>> WE DIDN'T HAVE A VOTE ON THE SECOND READING OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
I THOUGHT WE WERE VOTING ON THE FIRST TIME.
>> NOW, THE ONLY VOTE WE'VE TAKEN ON THIS SUBJECT IS WE HAVE VOTED TO AMEND THE ORIGINAL MOTION, WHICH INCLUDES CHANGING THE REVISION OF THIS POLICY TO WHAT WE'VE STATED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION FOR THE MOTION THAT WE HAVE ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW? DR. HANKS.
>> HOPEFULLY THE FINAL CLARIFICATION.
WHEN WE VOTE TO AMEND OR ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT, THAT STILL GIVES US THE OPTION TO COME BACK TO AMEND OR ADD TO OR DELETE OR WHATEVER WITH A NEW AMENDMENT FOR THE SECOND READING FOR A VOTE VERSUS TABLING.
>> IF WE VOTE IN FAVOR OF WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE PROPOSED ON THE REVISION OF THIS POLICY, SINCE THAT IS NOT WHAT WE DID ON FIRST READING, I THINK THIS IS AGAIN, ANOTHER FIRST READING.
IF THAT'S WHAT IS SUCCESSFUL, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND READING IN MY MIND.
>> THE SECOND VOTE WOULD BE TO VOTE WITHOUT THE RED LANGUAGE.
[02:15:01]
THAT'S ALREADY PASSED. WHAT'S ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW IS THE POLICY WITHOUT THE RED LANGUAGE.>> WE CAN VOTE ON THAT AND THEN THAT POLICY PASSES ON FIRST READING.
>> IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT THROUGH THE POLICY WITHOUT THE RED.
>> CAN WE GET SOME CLARIFICATION FROM THE ATTORNEY PRESENT, PLEASE? FOR THE PEOPLE AT HOME IS GETTING A LITTLE CONFUSING.
IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND JUST CLARIFYING WHAT'S ALREADY ON THE FLOOR AND WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS.
>> I'LL CLARIFY WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR.
WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO REVISE POLICY IJK, SUCH THAT THE PRINCIPAL IS NOT GOING TO APPROVE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS, THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE THE APPROVED SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL LIST AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL.
NOW, THAT IS THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
WE'VE ALREADY AMENDED THE MOTION TO DO THAT, AND THAT'S THE MOTION THAT WE'RE VOTING ON UP OR DOWN.
NOW, I CAN UNDERSTAND, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION MRS. REINHARDT JACKSON AS TO WHETHER THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST OR SECOND READING OF THAT?
>> MY INTERPRETATION IS IT'S A FIRST READING, BUT MRS. MAHONEY, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY?
>> IT'S A BOARD INTERPRETATION BUT I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO MAKE IT THE FIRST READING SINCE YOU MADE SUCH A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE [OVERLAPPING].
>> FROM MY VIEWPOINT, WE DO TWO READINGS ON POLICIES SO THAT WE CAN HAVE, FOR INSTANCE, PUBLIC INPUT, THINGS LIKE THAT.
IF WE JUST CHANGED A POLICY AT THE SECOND READING AND THEN SAID WHAT WE'RE DONE, THAT'S LIKE A BAIT AND SWITCH. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT.
>> YES, MA'AM. I'M NOT SENSING ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.
I THINK WE'RE CLEAR ON THE MOTION THAT WE'RE VOTING ON.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MOTION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND? THAT IS SEVEN IN FAVOR. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? ONE AGAINST, MOTION CARRIES SEVEN TO ONE.
THE LAST INDIVIDUAL ITEM, I PUT IT AS AN INDIVIDUAL ITEM AND I'D APPRECIATE FOLKS THAT ARE OPERATING THE SCREEN TO BRING UP AN ATTACHMENT.
WE HAD A REQUEST FROM MULTIPLE BOARD MEMBERS, SO I DIDN'T PUT THIS UNDER A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER ITEM.
THE REQUESTS FROM SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS WAS TO REVIEW OUR CODE OF CONDUCT POLICY WHEN IT COMES TO KNIVES.
WE HAVE A PROCESS EVERY YEAR BY WHICH WE REVIEW THE CODE OF CONDUCT, BUT WE'RE PULLING THIS UP AND REVIEWING THIS ONE SPECIFIC SECTION.
AS SUCH, THIS WAS FROM THE REQUEST OF PART OF THE BOARD, THERE IS NO RECOMMENDATION FROM THE ADMINISTRATION ON A POLICY CHANGE.
I'M JUST MAKING SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR, THIS IS FREE FORM.
WHAT WE CAN SEE IF YOU DON'T MIND GOING TO, IT'S SIMILAR BUT NOT QUITE THE SAME, BUT IF WE CAN REVIEW THE HIGH SCHOOL POLICY JUST AS AN EXAMPLE.
SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT SO WE CAN SEE THE CONSEQUENCES.
JUST TO SAY THIS OUT LOUD AND MAY HELP FOLKS THAT ARE IN THE AUDIENCE OR WATCHING.
WE DISTINGUISH THINGS WHEN IT COMES TO KNIVES, BY WHAT WAS THE INTENT? SOMEONE MESSED UP AND BROUGHT TO SCHOOL AND THEN THEY TURN THEMSELVES IN.
THEY BROUGHT IT TO SCHOOL, THEY POSSESSED IT AND THEN THEY WERE LIKE SHOWING IT OFF OR IT SAYS SHOWN TO OTHERS.
THE THIRD LEVEL OF INTENT IS POSSESSION THREAT TO OTHERS.
SOMEONE'S MADE A THREAT, OR WHETHER THAT'S VERBAL OR JUST BY SHOWING IT.
THEN THERE'S A DISTINCTION NOT MUCH OF ONE THAT YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A DISTINCTION BY THE SIZE OF THE BLADE.
GREATER THAN TWO, GREATER THAN TWO AND A HALF, GREATER THAN THREE INCHES, AND SO FORTH AND SO ON.
IF I USE THE EXAMPLE OF THE THREE INCH OR GREATER BLADE, AS YOU CAN TELL YOU GUYS CAN READ AS WELL AS I CAN.
IF YOU BRING A KNIFE TO SCHOOL THREE INCHES OR GREATER AND SOME MISTAKE.
[02:20:02]
YOU COULD GET EXPELLED. EXCUSE ME.THEN IF YOU'RE SHOWING IT AROUND TO OTHERS, YOU GET SUSPENDED THE FIRST TIME, POTENTIALLY SUSPENDED OR RECOMMENDED FOR EXPULSION THE SECOND TIME.
THE GUIDELINE FOR THE THIRD TIME YOU DO THAT IS RECOMMENDED EXPULSION.
THEN OBVIOUSLY IF YOU'RE MAKING A THREAT, THERE'S NO GRADED APPROACH WITH THAT.
IF YOU'RE MAKING A THREAT TO OTHERS WITH A KNIFE AND YOU CAN SEE THAT'S CONSISTENT, THAT'S RECOMMENDED EXPULSION AND SO FORTH.
THERE ARE SLIGHT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HIGH SCHOOL, MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
HAVING SAID THAT, WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE A MOTION, BUT WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION OR BE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK? MR. MORTON.
>> I WANT TO SPEAK FIRST AND THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
I'VE CONSIDERED A NUMBER OF APPEALS THAT WE'VE SET THROUGH.
I FEEL LIKE I'VE LOOKED AT THE HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL, LEVEL 3, ITEM 2, FIRST OFFENSE.
THE TERMS USED ARE POSSESSING OR THREATENING AND MIDDLE SCHOOL LEVEL 3, ITEM 2 FIRST OFFENSE.
SAME THING, BUT THERE'S A DISTINCTION MADE.
THEN WE GET INTO A DISTINCTION UNDER WEAPON THAT WE TREAT A KNIFE DIFFERENT THAN A FIREARM.
I UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME STUDENTS THAT WOULD BRING A KNIFE PROBABLY TO CUT THE STRING OFF THEIR CLOTHING.
BUT, MY CONCERN IS THIS AND THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
WHEN YOU LEAVE THIS MUCH GRAY AREA AND SOMEBODY'S GOT TO READ THIS MUCH MATERIAL TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S WRONG TO BRING A KNIFE AND THEN DETERMINE WHAT SIZE BLADE THEY CAN HAVE, WE'VE GOT SO MUCH GRAY AREA THAT ANY STUDENT IN THE WORLD COULD MAKE THIS MISTAKE.
WE'RE GOING TO SIT BEFORE ANOTHER APPEAL DOWN THE ROAD, IT'S COMING.
WE'RE GOING TO EVENTUALLY END UP WITH SOMEBODY USING SOMETHING WITH LESS THAN A TWO INCH BLADE TO STAB SOMEONE.
I LIKE REAL STRAIGHTFORWARD BECAUSE WHEN I TOLD MY STUDENTS WHEN THEY WERE IN SCHOOL, YOU DON'T TAKE A KNIFE TO SCHOOL.
I DON'T CARE IF IT'S TWO INCHES, ONE-AND-A-HALF INCHES.
I DON'T CARE WHAT YOUR INTENTIONS ARE.
I DON'T CARE IF YOU THREATENED.
I DON'T CARE IF YOU SELF REPORT.
YOU DON'T TAKE A KNIFE TO SCHOOL.
JUST LIKE YOU DON'T TAKE A GUN TO SCHOOL.
MY MOTION IS TO GET RID OF THE GRAY, WHICH IS EASILY DONE IF WE CONSIDER THE CURRENT WORDING WHERE IT SAYS LEVEL 3, ITEM 2, FOR A HIGH AND MIDDLE, IT SAYS FIREARM/WEAPON.
ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS CONSIDER A KNIFE A WEAPON.
THEN IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, I UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFERENCE THERE.
BECAUSE YOU EXPECT AN ELEMENTARY STUDENT TO HAVE A DIFFERENT MODE OF THINKING THAN MAYBE A MIDDLE SCHOOL OR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT.
I UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF GRAY IN THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL.
BUT IN MY OPINION, IN THE MOTION I'M GOING TO MAKE IS ON A HIGH AND MIDDLE.
IT NEEDS TO BE YOU BRING ANY KNIFE, IT'S A WEAPON, YOUR RECOMMENDED FOR EXPULSION.
THAT SAID MY MOTION IS THAT WE MODIFY OUR CODE OF CONDUCT FOR HIGH SCHOOL AND MIDDLE SCHOOL TO INCLUDE KNIFE AS A WEAPON, LEAVE THE WORDING THE SAME.
FIRST OFFENSE, BRINGING A KNIFE OR A FIREARM, YOU ARE RECOMMENDED FOR ITS EXPULSION, PERIOD. NO DISCUSSION.
>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION BY MR. MORTON, SECOND BY DR. BRADLEY, AND BEFORE WE START DISCUSSING WHAT I UNDERSTOOD YOU TO SAY THEN WE'D BASICALLY DELETE THIS KNIFE SECTION OUT OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT.
>> I'M TRYING TO HANG WITH YOU WITH THIS OLD MIND OF MINE.
DO THIS FOR DR. MURPHY GETS ME AGAIN.
I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW YOU WHERE YOU COME IN FROM.
FROM BEING A BUILDING PRINCIPAL, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY, ANY OFFENSE OF BRINGING A KNIFE TO SCHOOL FOR ANY REASON IS AUTOMATIC EXPULSION.
[02:25:02]
NOT IN THE SENSE OF IT'S NOT A GOOD THING.BUT OVER THE YEARS, I'VE HAD NUMEROUS KIDS COME TO ME AND SAID MS. SMITH, PLEASE HELP ME.
I FORGOT I HAD THIS IN MY POCKET AND MY BOOK BAG, WILL YOU PLEASE TAKE THIS TO KEEP ME FROM GETTING IN TROUBLE? I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
IN FACT, THAT WAS VERY COMPLIMENTARY OF THE CHILDREN THAT DID THAT.
SAME THING WITH CIGARETTE LIGHTERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
I JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE AN INNOCENT SITUATION LIKE THAT BE BROUGHT INTO THE FOLD OF POSSIBLY BEING EXPELLED.
UNLESS IT WERE SOMETHING THAT WAS REOCCURRING OVER A NUMBER OF TIMES.
THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN I GOT IS WE TAKE THAT INNOCENCE AWAY FROM IT AND TREAT THEM LIKE CRIMINALS AS SOON AS IT HAPPENS, IN MY OPINION.
AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BUT I WANT A LITTLE BIT OF AUTONOMY TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE SCENARIOS AS WELL. THAT'S ALL.
>> I'M SORRY. I HAVE SOMETHING BUT GO AHEAD, MR. SILAS.
DOES THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN GENERAL GIVE THE BUILDING PRINCIPAL SOME DISCRETION IN ANY INSTANCE? NOT NECESSARILY JUST THE KNIVES OR WEAPONS.
>> YES, SIR. IT IS DESIGNED TO GIVE THE PRINCIPLES SOME LEVEL OF DISCRETION DEPENDING ON MITIGATIONS OR AGGRAVATIONS THAT WILL MAKE IT EVEN WORSE.
IN SITUATION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE OF THE WEAPON, IF IT'S USED AS A WEAPON, THAT OUTCOME IS THE SAME AS THE RECOMMENDATION FOR EXPULSION.
HERE, YOU HAVE VERY TINY BLADES.
COULD BE ART PINS OR ART KNIVES OR SOME THINGS LIKE THAT NATURE.
IF WE SAY THAT THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A KNIFE, ANYTHING THAT YOU COULD CONSIDER A WEAPON, IF THEY HAVE A WEAPON ON SCHOOL GROUNDS, THEY ARE GOING TO BE EXPELLED, IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY RIGID.
THEN YOU HAVE SITUATIONS WHERE AGAIN, I THINK MR. SMITH ALLUDED TO IT, I'VE HAD SEVERAL SITUATIONS, KIDS THAT WORK CONSTRUCTION AFTER WORK, KIDS THAT WORK IN GROCERY STORES, AND THEY MAY HAVE A BOX CUTTER.
I'VE HAD THEM COME TELL ME ABOUT IT.
I SAY, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.
BUT IF WE SAY OOPS EVEN THOUGH YOU TOLD ME AND EVEN THOUGH I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO WORK AFTER WORK, YOU'RE GOING TO BE OUT FOR EXPULSION, I'M NOT SURE IF IT WILL BE AS BIG A DETERRENT AS MORE AS I GOT YOU FOR PERSONAL STUDENTS.
>> I THINK THAT WAS MY POINT WAS EVEN IF WE APPROVED MR. MOULTON'S MOTION, EVEN THOUGH THE CODE OF CONDUCT RECOMMENDS EXPULSION, HE STILL HAS THE DISCRETION TO CONSIDER EITHER THE STUDENT SELF-REPORTED, HE HAD A KNIFE THAT WAS REQUIRED FOR WORK THEN SO THAT PRINCIPLE COULD CONSIDER THAT THEN AND NOT FOLLOW THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN THAT CASE.
IS THAT A CORRECT STATEMENT TO HAVE THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT OR NO?
>> ONCE YOU REMOVE IT FROM THIS FORM, A LIST OF OPTIONS, HE OR SHE WILL FEEL COMPELLED.
THAT'S WHY WE LIKE TO TRY TO PUT A RANGE 3-5.
OR WE WANT TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW BEST.
WE WERE NOT THERE, YOU KNOW BEST, WHAT IS YOUR OPINION AND SO THAT'S FINE.
>> EITHER WAY, I THINK IT'S TOO COMPLICATED AS IT IS.
WHETHER WE GO MR. MOULTON'S ROUTE OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO BE MODIFIED TO BE SIMPLIFIED IN MY OPINION BEING EITHER A KNIFE OR NOT, NO MATTER THE LINKS, BUT MAYBE YOU DIDN'T STILL HAVE A COUPLE OF OPTIONAL CONSEQUENCES, BUT OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY SOMETHING FIRST AND THEN I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU.
MY CONCERN IS SIMILAR TO MR. SMITH'S AND IT MAY BE NAIVE AND WE CAN KEEP TALKING ABOUT IT.
BUT I RECOGNIZE I GREW UP IN A INDUSTRIAL OR PLANT CULTURE WHERE WE CARRIED POCKET KNIVES AS A TOOL.
JUST THINKING ABOUT THAT I WOULD HAVE A CONCERN WITH HAVING ZERO TOLERANCE ON PEOPLE BRINGING A KNIFE INTO THE SCHOOL.
I VIEW IT AS PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW BETTER BUT THAT'S THROWING THE BOOK AT HIM LIKE THAT THE FIRST TIME I CAN SEE BOTH SIDES OF IT BUT I WOULD HAVE A CONCERN WITH THAT JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES.
IF YOU GO OUT FISHING ON THE WEEKEND, YOU'RE HUNTING OR YOU GOT A JOB OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND YOU'RE ABSENT-MINDED, THAT'S A CONCERN.
NOW, DR. BRADLEY WANTED TO BE RECOGNIZED.
>> ONE THAT COULDN'T WAIT TO SATISFY ALL THIS BY PUTTING A SIMPLE SENTENCE IN THE POLICY THAT SAYS THAT IF A CHILD ACCIDENTALLY BRINGS A KNIFE TO SCHOOL AND TURNS IT IN BEFORE ANY INCIDENT OCCURS
[02:30:06]
THE KNIFE WILL BE TAKEN INTO POSSESSION OF THE OFFICE AND HELD UNTIL SUCH A TIME AS IT COULD BE RETURNED TO THE STUDENT, NO PENALTY ATTACHED TO RETURN IT TO THE PARENT.I DON'T THINK ANY OF US WANT TO PENALIZE THAT AS A MISTAKE.
THE HANG-UP I HAVE ABOUT THE LINKS OF KNIVES ARE SOME OF THE MOST LETHAL WEAPONS YOU CAN GET LIKE SCALPELS AND BOX CUTTERS AND ALL THAT HAVE LESS THAN A ONE-INCH BLADE.
I DON'T THINK THAT ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM, BUT I DO THINK WE COULD PUT A LANGUAGE INTO THE POLICY TO EXEMPT A CHILD WHO ACCIDENTALLY BRINGS IT.
BUT I THINK WE NEED TO SAY IF HE TURNS IT IN BEFORE SOME INCIDENT OCCURS BECAUSE OTHERWISE, THEY COULD USE THAT TO TRY TO ESCAPE PUNISHMENT FOR SOME ILL-INTENDED BEHAVIOR.
>> DR. BRADLEY, I WOULD JUST POINT OUT THAT IT DOES ALREADY SAY THAT IF THEY SELF-REPORT IT CAN BE HANDLED AS LOW AS A CONFERENCE ON THE POLICY AS WRITTEN.
>> I'M SORRY, MR. MOULTON RAISED HIS HAND, I THINK FIRST.
>> I'M CERTAINLY INTERESTED, DR. HANKS.
THE ONLY THING THAT CONCERNS ME, FIRST OF ALL, I AGREE WITH DR. BRADLEY AND I AGREE WITH YOU, MR. SMITH, I THINK A SIMPLE COMMENT OF SELF-REPORTING AND BRINGING A KNIFE BY MISTAKE, I THINK A COMMENT THAT SAYS, IN THAT SITUATION, IF YOU REPORT PRIOR TO AN INCIDENT OR PRIOR TO BEING FOUND WITH ONE OF OUR WEAPONS DETECTORS, I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINE AND THAT'S CLEAR.
I DON'T LIKE ALL OF THIS TWO-INCH, TWO-AND-A-HALF-INCH, THREE-INCH, ALL OF THIS STUFF BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE TO REMIND PEOPLE, BUT WE HAD A THING CALLED 9/11 THAT WAS CONDUCTED WITH BOX CUTTERS.
I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THIS.
IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO AGREE WITH ME BUT I ALSO DON'T LIKE ZERO-TOLERANCE POLICIES EITHER SO I'M WITH YOU ON THAT.
I THINK IF A CHILD IS ABLE TO SELF-REPORT BEFORE SOMETHING HAPPENS, THEN THAT NEGATES FROM EXPULSION.
BUT I DON'T LIKE ALL THIS GRAY AREA BECAUSE TO ME, IT'S LIKE OUR LAWS AND I LOOK AT OUR LAWS ALL THE TIME WE'RE FILLED WITH LOOPHOLES AND WE JUST SAT THROUGH AN APPEAL TWO WEEKS AGO WHERE A STUDENT DID NOT GET EXPELLED BECAUSE OF A LOT OF LOOPHOLES.
THEY BROUGHT A KNIFE TO SCHOOL.
>> JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE HAS SAID, I THINK THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE SIZE OF THE BLADE, I CAN AGREE TO GET RID OF THAT.
HAVING THE WEAPON, WHICH A KNIFE IS A WEAPON ON CAMPUS IS THE ISSUE.
I DO LIKE KEEPING THE SELF-REPORTING OPTION, BECAUSE SOME STUDENTS MAY ACCIDENTALLY HAVE HAD SOMETHING IN THEIR POCKET AND THEY WENT STRAIGHT TO ADMINISTRATION OR WHEREVER ELSE.
IF THAT REMAINS AN OPTION, THAT'S A BETTER THING I THINK THAN THAT ZERO POLICY IF YOU'RE CAUGHT WITH ANYTHING AND YOU'RE UP FOR EXPULSIONS.
I ALSO WANTED TO SAY THAT I THINK WE'RE PUTTING THE ONUS ON THE PRINCIPLES BECAUSE IF WE GO HARDCORE AND SAY THAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS EXPULSION, A PRINCIPAL IS GOING TO FEEL OBLIGATED TO EXPEL.
>> OTHER DISCUSSION. GO AHEAD.
I DON'T LIKE THE SIZE OF THE BLADE BUT I DO LIKE THE TERM INTENT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE INTENT POSSIBLY LOOKED AT OR POSSIBLY KEPT BECAUSE THAT'S THE WHOLE CRUX OF PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN.
IF YOU ACCIDENTALLY BRING ONE, THEN WE CAN TAKE IT.
IF YOU BRING IN, YOU START SHOWING THE OTHER KIDS, THEN YOU SHOWING OFF.
IF YOU COME INTO PROTECT YOURSELF OR SOMEONE'S GOING TO JUMP OUT, YOU GO AND JUMP ON SOMEONE.
THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THERE.
I JUST WANT TO KEEP THAT A LITTLE BIT OF AUTONOMY THERE FOR ADMINISTRATORS.
>> CAN'T WE JUST MAKE AN AMENDMENT? THEY GO AMEND THIS TONIGHT.
CAN'T WE AMEND MOTION TO INCLUDE A DISCLAIMER, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, SOME LANGUAGE THAT SAYS ESSENTIALLY THAT FATAL LIKE ACCIDENTALLY BRINGS UP KNIFE TO SCHOOL AND VOLUNTARILY TURNS IT IN BEFORE ANY INCIDENT OCCURS,
[02:35:06]
THAT THEY WILL BE HELD HARMLESS AND THE KNIFE WILL BE SAVED AND HELD TILL THE PARENT, PICKS IT UP.>> OF COURSE. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT WOULDN'T HAVE ACCOMPLISHED WHAT EVERYBODY HAS BEEN SAYING.
>> YEAH, I THINK JUST FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE COME TO AN AMENDMENT OR A VOTE.
WE'VE CHANGED THE CODE OF CONDUCT MID-YEAR BEFORE OUTSIDE OF THE REVIEW CYCLE, THAT'S NOTHING NEW.
ON THIS I'M STARTING TO HEAR A CONSENSUS FORMING I THINK, AND I WOULD EVEN CONSIDER THAT THE MOTION BE TO DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE CERTAIN CHANGES AND HAVE THEM COME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING AS A SUGGESTION.
THAT'S NOT A MOTION YET, DR. HANKS?
>> [BACKGROUND] WELL, WE GOT A MOTION. [OVERLAPPING].
>> BEFORE WE START MAKING AMENDMENTS OR VOTING ON THAT, I JUST THROW THAT OUT THERE FOR CONSIDERATION, AND I THINK I ALWAYS LIKE JUST TO VOTE THINGS UP AND DOWN AND THEN MAKE A SECOND MOTION.
THAT'S MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE.
I THINK IT'S CLEANER IF WE CAN [OVERLAPPING]
>> CAN WE JUST WITHDRAW THE MOTION.
>> THE PERSON THAT MADE IT ALWAYS CAN.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO.
I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT I'VE REVISED MY ORIGINAL MOTION TO KEEP THIS SIMPLE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LOT OF AMENDMENTS.
[LAUGHTER] I THINK EVERYBODY IS SAYING THE SAME THING PRETTY MUCH THERE'S ONLY ONE DIFFERENCE WITH MR. SMITH'S CONCERN OF INTENT.
I'M LIKE INTENT CAN CHANGE IN THE MATTER OF A MOMENT.
SOMEBODY WHO SAID THEY HAD NO ILL INTENT MAY HAVE INDEED HAD ILL INTENT AND YOU'LL NEVER KNOW.
BUT ANYWAY, THAT SAID, I'LL REVISE MY MOTION TO SAY, I THINK WE SHOULD ELIMINATE THIS SECTION ON TWO-AND-A-HALF INCH, WHATEVER SIZE BLADES.
WE SHOULD INCLUDE A KNIFE AS A WEAPON. EXCUSE ME, I'M SORRY.
MR. NESTLE, I THINK THE DISTRICT SHOULD REVIEW THEIR POLICY OF CODE OF CONDUCT, PARTICULARLY AT THE MIDDLE AND HIGH LEVEL TO POSSIBLY GET RID OF THIS SECTION ON THE SIZE OF THE BLADE AND INCLUDE KNIVES AS WEAPONS, AND ADD AN ADDITIONAL [NOISE] CAVEAT, IF YOU WILL THAT A PRINCIPAL HAS THE ABILITY TO EXCUSE THE ISSUE IF IT'S SELF-REPORTED PRIOR TO BEING FOUND IN SOME OTHER WAY OR AN INCIDENT HAS OCCURRED.
>> HOPE THAT'S CLEAR. YEAH, WE'LL RESTATE IT.
BUT MR. MOULTON MADE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY DR. BRADLEY. HERE'S THE TEST TO SEE IF I CAN RESTATE IT.
MR. MOULTON WITHDREW HIS ORIGINAL MOTION AND MADE THIS MOTION INSTEAD THAT WAS SECONDED TO DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION TO GO MAKE A REVISION TO THE CODE OF CONDUCT RELATED TO KNIVES AND BRING THAT BACK TO US WITH THE INTENT OF ELIMINATING THE SEPARATION OF KNIVES BASED ON LENGTH.
TO INCLUDE A KNIFE IN THE DEFINITION OF A WEAPON.
BUT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHETHER IT'S THROUGH LANGUAGE OR THROUGH THE TABLE OF CONSEQUENCES, THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN ADEQUATELY COVER HONEST MISTAKES, THINGS THAT ARE SELF-REPORTED TO HAVE CONSEQUENCES SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY ARE TODAY.
DID I MISS SOMETHING MR. MOULTON?
>> DID YOU NOT SAY THAT THE PUNISHMENT FOR BRINGING A KNIFE TO BE EXPULSION? WELL, IN THE FIRST CASE.
>> I THINK THAT PART IS COVERED IF WE INCLUDE KNIFE AS A WEAPON.
THAT IS A LEVEL 3 ITEM TO FIRST OFFENSE.
POSSESSING WITH NO INTENT, THERE'S A RECOMMENDED FOR EXPULSION ON FIRST OFFENSE.
>> I HAVE ONE MORE THING TO BE OUTLINED.
>> WHY WE'RE AMENDING AND PRESENTING THAT TO THE DISTRICT, IF WE'RE GOING TO GET RID OF THE LENGTH OF THE BLADE ACROSS MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL JUST MAKE IT ACROSS THE BOARD SO IT'S SIMPLE AND CLEAN.
A FIFTH GRADER IS ALMOST A SIXTH GRADER.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT CHANGE AND GET RID OF TWO-INCH, THREE-INCH OR WHATEVER FOR MIDDLE AND HIGH, JUST MAKE IT THE SAME WAY IN TERMS OF WEAPON IN GENERAL, TO INCLUDE THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL AS WELL SO THAT THEY'RE ALL CONSISTENT.
[02:40:12]
OKEY-DOKEY, [LAUGHTER] IF YOU'D LIKE TO STATE THAT AN AMENDMENT, WE CAN OR WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENT MOTION, OR YOU JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT AND THEN DR. MURPHY CAN HEAR YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT, TOO.IT'S IN CONJUNCTION WITH WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY SAID, SO DR. MURPHY CAN HEAR.
>> MR. BROOME HAS OTHER DISCUSSION.
>> I MAYBE CONFUSED, BUT I THOUGHT MORE THE ISSUE THAT WE RUN INTO, LAST TIME WAS THE FACT THAT INTENT, BECAUSE WE RUN INTO A SITUATION WHERE THE KNIFE GOT HIDDEN, WAS NEVER SEEN AS TO BE IN POSSESSION, AND WE FELT LIKE WE WEREN'T COMFORTABLE WITH SAYING THAT INTENT WAS THEY USED A WEAPON.
WE WENT BACK TO, WAS IT SELF-REPORTED BECAUSE WHEN IT WAS ASKED, THEY SAID YES, AND I'LL PUT IT OUT HERE IN THE STUDIO.
>> I UNDERSTAND BUT I KNOW WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT NAMES AND STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT THIS IS THE SECOND TIME WE'VE DONE IT, BUT I'D RATHER NOT TALK ABOUT PARTICULARLY.
>> BUT THE WHOLE THING WE'RE DOING WITH THESE, TALKING ABOUT LEAKS IS TOTALLY IGNORED.
WHAT PUT US IN THE PROBLEM TO START WITH, WHICH WAS REDEFINING INTENT.
>> WHAT'S THE POLICY THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING? I'M SORRY.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MENTION A COUPLE OF THINGS RELATED TO THIS DISCUSSION.
YOU HAVE A STATE STATUTE THAT MAKES IT ABOUT CARRYING WEAPONS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY, AND IT'S UNLAWFUL FOR ANY PERSON EXCLUDING CERTAIN OFFICERS, TO CARRY ON HIS PERSON WHILE ON ANY ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY SCHOOL PROPERTY, A KNIFE WITH A BLADE OVER TWO INCHES LONG, AND IT GOES ON AND EXPLAINS OTHER THINGS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS HOW THE DISTINCTIONS BECAME IN LENGTH, BUT THAT WOULD BE A CRIMINAL ISSUE.
WHAT SCHOOL OFFICIALS ARE REQUIRED TO DO IS WHEN THERE'S A CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, THEY HAVE TO REPORT THAT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT.
THERE STILL HAS TO BE SOME DISTINCTION AS TO WHAT'S A CRIME VERSUS WHAT'S A DISCIPLINARY OFFENSE.
THE INTENT ISSUE IN THE MISTAKE THOSE ARE VERY COMMON EXCEPTIONS MADE BY SCHOOL BOARDS AND BY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION.
BUT HOW YOU WORD THAT SHOULD BE VERY THOUGHTFULLY DONE AND CAREFULLY DONE.
AFTER SOME REVIEWS AS YOU ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT REFERRING TO ADMINISTRATION BECAUSE YOU CAN GET LAWYERS COME IN AND ARGUE WHAT INTENT IS, WHAT POINT YOU REPORT, YOU JUST HEARD SOMEONE HEARD YOU GOT IT AND YOU RUN A REPORT, ALL THAT COULD COME INTO FACTUAL DISPUTES.
I JUST THINK YOU WANT TO PUT SOME THOUGHT INTO THE WORDING OF IT AND JUST WANTED TO POINT THOSE TWO THINGS OUT.
>> I THOUGHT WE OPERATIONALLY DEFINED AN INTENT.
>> EITHER THE KID TAKES IT TO THE OFFICE AND TURNS IT IN BEFORE HE USES IT, SHOWS THAT IT HURTS ANYBODY WITH IT BEFORE THERE'S AN INCIDENT OR HE DOESN'T.
NOW IF HE DOES IT AND WE FIND A KNIFE, HE'S EXPELLED, PERIOD.
IF HE DOESN'T WANT TO GET EXPELLED THEN HE'S GOT TO COME CLEAN, TAKE THE KNIFE TO THE OFFICE, HAVE IT IMPOUNDED UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE PARENTS CAN COME AND CLAIM IT.
BUT THAT HAS TO HAPPEN BEFORE AN INCIDENT THAT MR. BROOME WAS TALKING ABOUT WAS FOUND AFTER AN INCIDENT OCCURRED.
UNDER THE NEW POLICY, THAT WOULD STILL BE EXPULSION?
>> I BELIEVE WHAT DR. BRADLEY, WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS COVERED BY THE MOTION THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE ON THE FLOOR.
[OVERLAPPING] MR. BROOME JUST GO AHEAD.
>> YOU FEEL LIKE THAT AND I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED, BUT YOU FEEL LIKE THE NEW POLICIES GOING TO COVER THE SITUATIONS THAT OUR HANDS WERE TIED ON PREVIOUSLY.
>> WE DON'T HAVE ANY POLICY TO CONSIDER.
AT THIS POINT WE ARE DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION WITH SOME INTENT TO MAKE POTENTIALLY AFTER WE VOTE, COME TO SOME CONSENSUS THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE CERTAIN CHANGES TO THE CODE OF CONDUCT.
THEN WE'LL HAVE A CODE OF CONDUCT REVISION TO VOTE AND DISCUSS.
>> ALL THE ADMINISTRATION IS GOING TO DO IS CHOOSE THE WORDS, RIGHT?
>> WE'RE NOT ASKING THEM TO GO CREATE A NEW POLICY WE'VE GOT THE POLICY, WHAT WE WON'T DO IS WRITE IT DOWN SO WE CAN HEAR YOU ON THE LINE.
>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR MR. BROOME.
MR. BROOME, I'D MAKE THIS SAME MOTION REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING WE'VE HEARD IN THE OTHER ROOM.
THIS HAS BEEN BOTHERING ME FOR FOUR YEARS REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THERE, I CAN TALK TO YOU PRIVATELY ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS EXECUTIVE LEVEL DISCUSSION.
[02:45:06]
BUT BOTTOM LINE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REASONS FOLKS CAN APPEAL AN EXPULSION.MANY TIMES IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LENGTH OF A WEAPON, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE PEOPLE GET SWORN IN PROPERLY AT THE HEARING.
THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE TO ME.
>> MR. BROOME DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION SECONDED ON THE FLOOR THAT WOULD REFER THIS ISSUE TO THE ADMINISTRATION AS DESCRIBED IN THE MOTION.
>> I'VE GOT LITTLE HANG-UP ABOUT THIS, REFERRING IT TO THE ADMINISTRATION, WE MISSED A MOMENT.
STATED A MOTION THAT REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THOSE WORDS IN IT.
I SECONDED THAT MOTION WHICH REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THOSE WORDS IN IT.
>> I DON'T WANT TO REFER ANYTHING TO THE ADMINISTRATION DID INVOLVE THEIR CREATIVITY OF CHANGING THE INTENT OF THIS MOTION.
THEY CAN WRITE IT BUT WE'RE NOT GIVING IT BACK TO THEM FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AS TO WHAT THE MOTION SHOULD CONTAIN.
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY THAT, BUT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT [OVERLAPPING] I INTENDED TO SECOND IT AT LEAST.
>> MR. MOLTEN, THROUGH HIS ORIGINAL MOTION AND HIS MOTION HE PUT FORTH DID REFER IT TO THE ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE CERTAIN CHANGES, AND WE'LL RESTATE THOSE.
THOSE CHANGES WERE TO ELIMINATING THE LENGTH OF THE BLADE AS A CONSIDERATION, AND THAT TREAT KNIVES AS A WEAPON, WHICH WOULD IN SOME CASES RECOMMEND EXPULSION WHERE WE DON'T TODAY.
BUT TO STILL ALLOW LANGUAGE IN THE CODE OF CONDUCT SUCH THAT IF SOMEONE SELF-REPORTS BRINGING THE KNIFE TO SCHOOL, THAT IT WOULD BE SIMILAR CONSEQUENCES THAT IT IS TODAY, NOT AN EXPULSION, LIKE IT WOULD BE IF IT WAS A FIREARM.
IN THE MOTION THAT YOU STATED SAID WE WOULD DO THIS IN THE MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOLS.
JUST TO RESTATE THAT AND DR. HANKS HAD SOME COMMENTS, BUT THAT'S THE MOTION WE'VE GOT.
>> SORRY TO BELABOR THIS, BUT I'LL REVISE IT THE SAME EXACT THING AND I THINK TO SIMPLIFY IT, MR. NESTLE [LAUGHTER] SIMPLIFY THIS IS TO REVISE IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR DISCUSSION, RATHER THAN TRYING TO LAY OUT EVERY DETAIL OF THE DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION.
I DO AGREE WITH INCLUDING ELEMENTARY FOR THE REASON THAT DR. HANKS MENTIONED.
ONE OTHER THING I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE UNADDRESSED IS WHAT MS. MAHONEY BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION, I THINK IS VERY TRUE, VERY REAL.
WE'RE GOING TO NEED SOMETHING IN OUR POLICY THAT ALLOWS LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BE REPORTED, WHETHER IT'S TURNED IN OR WHETHER IT'S NOT TURNED IN.
IF THE BLADE IS GREATER THAN 2 " OR GREATER.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT REMAINS IN THE POLICY SO THAT WE HAVE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT.
WE HAVE WRITTEN BESIDE RE FOR EXPULSION.
LE MEANS TO NOTIFY LAW ENFORCEMENT.
WE NEED TO KEEP THE LE LANGUAGE IN THERE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE IN LINE WITH THE STATE REGULATIONS AND LAWS.
>> WOULD IT BE HORRIBLE IF WE JUST HAD THAT [INAUDIBLE] TAX CUT IS ONE OF THE MOST LETHAL WEAPONS.
>> OKAY. I'M NOT TRYING TO BE A STICKLER, BUT MR. MOLTEN WITHDREW HIS MOTION AND MADE ANOTHER MOTION THAT'S CURRENTLY NOT SECONDED.
>> DR. BRADLEY HAS SECONDED THE MOTION FROM MR. MOLTEN, DO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION?
>> WE CAN ALWAYS FIGHT OVER THE WORDS WHEN THEY BRING IT BACK.
>> THAT WAS MY THOUGHT. YES, SIR.
>> THEN FROM A COMPLIANCE PERSPECTIVE, WE WILL HAVE TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT IT COMPLIES.
MR. MORTON HAS MADE THE MOTION.
I'M NOT SENSING ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS. THE MOTION CARRIES.
[02:50:06]
GOING BACK TO OUR AGENDA, WE HAVE SEVERAL CONSENT ITEMS. WE HAVE TEN AND IN SUMMARY, WE HAVE A LIST OF EXPULSIONS TO RATIFY, THAT THE BOARD MUST RATIFY.THERE IS A LIST OF OUTED DISTRICT TRANSFER REQUESTS, BOTH INTO AND OUT OF THE DISTRICT.
TWO ITEMS THERE, THEN THERE IS A REQUEST TO ADMIT FOREIGN EXCHANGE STUDENTS.
THERE IS A DONATION FROM BRIDGESTONE TO MIDDLE VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL FOR THE BASEBALL PROGRAM, $2,500. THANK YOU.
TO BE USED FOR BASEBALL OPERATIONS, SUPPLIES, EQUIPMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND UNIFORMS. THERE IS ANOTHER DONATION FROM THE GIFTING TREE TILL VELMA CAMPBELL MIDDLE-SCHOOL FOR $1,110.
IT'S INTENDED TO BE USED FOR THE VALLEY EMPTY BOWL EVENT.
THERE'S A $1,200 DONATION FROM GOVERNOR BILL FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH TO GO OVER VILLAGE ELEMENTARY.
THAT IS INTENDED TO BE USED TO PURCHASE SUPPLIES FOR THE NURSE, INCLUDING SPARE CLOTHING FOR THE STUDENTS.
THEN THERE IS A GRANT SUBMISSION TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA ARTS COMMISSION THAT WOULD SUPPORT OUR SCHOOLS.
WE'RE PROVING APPLYING FOR THAT GRANT.
THEN WHEN WE LIKE TO SEE, EVERYONE MAY REMEMBER THE PAVING PROJECT FOR THE CAR LOOP PROJECT GOT AT JD LEVER ELEMENTARY.
WE HAVE CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 2, WHICH WOULD SAVE THE DISTRICT OVER $19,000.
SO THAT'S MONEY BACK. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE TEN CONSENT ITEMS?
>> I MOVE WE APPROVE THESE TEN CONSENT ITEMS.
>> MOVED BY DR. BRADLEY, SECONDED BY MR. SMITH.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIES AND THAT WAS SIX MEMBERS VOTING.
WE DON'T HAVE MUCH FOR D ITEMS, INFORMATIONAL ITEMS TONIGHT, THERE WAS MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORTS THAT WERE DISTRIBUTED TO THE BOARD. EXCUSE ME.
ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA AHEAD OF TIME.
MR. TRACKSER WILL CERTAINLY BE ABLE TO TAKE QUESTIONS IF ANYBODY HAS ANY.
BUT ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. TRACKSER OR FROM THE BOARD ON THE FINANCIAL REPORTS? WE DON'T HAVE ANY INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER ITEMS. DR. MURPHY IS FILLING IN FOR MR. LAWRENCE THIS EVENING.
DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT'S UPDATE, SIR?
>> I JUST WANTED TO ECHO THE EARLIEST SENTIMENT ABOUT BUS DRIVER APPRECIATION WEEK.
WE'RE VERY MUCH CONCERNED AND THINKING ABOUT DRIVERS THIS WEEK AND WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU SEE A BUS DRIVER, IF YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY INTERACTION, PLEASE LET THEM KNOW YOU APPRECIATE THEIR EFFORTS, YOU APPRECIATE WHAT THEY'RE DOING, AND LET'S JUST TRY TO CELEBRATE THEM AS MUCH AS WE CAN. THANK YOU.
>> I'D LIKE TO GIVE MR. SMITH THE FLOOR FOR A MINUTE.
>> IT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT MS. STEPHANIE FROM THE AIKEN STANDARD WILL NO LONGER BE SERVING AS SHE'S MOVING ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER SITUATION AND TAKING HER PLACE IS MS. SAMANTHA WEAN, WILL BE REPRESENTING THE STAR IN AIKEN STANDARD WELCOME.
AND WE GO MS. STEPHANIE, SHE DID A GREAT JOB.
>> THANK YOU, AND THANK YOU AND WELCOME [APPLAUSE].
THAT CONCLUDES OUR AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING.
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> THAT WAS A CLOSE RACE BUT [LAUGHTER] I HEAR MOTION FROM MR. REINHARDT JACKSON. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY MR. MOLTEN, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIES. WE STAND ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.