Cy-Fair ISD school board meeting gets underway, April 11, 2022 screenshot from here |
We have some irreconcilable differences in our school
district. This month’s school board meeting was last Monday, April 11th. The
public comment is where we see much of the conflict. There is one side that
wants more power to the parents, more transparency, and less indoctrination and
sexualization of our children. There is another side that wants to limit parent
choice and to denigrate parent concerns.
Our school district is not unique in facing these
differences. But what I want to emphasize is, this is not a problem seen
elsewhere but not here in our backyard. It’s here.
School Board Member Concern
A friend passed along a blog post to me recently about some
issues in our district. The blog post is anonymous. You can read it here. Because I don’t know who wrote it, I can’t
vouch for them. But I’ve read it and corroborated much of what is in it, and
learned more to clarify a few things.
A member of our school board recently joined a private group
on Facebook of people in our community who have influence on what happens in
our district. The group is called Cy-Fair Civic Alliance. Their description of
the group says:
Cy-Fair Civic Alliance envisions a Cy-Fair ISD [Independent
School District] that embraces the future, prioritizes an inclusive
and equitable learning environment, and supports a diverse
community where every child can thrive. Cy-Fair Civic Alliance works to engage,
inform, and unite Cy-Fair ISD staff, parents, students, and taxpayers.
If you’re aware of the term “Diversity, Equity, and
Inclusion” (sometimes in different word order), then you can see why this is
concerning. DEI is against diversity of thought, against equality of
opportunity and instead favors equal outcomes, and excludes whoever they disfavor,
which tends to be anyone with white skin, or possibly with Christian beliefs. This
is an ideology spreading in businesses and institutions, like schools and
governments. It’s often associated with ESG scoring, the social scoring system
used in China.
The blog writer wanted to know what was going on in this
group, so he/she joined, after answering several “progressive” questions. I wasn’t
willing to answer those questions against truth, but I wondered what they were,
so I went so far as to request membership, see the questions, and then withdraw
the membership request. The questions are:
·
Please share your thoughts on diversity, inclusion,
and equity in public education.
·
Why is Public Education important?
·
How do you see yourself contributing to this
community? (Attending the board meetings, sending emails, sharing on social
media, outreach, etc.)
It’s clear there is a certain viewpoint in the group. So
when Cy-Fair ISD Board Member Julie Hinaman joined the group, she presumably answered
those questions in a way that indicated she was in alignment with the group’s
viewpoint.
welcome message for Julie Hinaman, posted on Cy-Fair Civic Alliance, image found here |
At the school board meeting last week, Hinaman was referred
to as a founding member of Cy-fair Civic Alliance, which she denies. That might
be a semantic difference; she joined during its first week of existence, but
may not be a person involved in creating, or founding, the group.
One controversial issue that has come up with this group is
their influence to reinstate in the Bridgeland High School library certain
books that had been removed following parent concerns. The blog post includes screenshots
of a book called Flamer, which was brought up by several citizens at the
board meeting. It appears to be a graphic novel, and the samples shown in that
blog post are particularly vile. They are sexually perverted in nature and
involve minors. Clearly this violates the anti-pornography laws in place to
protect young people.
So, to review, parents reported the content of these books
to the school district (I don’t know to which entity), and some schools then
removed the books from their libraries. CyFair Civic Alliance proudly announces
in its Facebook group its success in getting the books placed back in the
library at Bridgeland High School, where they had been removed. This post, by Tana Lam, is shown in the blog post, and was read during public testimony at the school board meeting.
During the meeting, Hinaman was accused of knowing about the content of the books in question, and knowing about Cy-Fair Civic Alliance’s personal contact with the librarian, making that decision to override parent concerns, and doing nothing about it.
CFISD Board Member Julia Hinaman, at the April 11 board meeting screenshot from here |
Later in the meeting Hinaman defends herself. She says,
I would like to correct a false statement made during public
comments using my name…. While there is a board policy and a district process
for reviewing library books, I have not been a part of the review process for
any library book, because it is not part of my role of governance.
Regarding a Facebook group, I am a follower. I follow several
different community groups across our community, just to stay in touch and to
see what’s going on in our community. I am not involved in the management of
that particular group that was mentioned. I am not a founder. And I’m unaware
of the post that was referenced.
There’s a difference between “following” a group and being a
member of a private group on Facebook. She had to join, and express her allegiance
to the ideas of the group, so that’s a bit disingenuous.
Also, I haven’t seen her membership in any of the community
groups I’m in, the kind that want to promote parents’ rights and school choice,
for example.
About being unaware of the post that was referenced, that
may be true, but it was testified to by multiple community members on both
sides of the issue, so by this late point in the meeting she is aware of the
post and of the involvement of the group for which she is a member. And by her
very resistance to the parents calling her out, she is supporting the
pornographic material being put back into the library. She could have expressed that
she was unaware of the group’s involvement and then have added that she would not
approve of such materials in our libraries, but she doesn’t do that.
On April 8, Cy-Fair ISD announced that Julie Hinaman had
been elected to the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB), “taking an interim
position representing Region 4, Position F.”
During our district platform work, where we took the
resolutions from precinct conventions to develop wording to pass along for the state
platform, one of the most common education resolutions was a demand to cut ties
with various organizations, of which TASB was mentioned specifically. The
platform wording we came up with was,
Sever Ties: We insist that local ISDs immediately
sever ties with organizations that have opposed parental rights and the voices
of parents, particularly concerning CRT-related materials and the sexualization
of the child as in the LGBT agenda. These include but are not limited to the
HB3 Reading Academies, the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB), the Texas
Association of School Administrators (TASA), the Texas Association of Community
Schools (TACS), the National School Boards Association (NSBA), the American
Library Association (ALA), the Texas Library Association (TLA), and the
International Baccalaureate Program (IBP), nor will we accept testing from the
Next Generation Assessments and Accountability (NGAA).
Reasoning from the resolutions mentioned that TASB, among
others, consistently lobbies against bills for parental rights and transparency,
works with the National School Boards Association (NSBA) to label parents
concerned with Critical Race Theory as domestic terrorists, and has worked to erode
parental authority.
The SREC (State Republican Executive Committee) has also
called out TASB for these issues.
In other words, being on TASB is not a reason to trust Julie
Hinaman to represent parents in our district; it is a reason to distrust her.
Irreconcilable Differences
We can see that those who oppose parent values in our
schools coincidentally favor books like those pornography examples we talked
about. But they want, not only for those things to be in our schools; they want
parents to have no place to go.
One of the public commenters at last week’s meeting called out the new board members, particularly Natalie Blasingame (not by name, but she’s the only new female board member), for having the audacity to suggest that underutilized campuses could be used for things parents want.
Dr. Tara Cummings, speaking at the April 11 school board meeting screenshot from here |
So, this was the testimony of Dr. Tara Cummings:
In response to the report [demographic report at Thursday’s
work session], one of our trustees commented that she’s committed to making
CFISD the very best choice for all families. I’m glad to hear that, but I’m a
bit confused and concerned, considering some of the anti-public ed political
candidates that she and our other new trustees have publicly endorsed.
Knowing that charter growth is a threat to our district and
public education in general, it’s imperative that our trustees mind their votes
accordingly, and that the community continue to pay attention to such.
This same trustee also stated in the future she hopes to see
underutilized campuses “used for things families want.” Although I agree that
the district must be judicious in making decisions about the facilities, our
facilities now and in the future, the primary priority, and a factor that sets
us far and above other educational options, especially charter and private
schools, is the commitment to opportunity for all. The promise that all
students, regardless of their zip code, campus, or circumstances are afforded
exceptional and equitable educational opportunities.
Speaking of equitable, how ‘bout them equity audit
recommendations? As a parent partner in education, which according to our new
trustees makes me the primary stakeholder in education, what I don’t want is
something along the lines of magnet-type programs. CFISD doesn’t need lotteries
in order to provide a world-class education to every
single one of our students. Opportunity for all means just that.
I’ve talked with Dr. Natalie Blasingame about what “used for
things families want” might mean. She suggests that, if there were parents of
20 students that wanted, say, a particular track, maybe a Christian track, it
would be possible—at no extra cost—to accommodate that choice. We simply use
current facilities and willing current staff to fill the need.
While I am very pro-homeschooling, Blasingame wants the
opportunity for the school district to try to meet the needs before a parent
feels like they have to turn elsewhere.
Dr. Cummings here reveals a couple of divisive points. She
claims, as though it’s common knowledge, that charter schools are a threat to
public schools. Charter schools are public schools; they are a type of
public school, with funding being part of public school funding; i.e., taxpayer
funding.
Every student that goes to a charter school goes there
because the public school they were assigned to failed to meet their needs—and because
they were among the lucky ones to get a slot in a charter school, which the
parents hoped would be a better option. The problem is, the waiting list for
charter schools is long—too long. And we’re not getting enough new charter
schools. Even though there is great demand, charter schools with proven track records,
such as those coming out of Hillsdale College, are being refused a charter in
Texas.
When Dr. Cummings says CFISD can “provide a world-class
education to every single one of our students; opportunity for all means just
that,” she doesn’t mean meeting the needs of all those students who have turned
elsewhere because their needs aren’t met; she means she wants to keep them
stuck in the failing situation along with everyone else that’s stuck there—so
she can make sure all of the state’s education funding goes to indoctrinating
them the way she wants.
Stacy DeMeier speaks at the school board meeting on April 11, screenshot from here |
It’s pretty clear that if we, as a community, do not stand up
to the recent attacks aimed at undermining public education, including book
banning, false accusations of CRT in the curriculum, and the constant attacks
on our teachers, then we will be left with a school district that is not receiving
adequate funding it needs. We need to support pro-public education
representatives. And we especially need board members who are not actively
trying to take funds away from our district by supporting and publicly
endorsing school choice voucher-loving politicians.
What she calls book banning is removing harmful pornographic
materials from school libraries intended for minors. We’re not talking about depriving children from reading Huckleberry Finn for its depiction of racial issues, or Harry Potter because it mentions witchcraft; we’re
talking about keeping out of school libraries actual pornography aimed at children. This used to be something parents and schools could agree on.
And there aren’t false accusations of CRT in the
curriculum; there are actual examples of CRT ideology being taught—which have been
presented in multiple previous school board meetings. I don’t know what she
means by attacks on teachers, unless she means teachers who are going against
the will of the parents and teaching things we’ve insisted not be taught. Such
a teacher might feel “attacked,” if a parent calls for them to be accountable. But
no, there are no physical or even verbal attacks on teachers, so that’s what
you might politely call a mischaracterization—or, more accurately, a lie.
Ayse Endomayo speaks at the school board meeting April 11, screenshot from here |
So, what is a heretic in DeMeier’s public school religion? Someone
who supports choice for parents who want their children’s needs met without indoctrination or sexualization of the child.
We are at an impasse. As parents, grandparents, and
concerned community members, we’d better push harder than the public school religion inquisitors. And we’d better do it now. Because the harm to our children is
already being done. The next school board election isn’t until 2023. We need
better from our board now.
Call to Action
One more thing. The Texas Education Association (TEA)
has, at the direction of Governor Abbott, updated their guidelines for
selecting and removing school library materials. (Texas Scorecard story here.) The purpose of these statewide standards is to prevent the presence of pornography
and other obscene content in Texas public schools, such as those we’re talking
about here in CFISD. The new standards require a district librarian to read all
materials brought into libraries, something that has not always happened. And
the review and selection process will be transparent and will emphasize
parental rights.
I got a text today suggesting that several hundred of us
ought to contact our school board members to adopt these new library review
policies. What the TEA has set forth is a model policy; it is then up to local
school districts to adopt policies. That means the parents need to require it.
Maybe a reminder that showing porn or other harmful materials to minors is
against the law, so in order to protect themselves from prosecution, they’d
better set an appropriate policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment