Wednesday, October 27, 2021

Parental Rights - Secure in R2 Schools?

You'll want to reach this article closely about a Florida case involving a school that provided "guidance" to a minor student , without informing the parents, about accommodating "... her decision to be acknowledged as non-binary and use an alternate name at school."

The school had a "Leon County School District’s Transgender/Gender-Nonconforming Student Support Plan" for the 13-year-old girl.

I'm beginning to hear about "personal pronoun" nonsense in Richland 2 schools for students as young as first grade. 

If you get a sniff of anything like this involving your child, please let me know. I'll write about it in a way that will not identify your child or you.

To what extent, if any, is this happening in Richland 2 schools?

Oct. 26 Board Meeting - Secondary Motion

When is Teresa Holmes going to start paying acttention when Trustee Agostini speaks. It seems to me that she turns off her hearing aid (or Hearing), as soon as Trustee Agostini begins speaking. And, if it involves a secondary motion, the hearing aid switch gets stuck on OFF.

When the draft agenda was being discussed, Trustee Agostini made a (secondary) motion to amend the primary motion (which was to approve the draft agenda). Her secondary motion was to add a discussion of the difference between Critical Race Theory vs. Culturally Relevant Teaching, based on the back-to-school, in-service to staff this fall. Mrs. Agostini's motion begins at (2::56:50) on the Oct. 26th meeting on  

Mrs. Agostini clearly said, "I move ..." Then Holmes asked, "Is that a motion, Ms. Agostini?" OF COURSE, IT IS A MOTION. Will somebody please put a copy of Robert's Rules of Order under Holmes' nose and tell her to inhale deeply?

Trustee Scott seconded the motion. Mrs. Agostini explained why she wanted the item on the agenda, and voting was called. Electronic voting was very slow. The superintendent said something to Holmes that was inaudible to the public. Then Holmes interrupted during the voting pause (2:59:00) and claimed a point of privilege to make a completely unnecessary and possibly incorrect statement. She said, ".. to remind everybody for the public (whatever that means) that Richland 2 school district does not teach critical race theory ..." 

She obviously missed the entire point about Critical Race Theory. The District claims not to teach it, but all the elements seem to be present: equity, inclusion, diversity, 100 Premier Men of Color (the preference of black men to white men in hiring). 

Kind of like "it smells like a pig, looks like a pig, walks like a pig, has pig's ears..., but we don't have any pigs here." Wake up!

Then Trustee Agostini addresses the form of the agenda shown and stated she wanted in on the agenda, not on the draft agenda.

McKie jumped in when she should have spoken correctly or kept her mouth shut. Then Manning further clarified that voting was on the Secondary Motion by Agostini. That had to be voted on before the vote could be taken on the Agenda as amended. Holmes referred to it as a "mouthful".

It is the Chair's responsibility to keep all that straight. Holmes seems completely unable to handle that.

The vote was 6-1 (McKie voting No) to add CRT vs. CRT to the November 16th agenda.

At that point Holmes should have asked the trustees if there were further motions. Instead, she attempted to jump straight to a vote on the primary motion to approve the draft agenda.

(3:02:35) Then Trustee McFadden stated she wished to make a motion to add a discussion of Board Policy BEDB - Board Agenda on the draft agenda for Dec. 14. You MUST listen to this exchange. Ask yourself why the board chair cannot listen and understand the first time what is clear to everyone else in the room. Mrs. McFadden made a motion. Holmes asks, "Are you making a motion?" Seconded by Mrs. Agostini. 

Manning tried to shoot down McFadden's request. It was premature and biased to make such a statement. He wants to keep the status quo, because the chair and the superintendent set the agenda. He certainly could have voted in favor of putting it on the agenda and then, if he wanted to argue against any changes, he could have done so when it was being discussed. It is hard to get something added to the agenda.

Mrs. McFadden wanted the agenda item established now for the draft agenda to be prepared on November 16. She has already learned how difficult it is to get past Holmes and the superintendent. 

Teresa blew some smoke at Mrs. McFadden with her suggestion for Mrs. McFadden to put it in writing "and we can address it that way", which is another way of saying it will go straight into the round file.

And then the superintendent stepped in with his usual long-winded oration. And after all that, Mrs. McFadden's motion was never voted on and, if it had been approved, it never got onto the draft agenda for the Dec. 14th meeting. Watch carefully at the November 16th meeting to see if the superintendent includes her request.

Coming up soon: Board & Superintendent Comments (3:10:50)

Oct. 26 Board Meeting - 1

There appeared to be more security and law-enforcement officers present at last night's board meeting than the 20 members of the public who were admitted to the board room.

Attendance had been severely limited to 20 by the superintendent's edict last Friday, October 22. COVID was mentioned in the media release, but no one outside Administration believed that for two seconds. 

The District seemed to be feeding off the National School Boards Association's (NSBA) assessment of protesting parents as domestic terrorists. The NSBA apologized for its letter to the White House. The knee-jerk reaction at the DOJ and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland's super-fast kick-off of inquiries by his Federal law-enforcement agencies ignited a public furor.

You'll want to hear the comments made by ten of the 20 people in the room. Go to and select the October 26th meeting. Fast-forward (drag) to (1:32:00) for the introduction of last night's Public Participation segment.

Teresa Holmes introduced the public participation segment with a reading and then a condescending comment about her intention to squash anyone who violated her rules. Notice her smug expression during her informal comments and her use of "we", meaning you. She added, "... when we get a little past things, we can open things back and have more people participate."

In other words, "when you people learn how to behave and control yourselves and stop picking on us, we'll let more of you people in." That's what her words meant to me. Notice she does not mention COVID.

And then public participation began (1:34:05).