[00:00:01]
THAT EVERYONE IS ABLE TO HEAR THE PROCEEDINGS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SERGEANT. THE TIME IS
[1. Call to order]
6:01 P.M. AND THIS MEETING IS HEREBY CALLED TO ORDER. WE HAVE THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM ATTENDING IN PERSON. NOTICE OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTED ONLINE AND AT THE FORT BEND ISD ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOR AT LEAST 72 HOURS. IF EVERYONE WILL RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY MR. SHOWIF. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO TEXAS. ONE STATE, ONE GOD, ONE INDIVISIBLE. IF EVERYONE WILL REMAIN STANDING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE, PLEASE.YOU MAY BE SEATED. BEFORE WE CONVENE AND CLOSE SESSION THIS EVENING, IF WE HAVE FIVE
[6. Public Comment (Part 1 of 2).]
SPEAKERS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP, WHO ARE PRESENT NOW AND WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND SPEAK, I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE FLOOR. IF WE HAVE SPEAKERS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP, WHO WANT TO WAIT TILL THE END, YOU'RE CERTAINLY ABLE TO DO THAT, AND YOU CAN DECLINE AND WAIT TILL THE END OR OR IF YOU'RE HERE AND YOU'D LIKE TO GO NOW, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU THAT OPPORTUNITY. SO I'LL CALL YOUR NAME. YOU CAN LET ME KNOW YET IF YOU'RE HERE. YES, I'D LIKE TO GO NOW, OR I'D LIKE TO WAIT UNTIL LATER. AND OUR BOARD SECRETARY, MR. HAMILTON, WILL KEEP THE TIME. IT IS THE TYPICAL THREE MINUTES, AND HE WILL GIVE YOU A 32ND WARNING. FIRST. I HAVE WHITNEY JALALI. GO AHEAD. OKAY YOU CAN GO TO THIS MICROPHONE. WE'RE MR. LONG PHAM IS. AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES AND YOU'LL GET A 32ND WARNING. OKAY. TO GO AHEAD OKAY.GOOD EVENING. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I'M NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT INDIVIDUAL BOOKS BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS REALLY ABOUT. SOME SCHOOL BOARD, TRUSTEES AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS CLAIM TO SUPPORT THEIR LGBTQ NEIGHBORS, MEANWHILE UNDERMINING ANY EXPRESSION OF THEIR ACTUAL ACCEPTANCE OR EXISTENTIAL LEGITIMACY DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE CONTENT BEING DISCUSSED, I WOULD ALMOST BELIEVE THAT CONCERN OVER EXPLICIT, EXPLICIT CONTENT WAS TRULY THE ISSUE AT HAND, EXCEPT THAT A DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF THE BOOKS CHALLENGED FEATURE LGBTQ CHARACTERS. BUT EVEN MORE TELLING IS THAT AN ENVIRONMENT HAS BEEN CREATED IN WHICH TEACHERS AND STAFF ARE AFRAID TO EXPRESS SUPPORT FOR THESE UNIQUELY VULNERABLE INDIVIDUALS.
A FLAG, AN INNOCENT STORY SIMPLY MENTIONING AN LGBTQ CHARACTER, A TEACHER TALKING ABOUT THEIR OWN FAMILY AND OTHER EXPRESSIONS OF SUPPORT COULD THREATEN THEIR LIVELIHOODS AND PERSONAL SAFETY.
MEANWHILE, LGBTQ STUDENTS AND STAFF STAFF OFTEN SUFFER FROM POOR MENTAL HEALTH, INCLUDING PROFOUNDLY DISPROPORTIONATE SUICIDE RATES. UNTIL YOU INITIATE OR ENCOURAGE OTHER AVENUES OF EXPRESSION OF LGBTQ SUPPORT AND REPRESENTATION, STOP PRETENDING THAT THIS IS ONLY ABOUT EXPLICIT CONTENT. DEMONSTRATE WITH YOUR ACTIONS OUTSIDE OF BOOK BANNING THAT IT'S NOT BIGOTRY. PROPOSE A PRIDE EVENT. ISSUE A STATEMENT DENOUNCING HOMOPHOBIA WHEN APPROPRIATE, POST SIGNS EXPRESSING SUPPORT. LET KIDS READ ABOUT CHARACTERS WITH GAY PARENTS. IN ADDITION, WHAT IS INAPPROPRIATE AND FOR WHAT AGE GROUP IS INCREDIBLY SUBJECTIVE AND SHOULD NEVER BE DECIDED BY ONE INDIVIDUAL WHEN MAKING DECISIONS FOR AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY. PROPOSING SUCH AN IDEA IS A NOT SO THINLY VEILED GRAB AT A RUBBER STAMP, WHICH IS UNACCEPTABLE AND ANATHEMA TO DEMOCRACY AND TRANSPARENCY. SEE, THIS ISSUE IS NOT ONLY COMPLICATED BY THE SUBJECTIVITY OF INAPPROPRIATE CONTENT, BUT ALSO BY THE NEED FOR NUANCED DECISION MAKING ABOUT WHETHER A BOOK IS BALANCED BY THE IMPORTANCE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE REMAINDER OF ITS CONTENT. MANY RELIGIOUS TEXTS HAVE BEEN DEEMED TO FIT THIS CATEGORY BY THEIR RESPECTIVE CONGREGATIONS. THIS IS ALSO WHY, ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE OF BOOKS FOR WHICH CONSENSUS OF ACCEPTABILITY IS DIFFICULT TO REACH, IT'S ESSENTIAL THAT DECISION MAKERS ACTUALLY READ THEM INSTEAD OF SIMPLY ADOPTING LISTS FROM POLITICALLY MOTIVATED GROUPS. I ASK YOU TO DENY THE PROPOSED CHANGES. HAPPY PRIDE MONTH AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS ANGIE WORSWICK. IS ANGIE HERE? DO YOU WANT TO GO NOW OR AT THE END? OKAY THANK
[00:05:13]
YOU FOR BEING HERE. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. HI THERE. MY NAME IS ANGIE WIERZBICA. CAN YOU HEAR ME IN THE BACK? I KNOW I COULDN'T HEAR EARLIER. OKAY, I AM A PARENT OF TWO KIDS AT QUAIL VALLEY ELEMENTARY. I'M ACTIVE IN MY COMMUNITY, AND I APPRECIATE YOU LETTING ME, LETTING SOME OF US GO FIRST AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. I HAVE YOUNG KIDS. I LIKE TO GET HOME BEFORE THEY'RE IN BED, I AM HERE, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE F LOCAL POLICY. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS, A LOT OF, TOPICS THAT PEOPLE WILL BRING UP. AND I'M SO GLAD THAT YOU ALL ARE DISCUSSING IT TONIGHT AND HAVING ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS VERY IMPORTANT POLICY. I'M JUST GOING TO BRING UP THREE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER. NUMBER ONE, HB 900 IS LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN THE CURRENT AF POLICY. POLICY, LOCAL POLICY FOR FORT BEND ISD. YOU DO NOT NEED TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND THE MANDATORY COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SCHOOL LIBRARIES.WE ARE A DISTRICT OF INNOVATION, BUT WE ARE ALSO IN TEXAS, WHERE WE LIKE SMALL GOVERNMENT. RIGHT.
LET'S LET'S MODEL THAT. LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT HAVING EXCESSIVE, RULES AND REGULATIONS WHERE THEY DO NOT NEED TO BE. NUMBER TWO, CURRENTLY THERE IS A RUBRIC THAT'S USED IN THE RECONSIDERATION PROCESS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS IS RELATIVELY NEW FOR THE PROCESS FOR THIS POLICY. AND NEITHER AM AN HB 900 DOES NOT REQUIRE A RUBRIC OF ANY KIND TO BE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A BOOK IS EDUCATIONALLY SUSTAINABLE OR SUITABLE. NOW, I UNDERSTAND A RUBRIC MAY SEEM LIKE IT'S A GOOD CHOICE TO MEASURE, COLLECT, AND ANALYZE THE RANKINGS AND THE SCORES, BUT THIS DOES NOT ALLOW FOR AS MUCH DISCUSSION THAT'S NECESSARY WHEN WE FALL INTO THESE GRAY AREAS. WHEN WE'RE DISCUSSING THESE BOOKS AND FURTHER, IT'S BEEN ACTUALLY SEEN ON THESE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES THAT THIS THESE RUBRICS ARE NOT EVEN BEING FILLED OUT ALL THE WAY. IF SOMETHING IS RANKED AT A SCORE OF TEN OR ABOVE, THEY ARE REMOVED AND THE SECOND OR THIRD PAGES, I BELIEVE THAT ALLOW FOR THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO WRITE COMMENTS ARE BLANK. THESE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, EVEN IF YOU NEED A RUBRIC, THEY'RE NOT DOING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING TO DISCUSS THE GRAY AREAS THAT BELONG THAT ARE IN THESE BOOKS. AND FURTHER, AND EVEN MORE IMPORTANT, IT DOESN'T THE RUBRIC DOES NOT CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT THE BOOK IS TAKEN AS A WHOLE. I THINK WE'VE HEARD THAT A LOT. WE DON'T NEED TO BE, SCORING THESE BOOKS ON EXCERPTS. WE NEED TO BE SCORING THEM ON THE WHOLE BOOK. WE'RE AN EDUCATION SYSTEM, RIGHT? WHY ARE WE LOOKING AT EXCERPTS OF BOOKS ONLY NUMBER THREE. AT LEAST ONE PARENT SHOULD BE ON EVERY RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE. THERE ARE NO PARENTS. THE COMMITTEES.
WE HAVE LOTS OF FORT BEND ISD COMMITTEES, AND PARENTS ARE ON THOSE COMMITTEES. WHY IS NOT ONE PARENT ON ANY OF THESE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEES? I THIS IS VITAL FOR PRESERVING PARENTAL RIGHTS, AND I THINK MOST PARENTS IN THIS DISTRICT WOULD APPRECIATE HAVING A VOICE JUST LIKE I AM HERE TONIGHT. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS SCOTT PET. DO YOU WANT TO GO NOW? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. HI.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? HI MY NAME IS DOCTOR SCOTT, PET. I'M THE FATHER OF TWO FORT BEND ISD STUDENTS. ONE AT FIRST COLONY MIDDLE SCHOOL, THE OTHER ENTERING CLEMENTS HIGH SCHOOL.
I'M ALSO MARRIED TO A BEAUTIFUL FORT BEND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHER WHO FOR OVER A DECADE HAS SPECIALIZED IN LITERACY, SOCIAL STUDIES, AND READING SCIENCE. THIS YEAR SHE WAS CAMPUS TEACHER OF THE YEAR. AS FOR MYSELF, IN 2022 I EARNED A PHD IN ENGLISH LITERATURE FROM RICE UNIVERSITY, WHERE I HAVE TAUGHT WRITING AND LITERATURE CLASSES SINCE 2017. MY FAMILY COVERS THE GAMUT OF BOOK READING AND SCHOOLS IS THE POINT. FROM FIRST GRADE TO FIRST YEAR UNDERGRADUATES, AND WE'RE HERE TO OPPOSE IN THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE TERMS, ANY POLICY THAT DISEMPOWERS THE TRAINED EXPERTS, LIBRARIANS AND TEACHERS WHO, IN GOOD FAITH COLLABORATION WITH ONE ANOTHER, MAKE SOUND JUDGMENTS ABOUT WHAT BOOKS ARE AGE APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR CLASSROOMS AND SCHOOL LIBRARIES. I WANT TO SAY THAT, IT'S VERY EASY TO TEAR WORDS FROM CONTEXT.
IT'S THE LOWEST FORM OF INTELLECTUAL LAZINESS AND DECEIT. PEOPLE WHO ADDRESS SCHOOL BOARDS AND SUPPORT A BOOK BANDS DO THIS EVERY DAY, AND WE NEED TO BE HONEST AND BRAVE
[00:10:01]
ENOUGH TO SEE THROUGH THAT CHEAP TACTIC, I'M SKIPPING AHEAD. SORRY. I JUST WANT TO BE FAST.YEAH. PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT BOOK BANDS KNOW THAT CONTEXT MATTERS. IT'S JUST THAT THEY DON'T LIKE THE CONTEXT OF THE BOOKS THEY OPPOSE. THERE ARE MANY BOOKS I WOULD NEVER WANT IN OUR SCHOOLS.
FOR EXAMPLE, PROPAGANDA WRITTEN WITH THE PURPOSE OF OTHERING OR OF INSPIRING HATRED. I DON'T WANT THOMAS DIXON'S THE KLANSMEN IN MY SCHOOL LIBRARY. I DON'T LIKE THE CONTEXT OF WHITE SUPREMACIST PROPAGANDA NOVELS, BUT I WOULD NEVER QUOTE FROM THAT BOOK AND TELL YOU TO BAN IT BASED ON THE WORDS. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO BAN IT BASED ON THE CONTEXT. SO PEOPLE WHO QUOTE BOOKS OUT OF CONTEXT ARE NOT BEING HONEST. IT'S NOT THE WORDS THEY DISLIKE. IT IS THE CONTEXT OF THOSE WORDS. STORIES ABOUT PEOPLE WHO WERE DEHUMANIZED AND OTHERED AND UNDER-RECOGNIZED.
IT'S MUCH EASIER TO WEAPONIZE WORDS BY TEARING THEM FROM THEIR CONTEXT THAN TO THINK AND READ CRITICALLY AND TEACH OUR CHILDREN TO PUT THEIR WORDS THEY READ INTO A CONTEXT THAT BROADENS AND SOMETIMES CHALLENGES, EVEN THREATENS THEIR WORLDVIEW, LAST THING I'LL SAY.
ANYONE WHO ADDRESSES THE BOARD ON THIS SUBJECT AND THEY MIGHT BE ON THE BOARD, EVEN SHOULD BE WILLING TO SHARE SOME OF THE BOOKS THAT HAVE MADE AN IMPACT ON THEIR LIVES. CERTAINLY ANYONE IN A POSITION OF POWER TO CHANGE DISTRICT POLICY SHOULD BE WILLING TO PUBLISH A LIST OF BOOKS THAT HAVE INFLUENCED THEM. SO FOR ME, I JUST WANT TO LIST A FEW OF THOSE THEY INCLUDE THE AWAKENING BY KATE CHOPIN, 30S PARADISE BY TONI MORRISON, GIOVANNI'S ROOM BY JAMES BALDWIN, BLOOD MERIDIAN BY CORMAC MCCARTHY, FUGITIVE PIECES BY ANNE MICHAELS, THE AMAZING ADVENTURES OF KAVALIER AND CLAY BY MICHAEL CHABON, TO THE LIGHTHOUSE BY VIRGINIA WOOLF, AND MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY MORE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS DARCY PITT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. GOOD EVENING, BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DARCY PITT.
AND I JUST TAKE A MINUTE. IT'S OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO PAUSE YOUR TIME. IT'S OKAY. YOU TELL US WHEN YOU'RE READY. SORRY. IT'S OKAY. I TOLD MY STUDENTS TO BE BRAVE.
SO THEY'RE WATCHING MISS PESTERING. I AM A FORT BEND ISD PARENT OF TWO STUDENTS. I'M ALSO A DISTRICT EMPLOYEE AND THE 2023 2024 CAMPUS TEACHER OF THE YEAR FOR AUSTIN PARKWAY ELEMENTARY.
I'M A STAKEHOLDER IN OUR DISTRICT AND COMMITTED TO THE ACADEMIC SUCCESS AND SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN. I'M HERE TODAY TO REMIND YOU THAT FORT BEND ISD IS A TOP RATED DISTRICT WITH CAREFULLY VETTED PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE COMMITTED TO EQUIPPING STUDENTS WITH THE CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS THEY NEED TO SUCCEED IN COLLEGE AND BEYOND. OUR EDUCATORS AND CAMPUS LIBRARIANS ARE TRUSTWORTHY EXPERTS IN THEIR FIELDS. THEY ARE TRAINED PROFESSIONALS WITH THE DEEP UNDERSTANDING OF CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATIONAL NEEDS. OUR EDUCATORS AND CAMPUS LIBRARIANS HAVE THE EXPERTISE REQUIRED TO SELECT AGE APPROPRIATE BOOKS THAT ARE ALIGNED WITH THE TEAKS AND OUR DISTRICT CURRICULUM OBJECTIVES. MY COLLEAGUES AND I ARE COMMITTED TO FOSTERING CRITICAL THINKING AND EMPATHY IN OUR STUDENTS. PLEASE RECONSIDER THE DRASTIC CHANGES PROPOSED TO OUR DISTRICT'S BOOK SELECTION AND RECONSIDERATION POLICY. THE CHANGES ARE DANGEROUSLY VAGUE AND COULD POTENTIALLY HARM OUR STUDENTS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS BY PROMOTING CENSORSHIP AND EXTREMIST AGENDAS DO NOT UNDERMINE THE EXPERTISE OF FORT BEND ISD TEACHERS AND LIBRARIANS. PLEASE TRUST US TO DO THE JOBS THAT WE WERE HIRED TO DO AND GIVE MORE EDUCATORS AND LIBRARIANS A SEAT AT THE TABLE. WE KNOW OUR STUDENTS DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES, THEIR INTERESTS AND THEIR EDUCATIONAL GOALS WHEN CHOOSING BOOKS FOR OUR CLASSROOMS AND LIBRARIES, WE LOOK AT THEIR EDUCATIONAL VALUE, HISTORICAL CONTEXT, AND RELEVANCE FOR OUR STUDENTS. RELYING ON ONE INDIVIDUAL TO REVIEW ALL THE BOOKS FOR ALL AGE GROUPS BASED ON THEIR EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY OVERLOOKS THE COMPLEXITY OF EVALUATING LITERATURE. WITHOUT OUR EXPERTISE, STUDENTS MAY MISS OUT ON VALUABLE LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES AND EXPOSURE TO DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES THAT ENRICH THEIR MINDS AND PROMOTE
[00:15:04]
INTELLECTUAL GROWTH. TEACHERS AND CAMPUS LIBRARIANS ARE HERE TO ENSURE FORT BEND ISD STUDENTS ARE EQUIPPED WITH SKILLS FOR LIFE. I URGE YOU TO PLEASE BE INCLUSIVE OF EDUCATORS AND LIBRARIANS IN THE BOOK RECONSIDERATION PROCESS AND USE THEIR INVALUABLE EXPERTISE AND PERSPECTIVES IN SHAPING EDUCATIONAL CONTENT AND FOSTERING A RICH LEARNING ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL CHILDREN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LAST UP IS TAMMY MARINO. DO YOU WANT TO GO NOW? OKAY. GO AFTER. OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO CONVENE IN CLOSED SESSION, WE WILL BE BACK[3. Convene in closed session under Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 551 under the following sections: 551.071 - For the purpose of a private consultation with the Board's attorney on any or all subjects or matters authorized by law; Section 551.072 - Consider purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property, Section 551.074 - Personnel matters, Section 551.076 - Security matters, Section 551.082 - Student discipline matter or complaint, or Section 551.0821 - Personally identifiable information about public school student]
OUT IN A I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE, BUT, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO THAT, TO GET LEGAL ADVICE. SO WE WILL NOW CONVENE IN CLOSED SESSION UNDER THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551. THOSE SECTIONS THAT ARE LISTED IN OUR AGENDA AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF A PRIVATE CONSULTATION WITH THE BOARD'S ATTORNEY ON ANY AND ALL SUBJECTS OR MATTERS AUTHORIZED BY LAW. THE TIME OKAY THE TIME IS 7:36 P.M. AND[4. Reconvene in open session]
[5. Policy EF (Local) - Instructional Resources]
WE ARE NOW RECONVENED IN OPEN SESSION, SO SINCE THIS IS A WORKSHOP, WE ARE GOING TO, WORK THROUGH THE FORMAT, A LITTLE BIT INFORMALLY, JUST TO LET THE AUDIENCE AND STAFF KNOW. SO THE FIRST THING WE'RE GOING TO DO IS I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO DOCTOR SMITH, SO THAT YOU CAN GIVE US A LITTLE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ABOUT HOW YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN OPERATING UNDER THE CURRENT POLICY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. SO YES, MA'AM, WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN BY GIVING SOME CONTEXT TO THE BACKGROUND OF, WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS AND SPECIFICALLY KIND OF WALK YOU THROUGH A TIMELINE. AND THEN I'VE ASKED OUR IN-HOUSE COUNSEL, MR. KOBE WILBANKS, TO ALSO GIVE A, POLICY AND A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, AND SO WE'RE GOING TO START WITH, MISS MELISSA HUBBARD. AND, WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU. GOOD EVENING, I'M JUST GOING TO AS DOCTOR SMITH SAID, GIVE SOME HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND A TIMELINE OF INFORMATION, RELATED TO CURRENT PROCEDURES. WOVEN INTO THIS TIMELINE IS SOME ASPECTS OF INTERNAL MEASURES THAT WE'RE TAKING, AS WELL AS THE MEASURES THAT, ARE OCCURRING AT THE STATE. SO YOU'LL NOTICE THAT IN THE FALL OF 2022, WE BEGAN BY IMPLEMENTING A CENTRALIZED, KIND OF ORDERING SYSTEM TO SUPPORT SOME OF THE SELECTION ANALYSIS PIECES IN THE LIBRARY, FOLLOWING THAT, THE BOARD POLICY COMMITTEE WAS MEETING, TO WORK THROUGH A DRAFT OF EF LOCAL, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY OUR BOARD OF TRUSTEES IN APRIL OF 2023, COUPLE SHORT MONTHS AFTER THAT, HOUSE BILL 900 WAS PASSED IN OUR 88TH LEGISLATURE. AND THERE ARE SOME, SPECIFICITY AND REQUIREMENTS BUILT INTO HOUSE BILL 900 THAT YOU'LL SEE ON THIS CHART AS WELL , SO FOLLOWING THE PASSAGE OF THAT LEGISLATURE, WE ALSO RECEIVED SOME GUIDANCE, RELATED TO HOW TO BEGIN IMPLEMENTING SOME PIECES. AND THAT IS WHAT KIND OF LAUNCHED OUR INTERNAL AUDITING PROCESS. IT'S A DISTRICT WIDE AUDITING PROCESS. SO IN NOVEMBER OF 2023, WE LAUNCHED OUR FIRST DISTRICT WIDE AUDITING PROCESS WITH OUR GRAPHIC NOVELS, AND WE COMPLETED THAT IN MARCH. WE KIND OF WEEDED THOSE FROM THE COLLECTION, AND WE HAVE KEPT MOVING SINCE THEN, IN AS A PROVISION OF HOUSE BILL 900, THE SLACK WAS REQUIRED TO GENERATE STANDARDS, COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND THEY HAD TO BE APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY JANUARY, AND SO RIGHT THERE AT THE END OF DECEMBER, DECEMBER 29TH, THEY WERE ADOPTED. AND SO NOW WE HAVE THE TSLAC COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PURPOSES OF THE PUBLIC. TELL THEM WHAT TSLAC IS. YES TSLAC IS THE TEXAS STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES COMMISSION. ALSO ONE OF THE PROVISIONS IN HOUSE BILL 900 IS THAT VENDORS MUST SUBMIT A LIST OF SEXUALLY EXPLICIT OR SEXUALLY RELEVANT BOOKS TO TIA.NOW THAT PROVISION IS ENJOINED, WHICH IS, I THINK, A FANCY LEGAL WORD THAT SAYS IT IS ON HOLD RIGHT NOW. WE, THAT PROVISION IS NOT MOVING FORWARD AT THIS TIME. IT WAS IN LITIGATION. SO WE HAVE KEPT MOVING THROUGH THE PROCESS HERE IN THE DISTRICT, IN ALIGNMENT WITH OUR CURRENT F LOCAL POLICY, AND WE ARE CONTINUING WITH OUR INTERNAL AUDITING PROCESSES. OUR NEXT, KIND OF STOP ALONG THE WAY IS OUR FICTION NOVELS. AND SO WE'RE KIND OF STARTING THIS SUMMER,
[00:20:03]
MOVING INTO OUR DISTRICT WIDE AUDITING FOR FICTION NOVELS, LATE SPRING. WE'RE STILL KIND OF WAITING ON INFORMATION IN THE UPDATE OF 123 FROM TASB, BUT THAT UPDATE IS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE SOME TASB RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR POLICY. THE LAST KIND OF TWO PIECES ON THIS TIMELINE ARE CONNECTED TO THAT PROVISION INSIDE OF HOUSE BILL 900, WHICH IS ENJOINED OR ON HOLD, AND THAT RELATES TO VENDORS PROVIDING AN INITIAL UPDATED LIST. AND THAT'S HOW IT IS WRITTEN IN HOUSE BILL 900, IN SEPTEMBER. AND THEN A DOMINO EFFECT OF THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE THAT IN JANUARY OF 2025, DISTRICTS ARE SUPPOSED TO CONDUCT AN INITIAL CONTENT REVIEW AND SUBMIT A REPORT. SO THOSE KIND OF PIECES OF THE PUZZLE ARE ON HOLD. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ARE STILL DOING SOME THINGS IN HOUSE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE IN ALIGNMENT WITH HOUSE, WITH HOUSE BILL 900 AND ALSO OUR CURRENT F LOCAL POLICY. SO IF YOU KIND OF THINK ABOUT THIS IN TWO WAYS, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE NEED TO REACT AS A DISTRICT, THERE ARE SOME PROACTIVE MEASURES THAT WE NEED TO PUT INTO PLACE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THESE POLICY PROCEDURES. AND SO WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WE HAVE COLLECTION &-PE PUBLISHED ON OUR IN OUR STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES ONLINE. WE USE THOSE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO PURCHASE AND ORDER OUR LIBRARY BOOKS AND WE ARE ABLE TO USE OUR CENTRALIZED ORDERING PROCESS TO REVIEW THAT LIST OF REQUESTED BOOKS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE IN ALIGNMENT. AND SO THAT IS A PROCESS THAT HAPPENS THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL YEAR. AND THE LIBRARIANS ARE AWARE OF THAT PROCESS. THEY SUBMIT THEIR THEIR LISTS, THEY GET FEEDBACK IF NEEDED OR WE REACH OUT AND ASK QUESTIONS. AND SO THOSE ARE PROACTIVE TO KEEP CERTAIN BOOKS OUT OF THE LIBRARY THAT MIGHT NOT MEET THE SELECTION CRITERIA. BUT THERE ARE SOME REACTIVE MEASURES. ANY TIME YOU GET NEW LEGISLATION, YOU HAVE TO KIND OF GO BACK AND EVALUATE. SO SOME OF THOSE REACTIVE MEASURES ARE THE AUDIT CYCLES WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE COLLECTION AND REVIEWING, BOOKS ACCORDING TO THE NEW POLICY. AND WE HAVE A RECONSIDERATION PROCESS IN PLACE THAT ALLOWS US THE ABILITY TO REVIEW TEXTS AND MAKE A DETERMINATION IF THAT TEXT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED OR NOT. THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE RECONSIDERATION PROCESS. THERE'S AN INFORMAL AND A FORMAL . I ALSO JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME TOOLS THAT WE'VE PUT INTO PLACE TO MAINTAIN SOME TRANSPARENCY. SO AND THIS ALIGNS WITH OUR COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA. AND YOU'LL SEE IN THE TSLAC GUIDELINES AS WELL, 24 HOUR ACCESS TO CAMPUS LIBRARIES. THIS IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. YOU CAN LOOK AT ANY LIBRARY CATALOG IN THE DISTRICT. WE ALSO HAVE OUR SKYWARD PARENT NOTIFICATION EMAIL. PARENTS SIGN UP FOR THAT.WE ENCOURAGE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, BUT IT CAN BE DONE AT ANY TIME. AND THEY GET A DAILY OPT IN EMAIL OF THE BOOKS THAT CHILDREN HAVE CHECKED OUT OF THE LIBRARY, THIS IS KIND OF A NEW FEATURE THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUBLICIZE WIDELY TO PARENTS THIS COMING YEAR, OUR LIBRARIANS KNOW ABOUT THIS FEATURE NOW, BUT REALLY, WE'RE GOING TO PUBLIC, MAKE IT MORE AVAILABLE TO PARENTS WHERE THEY CAN INSERT NOTES AND COMMENTS INSIDE OF FOLLETT THAT LIBRARIANS CAN ACCESS VERY QUICKLY. AND THEN WE'VE UPDATED OUR LIBRARY MEDIA SERVICES WEBSITE. IT CONTAINS INFORMATION ON THE BOOKS THAT ARE BEING CHALLENGED. ARE THE BOOKS THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH THE AUDIT AND DETERMINED TO REMOVE. WE UPDATE THIS WEBSITE EVERY WEEK BASED ON INFORMATION THAT WE'RE GETTING AND OUR STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES ARE NOW PUBLIC. SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME TOOLS THAT WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED TO HELP WITH SOME OF THE TRANSPARENCY AND FINDING INFORMATION. SO AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO MR. WILBANKS. AND YOU'VE GOT SOME FOLDERS KIND OF COMING AROUND WITH SOME MATERIALS FOR YOUR REFERENCE FOR THE REST OF THE WORKSHOP, MR. WILBANKS. THANK YOU, MISS HUBBARD. GOOD EVENING. BOARD DOCTOR SMITH, FOR PASSING OUT TO YOU A BLUE FOLDER. AND ULTIMATELY, TONIGHT, WHAT WE WANTED TO PROVIDE TO YOU , WERE RESOURCES FOR YOU. SO I WANT TO BRIEFLY JUST WALK YOU THROUGH WHAT THOSE RESOURCES ARE . IT IS. OKAY THIS ONE. THAT'S BETTER. YEAH. PERFECT. SO AS YOU RECEIVE YOUR FOLDERS, MY PURPOSE IS TO EQUIP YOU WITH SOME RESOURCES TONIGHT. SO IF YOU OPEN YOUR FOLDER, YOU'LL NOTICE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF YOUR FOLDER YOU HAVE A BLUE DOCUMENT. THE TOP SAYS TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. THIS THESE ARE THOSE TSLAC STANDARDS. OR OCCASIONALLY WE REFER TO THEM AS TSLAC GUIDELINES. THIS IS 13 ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 4.2. IT'S A BIT HARD TO READ AS THE
[00:25:03]
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE GOES. IT'S REALLY FORMATTED STRANGELY, THE STATE LIBRARIES AND ARCHIVES COMMISSION. SO I WANT YOU TO HAVE THIS AS A REFERENCE. THE DOCUMENT IMMEDIATELY BEHIND IT.DON'T SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON THE BLUE PART. HERE'S WHY. THE DOCUMENT IMMEDIATELY BEHIND IT, THE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY CHECKLIST FOR DISTRICTS IS ULTIMATELY THE SAME CONTENT.
AND THE STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES COMMISSION HAVE TAKEN IT AND PUT IT IN A CHECKLIST FORMAT MUCH MORE READABLE AND USER FRIENDLY. THE CONTENT IS VIRTUALLY THE SAME. IT'S ARRANGED IN A LITTLE DIFFERENT ORDER AND IN A MORE READABLE FORMAT. AND SO IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE GUIDELINES LOOK LIKE, THIS IS A RESOURCE THAT'S A LITTLE EASILY. IT'S MORE EASILY DIGESTIBLE FOR YOU WANT YOU TO HAVE THAT THERE AS WELL. SO I'LL SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF TIME IN A MOMENT JUST KIND OF HIGHLIGHTING THE OVERVIEW OF WHAT'S IN THOSE GUIDELINES, BUT THE NEXT RESOURCE I HAVE FOR YOU IN YOUR PACKET IS A YELLOW DOCUMENT THAT IS HOUSE BILL 900.
NOW, I HAVE GONE THROUGH AND ANNOTATED IT FOR YOU. THERE ARE SEVEN SECTIONS. THERE ARE REALLY ONLY TWO SECTIONS THAT HAVE HAVE SUBSTANCE. THERE'S SECTION ONE IS THE TITLE SECTIONS FOUR AND FIVE, DEAL WITH DEADLINES. SECTIONS SIX AND SEVEN DEAL WITH IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVE DATES. THE SECTIONS TWO AND THREE ARE THE MEAT OF WHAT? THE CONTENT OF HOUSE BILL 900, SECTION TWO IS ABOUT. THE TSLAC STANDARDS OR GUIDELINES, AND THEN SECTION THREE ADDRESSES THE WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE VENDOR RATINGS, THE PORTIONS THAT ARE ENJOINED. I INCLUDE THAT AS A REFERENCE FOR YOU. SO IF YOU DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THE ACTUAL BILL SAYS, YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE ACTUAL BILL LANGUAGE . I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF YOUR FOLDER, YOU HAVE A PINK AND A GREEN. RECOMMENDED POLICY LANGUAGE. NOW THIS POLICY THIS IS TABBYS RECOMMENDED POLICY LANGUAGE REGARDING EFA AND EFB. THEY RECOMMEND AT THIS POINT THAT YOU SPLIT THE POLICY WOULD BE OUR EF LOCAL INTO TWO. NOW YOU HAVE SEEN THESE IN YOUR DOCUMENT THAT YOU RECEIVED LAST NIGHT. YOU RECEIVED, SOME PLAIN OLD WHITE VERSION. WE INCLUDED THIS HERE AS A REFERENCE AND PUT IT ON COLORED PAPER SO YOU CAN FIND IT AMONG ALL THE VERSIONS.
BUT THIS IS ULTIMATELY THE SAME VERSION THAT CAME FROM POLICY FROM TASB. NOW, YOU HEARD MISS HUBBARD MENTIONED EARLIER THAT WE'RE STILL WAITING ON UPDATE 123 FROM TASB, AND TASB PLANS TO INCLUDE THESE VERSIONS. IN UPDATE 123, WE REACHED OUT TO OUR POLICY CONSULTANT AND OBTAINED AN ADVANCED COPY. AND THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT THIS IS. BUT IT HASN'T BEEN RELEASED IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF THEIR POLICY UPDATE PROCESS. THE FINAL PART THAT I JUST WANT TO WALK YOU THROUGH IS I WANT TO WALK YOU THROUGH THAT COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST, THE TSLAC STANDARDS, IF YOU WILL. THIS IS THE WHITE DOCUMENT. THE CHECKLIST DOCUMENT THAT AS WE GO THROUGH, IF THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT DO WE MEET AND COMPLY WITH THE STACK GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS, THIS IS THAT DOCUMENT. ULTIMATELY THE FRONT PAGE IS AN INTRODUCTION. I'LL HIGHLIGHT THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH. THIS CHECKLIST OUTLINES THE MINIMUM REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF THE LIBRARY COLLECTION POLICY. WE MUST ADDRESS EACH OF THE POINTS LISTED. THIS IS THE INTRODUCTION TO THAT. AS YOU OPEN UP THAT DOCUMENT. THERE ARE FOUR HEADERS. THE FIRST IS A GENERAL REQUIREMENT SECTION ON PAGE NUMBER TWO, A BRIEF NOTE. THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE THERE'S AN INDENT OR A SECTION THAT'S SET OFF WITHOUT A CHECKBOX. THOSE REQUIRE AMOUNTS FROM THAT SECTION ARE DIRECTLY FROM HOUSE BILL 900. SO THE GUIDELINES INCORPORATE THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE DIRECTLY IN THE BILL ITSELF, AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE TWO AND INTO PAGE THREE. YOU THEN HAVE A HEADING REGARDING EVALUATION OF MATERIALS. WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THAT TOPIC AS YOU FLIP OVER THE PAGE FOUR, YOU SEE A SECTION.
WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS REGARDING RECONSIDERATION OF LIBRARY MATERIALS AND THEN THE FINAL SECTION ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT REALLY DIDN'T FIT ANYWHERE. AND YOU HAVE A OTHER PROVISION SECTION THERE FOR THOSE FOR THAT CHECKLIST. SO AS A RESOURCE FOR YOU, A MORE EASILY DIGESTIBLE VERSION OF WHAT THOSE GUIDELINES ARE, THOSE ARE THE RESOURCES WE HAVE FOR YOU TO AID IN YOUR PROCESSING AND WORKING THROUGH THIS POLICY. I DO WANT TO DRAW
[00:30:04]
MY ATTENTION TO YOUR ATTENTION TO ONE PIECE IN THIS COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST. YOU'LL NOTICE THERE ARE A FEW PROVISIONS THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED THAT TSLAC HAS HIGHLIGHTED THOSE. THOSE ARE THE SECTIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ENJOINED, AND THOSE ARE THE SECTIONS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE LITIGATION. ONE. AND SO THEY ARE NOT. FOR EXAMPLE, ON PAGE TWO THERE ARE TWO PARAGRAPHS THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED. THEY'RE INCLUDED BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF THE LAW, BUT THEY ARE NOT, ENFORCEABLE AT THE MOMENT. ALL RIGHT. AND WITH THAT, THAT ARE THOSE ARE THE RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE FOR YOU TO AID IN YOUR PROCESSING. THANK YOU, MISS HUBBARD. THANK YOU, MR. WILBANKS. MADAM PRESIDENT, I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU. THAT CONCLUDES THE ADMINISTRATION'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU, DOCTOR SMITH, MISS HUBBARD AND MR. WILBANKS, WE APPRECIATE YOU GUYS KIND OF GIVING US THAT HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE LEGAL BACKGROUND. I THINK THAT THAT IS HELPFUL, BEFORE THE BOARD BEGINS OR THE I TURN IT OVER FOR TRUSTEES TO BEGIN DELIBERATIONS, I'M GOING TO MAKE I'M GOING TO MAKE A QUICK STATEMENT. SO, I WASN'T ON THE BOARD PREVIOUSLY WHEN, WHEN THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN MARCH, AND SINCE A WORKSHOP IS NOT A TYPICAL MEETING, I'M GOING TO MAKE A FEW REMARKS, NOT JUST AS THE BOARD PRESIDENT, BUT SORT OF AS THE WORKSHOP FACILITATOR, FIRST, I WANT TO MAKE VERY CLEAR FROM MYSELF AND ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES THAT WE SUPPORT, WE RESPECT, AND WE RELY UPON VERY HEAVILY OUR LIBRARIANS, AS AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR EDUCATIONAL TEAM. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT AT THE OUTSET, I PERSONALLY KNOW AND HAVE WORKED WITH SEVERAL LIBRARIANS IN OUR DISTRICT. THEY HAVE BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN SUPPORTING MY STUDENTS, OUR STUDENTS, NOT ONLY IN ENCOURAGING AND SUPPORTING LITERACY, BUT IN SUPPORTING OUR SCHOOLS GENERALLY AND THROUGH FUNDRAISING EFFORTS AND IN MANY, MANY, MANY COUNTLESS WAYS. SO I PERSONALLY TONIGHT WANT TO THANK OUR LIBRARIANS FOR ALL THAT YOU DO FOR OUR STUDENTS, AND IT IS MY INTENT THIS EVENING, PERSONALLY AND AS THE BOARD PRESIDENT, AND AS WE DELIBERATE TO HONOR YOUR WORK AND HONOR YOUR PROFESSION. SO I JUST WANT TO START WITH THAT, SECOND, I WANT TO STATE THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS WORKSHOP IS ABSOLUTELY A 100% NOT ABOUT A CHALLENGE TO ANY SPECIFIC BOOK, IT IS CERTAINLY NOT ABOUT BANNING BOOKS. ANYBODY IN HERE WHO KNOWS ME OR ANYBODY ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WHO KNOWS ME, PERSONALLY, THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M ABOUT. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS WORKSHOP IS ABOUT, WHILE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE CAN AND DO DISAGREE ON WHAT SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BE ACCESSIBLE TO STUDENTS OF VARIOUS AGES, THIS WORKSHOP DOES NOT AND WILL NOT ADDRESS THOSE SPECIFIC ISSUES. THE PURPOSE OF THIS WORKSHOP, AS IS NOTICED, IS TO DELIBERATE POLICY AND A PROCESS FOR BOOK SELECTION IN OUR LIBRARIES AND FOR PARENTS, GUARDIANS, STAFF, CONSTITUENTS, ETC. TO MAKE CHALLENGES TO ANY BOOK THEY DEEM CONCERNING THAT IS PRESENT IN FORT BEND ISD LIBRARIES. AND THAT'S THE RECONSIDERATION POLICY PORTION OF THE POLICY THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER, WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO THIS BY LAW AS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, IT'S MY GOAL TO APPROACH THIS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS, STUDENT FOCUS, AND I THINK REASONABLENESS. SO IT'S MY HOPE AND EXPECTATION THAT DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE MAY DISAGREE AS TRUSTEES OR AS A COMMUNITY, THAT WE WILL BEHAVE WITH CIVILITY AND RESPECT TOWARDS ONE ANOTHER, ONE OF THE THINGS I STATED THE NIGHT I WAS ELECTED, WELL, THE NIGHT I WAS SWORN IN AND ELECTED AS BOARD PRESIDENT IS THAT IT'S A NEW DAY IN FORT BEND ISD. AND MY HOPE AND EXPECTATION IS THAT WE AS A BODY COLLECTIVE, WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT, FINALLY, I CALLED THIS WORKSHOP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE VOTE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES IN MARCH, AND I WANT TO DO MY BEST TO HONOR WHAT WAS ON THE AGENDA AND THE DISCUSSION THAT TOOK PLACE AT THAT TIME, WITH THAT IN MIND, I ASKED FOR GUIDANCE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE TRUSTEES, AND WE WILL START WITH A CONVERSATION WITH THE DRAFT POLICY THAT WAS ON THE AGENDA AT THE MARCH MEETING, BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF[00:35:07]
CONFUSION, DISCUSSION, I DON'T KNOW WHATEVER IN THE COMMUNITY. AND FOR PURPOSES OF CLARITY, THERE IS ONE PORTION RELATED TO SUPERINTENDENT AUTHORITY THAT I WANTED TO READ FROM THE DRAFT, JUST TO GIVE THE PUBLIC SOME CONTEXT FIRST, AND IT STATES THAT WHILE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY OVER INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS RESTS WITH THE BOARD, THE BOARD DELEGATES AUTHORITY TO THE SUPERINTENDENT AS THE DISTRICT'S INSTRUCTIONAL LEADER TO MAKE DECISIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS POLICY REGARDING THE ACQUISITION, USE, MAINTENANCE, RESTRICTION OF ACCESS TO, AND REMOVAL OR REJECTION OF ALL INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS. IN ADDITION TO THE ABILITY TO EXERCISE HIS AUTHORITY DIRECTLY, THE SUPERINTENDENT ALSO HAS THE AUTHORITY AND DISCRETION TO CONVENE A REVIEW COMMITTEE TO INFORM HIS DECISIONS REGARDING THE SAME. ALL THE THINGS I JUST READ, SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE FOR POINT OF CLARIFICATION. ALL OF THAT BEING SAID, I'M GOING TO SHUT UP NOW AND LET OUR TRUSTEES, BEGIN DELIBERATIONS AND I DON'T SEE ANYBODY'S CARD UP. SO OKAY, MR. HAMILTON, I THINK YOU I THINK YOU STOLE HER CARD. YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT. I THOUGHT THAT WAS. OH, OKAY. YEAH, BUT NOW ADAM DOESN'T HAVE ONE. OKAY, GOOD. I DON'T NEED THAT. I DON'T NEED IT. OKAY CAN I ASK MRS. HUBBARD A QUESTION? YES YES. SO YOU MENTIONED YOU MENTIONED THE AUDIT OF THE GRAPHIC NOVELS, DO YOU KNOW OFFHAND HOW MANY WERE REMOVED DURING THAT PROCESS? I WANT TO SAY IT WAS 70 SOMETHING, BUT I CAN LOOK ONLINE. IT'S POSTED ONLINE. SO I THINK IT WAS CLOSER TO 70. BUT I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO CHECK. OKAY SEVEN ZERO OKAY. IT'S POSTED ONLINE. I CAN PULL IT UP REAL QUICK. IT'S POSTED ONLINE. YES. WHAT YOU SAID OKAY OKAY. THANK YOU, SO YES, I WANT TO ECHO WHAT PRESIDENT TOLSON, SAID SO. SO, SO I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME MISINFORMATION OUT THERE. SO LIBRARIANS ARE AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN THE PRIMARY EDUCATIONAL EXPERTS WHEN IT COMES TO ACQUIRING AND OR REMOVING LIBRARY BOOKS. AND THIS POLICY DOES NOT CHANGE THAT, AND SO, SO WHAT THIS DOES, IS IT, IT DOES, SO, SO THE I THINK IT'S HELPFUL AS FAR AS BACKGROUND, SO THE POLICY SO THE, THE FRAMING. SO THIS IS, IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED ISSUE, AND SO WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD WHEN IT COMES TO POTENTIALLY REMOVING A BOOK, SO THERE'S THE IF LOCAL POLICY, WHICH OUR BOARD CONTROLS AND THERE'S THE F LEGAL POLICY, WHICH OUR BOARD DOES NOT CONTROL. SO THAT'S, THAT'S GENERALLY WRITTEN BY TASB AND BASICALLY JUST KIND OF SETS OUT SETS THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR A, A PARTICULAR ISSUE. AND SO IN THIS CASE, F LEGAL, SETS OUT THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS AROUND LIBRARY BOOKS. AND SO, SO THE, THE ONE OF THE KEY STATEMENTS IN F LEGAL IS THAT IT SAYS A DISTRICT MAY REMOVE, LIBRARY BOOKS, THAT ARE EXCESSIVELY VULGAR OR, OR BASED ON THE EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY OF THE BOOK, SO THAT'S THE LEGAL SITUATION. THE DISTRICT HAS THAT LEGAL AUTHORITY. AND THEN, WE'VE GOTTEN COMMUNITY FEEDBACK IN MULTIPLE WAYS, THAT HAVE MADE IT MADE COMMENTS THAT THE PROPOSED POLICY CHANGES RESTRICT THE LEGAL AUTHORITY BEYOND WHAT HOUSE BILL 900 DOES. AND THAT'S GENERALLY THE CASE WITH ALMOST ALL OF OUR BOARD POLICIES. SO THE LEGAL POLICY SETS OUT THE LEGAL STANDARD. AND THEN GENERALLY WE CAN'T WE CAN'T DO LESS. WE CAN'T WE CAN'T VIOLATE THE LAW. WE CAN'T VIOLATE LEGAL POLICY, HOWEVER, WE CAN FURTHER RESTRICT WHAT THE LEGAL AUTHORITY, THE LEGAL AUTHORITY THAT THE DISTRICT HAS, WE CAN'T RESTRICT THAT. AND SO THE EXISTING POLICY RESTRICTS THE LEGAL AUTHORITY THAT THE DISTRICT HAS, AND RATHER WHERE THE WHERE THE LEGAL POLICY GIVES THE DISTRICT THE AUTHORITY TO REMOVE BOOKS BASED ON EXCESSIVE VULGARITY OR THE EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY OF THE BOOK. THE LOCAL POLICY RESTRICTS THAT AND SAYS BEFORE WE REMOVE A BOOK, IT HAS TO GO TO, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE FORMAL CHALLENGE PROCESS. AND SO, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE, I SUPPORTED THE CHANGES THAT SET UP THAT FORMAL CHALLENGE PROCESS AND REQUIRED THAT ALL CHALLENGES, GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND SO I DID SO IN PART BECAUSE I DID NOT THINK THE PROBLEM WAS AS SEVERE[00:40:01]
AS I NOW KNOW IT TO BE, AND WE ALL KNOW IT TO BE BASED ON THE LEVEL OF DEGENERATE CONTENT THAT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED IN FORT BEND ISD LIBRARIES. AND SO, BASED ON THE PROBLEM BEING WORSE THAN I REALIZED, AND AS, AS THAT CONTENT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED, WHEN I BROUGHT IT TO THE ADMINISTRATION'S ATTENTION, I WAS TOLD THAT, UNLESS SOMEBODY FILES THE FORMAL CHALLENGE BASED ON THE ADMINISTRATION'S INTERPRETATION OF THE EXISTING POLICY, THE EXISTING F LOCAL POLICY, THEY CANNOT REMOVE A BOOK UNTIL OR UNLESS SOMEONE CHALLENGES THE BOOK. AND SO, BASED ON WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH HOUSE BILL 900 AND THE CHANGES, WE AND MY OPINION, A VERY STRONG OPINION, WE HAVE LIBRARY CONTENT THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW. AND THAT IS NOT ONLY DUE TO HOUSE BILL 900 CHANGES, BUT JUST THE EXISTING LEGAL SITUATION PRIOR TO HOUSE BILL 900. AND SO THE SITUATION AS THE ADMINISTRATION IS, IS IMPLEMENTING HOUSE BILL 900 IS THAT THEY CANNOT REMOVE CONTENT THAT IS, AT LEAST ARGUABLY IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE FORMAL CHALLENGE PROCESS. AND SO AS WE AS THIS CONTENT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED, THE ONLY PROCESS IS FOR SOMEBODY TO FILE A FORMAL CHALLENGE. AND, AND I THINK BASED ON THE, THE, THE QUANTITY OF BOOKS AND THE QUALITY OF EGREGIOUS CONTENT, THAT PROCESS IS OUT OF ALIGNMENT WITH THE CURRENT SITUATION. AND SO THE SITUATION HAS CHANGED, AND THEREFORE, I BELIEVE WE NEED A POLICY CHANGE, NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF THE HOUSE BILL 900 CHANGES, BUT ALSO DUE TO THE, THE CONTENT THAT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED, SO I, I HAVE SOME MATERIALS HERE FOR THE TRUSTEES AND DOCTOR SMITH, NOT GOING TO ADDRESS ANY OF THAT CONTENT NOW, BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE A POINT ABOUT ONE OF THESE. SO ONE OF THESE IS NOT SO ALL BUT ONE OF THESE EXAMPLES ARE CURRENTLY IN FORT BEND ISD LIBRARIES, EXCEPT FOR ONE, THE ONE THAT IS NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE. IT WAS PURCHASED BY A LIBRARIAN AND THE ONLY COPY SHOWS AS LOST. AND SO I INCLUDED THAT ONE TO SHOW THAT THAT BOOK GOT IN EVEN THOUGH IT IS CURRENTLY NOT AVAILABLE. AND SO I WANTED TO MAKE THE POINT THAT, THAT MY ASSUMPTION THERE IS THAT A RESPONSIBLE ADULT, SO MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT THE LIBRARIAN DID NOT KNOW THAT THE CONTENT. SO THE CONTENT HAS GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATIONS OF SEX ACTS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MASTURBATION INSTRUCTIONS AND SO THERE'S A PAGE WITH MULTIPLE PENISES WITH MASTURBATION INSTRUCTIONS, AND THERE'S A PAGE WITH MULTIPLE VAGINAS WITH MASTURBATION INSTRUCTIONS. EACH OF THEM HAVE HANDS INCLUDED IN THE ILLUSTRATIONS DEMONSTRATING. AND SO MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT SOMEONE PURCHASED THAT BOOK WITHOUT REALIZING THE EGREGIOUS LEVEL OF THE CONTENT. AND THEN THE FACT THAT IT SHOWS AS LOST AND HAS NOT BEEN REPURCHASED. I'M ASSUMING THAT A RESPONSIBLE ADULT WANTS REAL ONCE HE OR SHE REALIZED WHAT WAS IN THE BOOK OR INTENTIONALLY LOST THE BOOK, AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT IT WILL BE ADDED TO THE DO NOT PURCHASE LIST BECAUSE IT SHOULD NOT BE REPLACED. BUT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO I WANTED TO MAKE THAT POINT THAT I BELIEVE SOMEONE WAS A, SOME EDUCATIONAL EXPERT, WAS A RESPONSIBLE ADULT TO LOSE THAT BOOK. AND I ALSO WANTED TO POINT OUT SO, WE MADE A VERY LARGE PURCHASE LAST YEAR WHEN WE OPENED CRAWFORD HIGH SCHOOL, TO STOCK THE LIBRARY. SO BRAND NEW HIGH SCHOOL, BRAND NEW LIBRARY. AND I BELIEVE THE DOLLAR AMOUNT WAS $137,000 TO STOCK THE ENTIRE LIBRARY, KIND OF MOSTLY ALL AT ONCE. AND I WANT TO COMMEND THE TWO LIBRARIANS WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR VETTING THAT LIST, BECAUSE THEY FOUND, I THINK IT WAS AT LEAST 20 SOMEWHERE IN THE BALLPARK OF 20 ISH BOOKS, THAT WERE ON THE LIST FROM THE VENDOR. AND THEY REMOVED THOSE BOOKS FROM THE LIST, AND I BELIEVE THE PRIMARY REASON WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS SEXUALLY EXPLICIT CONTENT IN THOSE BOOKS. AND SO I WANT TO COMMEND THOSE LIBRARIANS FOR MAKING THAT DECISION AND FOR, FOR DOING THE DOING THE WORK TO PREVENT SUCH CONTENT FROM BEING IN THAT LIBRARY. AND I THINK THE REASON I BRING ALL THIS UP, SO, SO IN THAT SITUATION, SO THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT THOSE TWO LIBRARIANS FELT THAT THERE WAS CONTENT ON THAT LIST THAT WAS NOT EDUCATIONALLY SUITABLE FOR A HIGH SCHOOL LIBRARY. AND I WOULD SAY THERE'S THERE HAVE BEEN ADDITIONAL BOOKS THAT, THAT MADE IT PAST THAT PROCESS AND THAT. AND AGAIN, THAT'S $137,000 WORTH OF BOOKS. THAT'S A LOT OF BOOKS. AND SO THERE'S ADDITIONAL. SO AT LEAST ONE OF ONE BOOK IN ADDITION TO THAT HAS BEEN HAS BEEN REMOVED THROUGH THE CHALLENGE PROCESS, AND SO ALL THAT TO SAY, WE THE POLICY CHANGES DO NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT LIBRARIANS ARE THE PRIMARY[00:45:02]
EDUCATIONAL EXPERTS WHEN IT COMES TO ACQUIRING AND, AND, OR REMOVING CONTENT. AND AT THE SAME TIME, THEY'RE NOT THE ONLY EDUCATIONAL EXPERTS WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE DECISIONS, SO THIS GIVES AUTHORITY BACK TO THE DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION TO BE INVOLVED IN THOSE DECISIONS WITHOUT BOOKS HAVING TO INITIALLY GO THROUGH THE FORMAL CHALLENGE PROCESS. SO THANK YOU.THANK YOU, MR. HAMILTON. MISS HANNON. I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. HAMILTON. AND THIS I'M TRULY WANTING TO KNOW. AND I KNOW WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY LOCAL. I MEAN, F LEGAL IN OUR PACKET, BUT, CAN YOU TELL ME WHERE IN F LOCAL. CAN YOU TELL ME THE VERBIAGE THAT IS, IS YOU'RE BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT WE THAT OUR LOCAL POLICY IS VIOLATING LEGAL POLICY AND IT'S RESTRICTIVE. SO F LEGAL WAS IN OUR PACKET A LEGAL WAS OKAY. YES. OH I HAD TO PRINT IT. IT WASN'T. YEAH. I WAS IN MINE.
OKAY. WELL THEN HOLD ON BEFORE HE ANSWERS. LET'S ALL FIND IT IN OUR. SO IT'S THE IT'S THE VERY LAST PARAGRAPH LEGAL. F LEGAL IT IS. IT'S AFTER THE DRAFT. RIGHT. OH IT IS I BEG YOUR PARDON. YES, YES. OKAY. SO IF YOU COULD JUST HELP US ALL KNOW THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU FEEL LIKE IS IN VIOLATION AND. YEAH. SO I DIDN'T SAY IT'S IN VIOLATION. SO I SAID IT FURTHER RESTRICTS. SO THE LET ME GET THERE. SO I CAN READ THE EXACT LANGUAGE. I MEAN I KNOW IT PRETTY WELL, SORRY. WHAT PAGE IS THAT ON. DO YOU KNOW. SO IT'S RIGHT. IT'S IN THIS PACKET OR. NO. YES IT IS. SO YOU'RE IT'S AFTER THE BLUE LINE 16 1718. YEAH. LIKE RIGHT HERE. LET'S SEE IF LOCAL. SO I DON'T NEED IT. IT SAYS IT'S IT SAYS DISTRICTS GO TO THE VERY END OF IT. NO, I'M SORRY. IT'S I BELIEVE IT SAYS DISTRICTS MAY REMOVE CONTENT THAT IS EXCESSIVELY VULGAR OR BASED ON THE EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY OF THE BOOK. CAN YOU HELP ME? WHERE ARE YOU? YEAH, I COULDN'T FIND IT EITHER. I'LL.
I'LL SHOW YOU IN JUST A SECOND, BUT. YEAH I DID NOT SAY IT VIOLATES. I BEG YOUR PARDON? RESTRICTS. YOU USE THE WORD RESTRICT. SO I MISWROTE THAT WORD DOWN SO WE CAN'T GO OUTSIDE OF THE LEGAL POLICY. WE CAN'T SAY. WE CAN'T SAY THAT. SO IT IS ON. IT'S ON PAGE 51 AND IT IS AT THE END OF THE VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH OF F LEGAL. SO IT'S RIGHT HERE. A DISTRICT MAY REMOVE MATERIALS BECAUSE THEY ARE PERVASIVELY VULGAR OR BASED SOLELY ON THE EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY OF THE BOOKS IN QUESTION. THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE LEGAL AUTHORITY THAT THE DISTRICT HAS. AND THEN BASED ON THE LANGUAGE OF F LOCAL AS INTERPRETED BY THE ADMINISTRATION, THAT AUTHORITY IS LIMITED BY THE LANGUAGE IN F LOCAL TO SAY THAT, SO MY, MY UNDERSTANDING OF F LEGAL MEANS THAT IF A BOOK IS CHALLENGED AND THE DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION BELIEVES THE BOOK IS NOT EDUCATIONALLY SUITABLE OR IS EXCESSIVELY VULGAR, THE ADMINISTRATION CAN REMOVE THE BOOK BASED ON THAT DETERMINATION. OKAY, AND I'M SORRY, MISS TOLSON. TELL ME AGAIN WHERE WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE SECTION? IT'S THE VERY FIRST SECTION. LAST SENTENCE. SO WHERE IT SAYS F LEGAL AND IT SAYS SCHOOL LIBRARY, REMOVAL OF LIBRARY MATERIALS. THE VERY FIRST SECTION. WHAT DO YOU HAVE. IT'S 14 I THINK THE FIRST PAGE.
I'M SORRY I MISHEARD YOU. I THOUGHT YOU SAID 15. SO IT'S RIGHT HERE. THERE OKAY. WELL, LAST SENTENCE, REMOVAL OF LIBRARY MATERIALS. OKAY. A DISTRICT, A DISTRICT MAY REMOVE MATERIALS BECAUSE THEY ARE PERVASIVELY VULGAR OR BASED SOLELY UPON THE EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY OF THE BOOKS IN QUESTION. SO I, I DO CAN CAN WE ASK THE LEGAL CAN WE OR CAN WE ASK LEGAL COUNSEL A QUESTION ABOUT THAT? OKAY. SO MY QUESTION I REALLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW DOES DO OUR COMMITTEES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION THAT THAT OR THE ACTION THAT IT'S CALLING FOR
[00:50:10]
HERE? A DISTRICT MAY REMOVE MATERIALS BECAUSE THEY ARE PERVASIVELY VULGAR OR BASED SOLELY ON THE EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY OF THE BOOK. SO I LET ME I'M GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION DIFFERENTLY. SO OUR AUDIT PROCESS. YES. WHEN THE ENTIRE DISTRICT GOES THROUGH THROUGH THAT PROCESS. RIGHT I'M GUESSING THAT WOULD BE PART OF THIS. AND THEN WHAT OUR CURRENT POLICY COMMITTEE STANDARD MEET THIS REQUIREMENT OR, OR IS IT MORE RESTRICTIVE, LIKE MR. HAMILTON IS SAYING WITH RESPECT TO WHAT'S IN THE LEGAL POLICY THAT DEFINES THE SCOPE OF THE DISTRICT'S AUTHORITY? AND SO THE DISTRICT HAS, FOR PURPOSES OF THIS LEGAL POLICY, THE ABILITY TO REMOVE BOOKS THAT ARE PERVASIVELY VULGAR OR THAT ARE NOT EDUCATIONALLY SUITABLE.THERE ARE ANY NUMBER OF WAYS THE DISTRICT COULD DO THAT. FOR INSTANCE, THE AUDIT POLICY OR RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE. AS I UNDERSTAND THE WRINKLE, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ADMINISTRATION INTERPRETS THE EXISTING F LOCAL POLICY TO RESTRICT ITS AUTHORITY SO THAT IT CAN ONLY BE EXERCISED THROUGH THE RECONSIDERATION PROCESS. OKAY, OKAY. SO IN ESSENCE, WHAT WE MINE YOU WANT MY COPY. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR. SO IF HYPOTHETICALLY WE HAD OUR CURRENT VERSION OF THE POLICY AND WE ADDED A CAVEAT OF SOME SORT THAT SAID, IN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR IN A CIRCUMSTANCE THAT NEEDS TO CIRCUMVENT THE, THE COMMITTEE, THE SUPERINTENDENT OR HIS DESIGNEE COULD HAVE THAT AUTHORITY. CAN YOU HAVE COULD YOU HAVE BOTH PRONGS IN A POLICY ? TO BE CLEAR, IF YOU'RE ASKING, COULD YOU HAVE BOTH PRONGS OF A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE THAT WORKS FROM A COMPLAINT UP, AND ALSO TO HAVE A SUPERINTENDENT OR DESIGNEE MAKE A DETERMINATION? YES. AND THE ONLY SO IT'S NOT ONE OR THE OTHER. CORRECT. OKAY THANK THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR HELPING ME FIND THAT IN IF LEGAL. SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU, MR. BRUSH, TO FINISH WHAT IT SOUND LIKE. YOU SAID THE REASON I JUST WANT TO HEAR THE REST OF IT. I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT THE STANDARD IN THE LEGAL POLICY CONTAINS TWO PRONGS AS WELL. PERVASIVELY VULGAR OR EDUCATIONALLY SUITABLE, EDUCATIONALLY UNSUITABLE AND A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE. OR THE SUPERINTENDENT COULD MAKE A DETERMINATION ON BOTH. EITHER OR PRONG. SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT THAT OUR POLICY CURRENTLY IS RESTRICTIVE BASED ON F LEGAL OR.
NO, BECAUSE WE HAVE SEVERAL PRONGS WITH THE AUDIT AND THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S INTERPRETATION OF THE POLICY THAT IT HAS TO WORK THROUGH THE RECONSIDERATION. SO WE WOULD NEED THAT ADDITIONAL, CAVEAT IN IN THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO ONE COMMENT, REAL QUICK. SO THERE THERE IS A THERE IS ADDITIONAL. SO 11, SO IT IS THE WORD MAY IN THAT PARAGRAPH. SO IT IS OPTIONAL AUTHORITY NOT A MANDATE THAT THEY MUST REMOVE EITHER EXCESSIVELY VULGAR OR, EDUCATIONALLY UNSUITABLE CONTENT . THAT'S WHY I UNDERLINE THE WORD MAY THERE FOR YOU, AND ANOTHER THING, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY CURRENTLY FOR LIBRARIANS TO WEED RESOURCES SO THEY COULD THEORETICALLY DETERMINE THAT, SO THEY ARE GOING THROUGH THE, THE AUDIT PROCESS. AND THEY COULD ADDITIONALLY, PRIOR TO GETTING TO. SO I KNOW WE JUST DID GRAPHIC NOVELS, FICTION IS NEXT.
AND SO WHAT WHATEVER LET'S SAY ANOTHER SECTION AFTER THAT AND EBOOKS BROUGHT TO A CAMPUS LIBRARIANS, ATTENTION. NOW THEY COULD LOOK AT THE CURRENT SELECTION CRITERIA, SAY IT'S OUT OF ALIGNMENT WITH THAT, AND MAKE THE DECISION TO WEED THE BOOK SEPARATE FROM THE PROCESS. BUT YEAH, RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MISS HANNON. DO WE REALLY HAVE NO OTHER COMMENTS? COME ON PEOPLE. ALL RIGHT, MR. GARCIA. SO I DID HAVE A QUESTION IN REGARDS TO THE HOW BOOKS GET REMOVED WHEN, AND I KNOW CRAWFORD IS NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE BECAUSE THE SCHOOL JUST OPENED, BUT ASSUMING NEXT YEAR WE HAVE, LIBRARIANS PURCHASED NEW BOOKS, FOR THE NEXT SCHOOL YEAR, A SIMILAR SITUATION WHEN CRAWFORD PURCHASED THEIR BOOKS AND THE LIBRARIANS WENT THROUGH, DID THEIR, THEIR CHECKS AND THEY PULLED 20 BOOKS, HOW WAS IT THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO PULL AND I'M SURE LIBRARY LIBRARIANS DO THAT BEFORE THE NEXT SCHOOL YEAR. WHEN THEY GET NEW BOOKS, THEY GO
[00:55:02]
THROUGH THEM AND THEY SEE BOOKS THAT ARE NOT SUITABLE, AGE APPROPRIATE OR WHATEVER. AND THEY PULL BOOKS. HOW IS IT THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO PULL THE BOOKS BEFORE HAVING A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE CONVENED, WHEREAS WE'RE HAVING THE PROBLEM WE HAD RECENTLY WAS THERE'S BOOKS THAT HAVE BEEN FOUND THAT ARE QUESTIONABLE AND WE CAN'T PULL THE BOOKS UNTIL WE HAVE A COMMITTEE. SO WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO SITUATIONS? IF I MAY CLARIFY, MR. GARCIA, THE DIFFERENCE IS, AS WE GO BACK TO THE ADMINISTRATION'S, PERSPECTIVE HAS BEEN ON THE PREVIOUS POLICY, THE POLICY READS THAT ONCE THERE'S A COMPLAINT, IT READS A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE SHALL REVIEW AND SHALL BE CONVENED. AND SO THAT'S THE THAT'S THE RUB THERE IS, IS WHEN POLICY SAYS IF THERE'S A COMPLAINT, IT SHALL CONVENE A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE. IF THERE IS A PROVISION IN POLICY, THE CURRENT POLICY THAT ALLOWS FOR MAINTENANCE OF LIBRARY MATERIALS AND SO WHEN THERE'S NOT, IT CREATES A STRANGE CIRCUMSTANCE SO THAT WHEN THERE'S NOT A COMPLAINT, THE LIBRARIANS HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO, TO MAIN, TO MAINTAIN AND TO WEED THEIR COLLECTION ACCORDING TO DISTRICT PROCEDURES. IF I CAN ADD TO THAT, THERE'S CERTAIN CRITERIA THAT THEY USE WHEN THEY'RE WEEDING. SO THEY'RE LOOKING AT CIRCULATION DATA, HOW OFTEN IT'S BEEN CHECKED OUT. THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE AGE OF THE TEXT, IT'S WEAR AND TEAR IN THE LIBRARY. AND ALSO, THE CONTENT AND ITS ALIGNMENT WITH THE SELECTION CRITERIA. AND SO THE AUDIT PROCESS THAT WE'VE PUT IN PLACE AND STARTED WITH GRAPHIC NOVELS, WE DID THAT BECAUSE WHEN WE THINK ABOUT OUR LARGE HIGH SCHOOLS, WE'RE LOOKING AT 10,000 TO 15,000 BOOKS IN A HIGH SCHOOL LIBRARY. AND A LOT OF THOSE BOOKS WERE PURCHASED BEFORE MANY OF THESE LIBRARIANS WERE IN THEIR CURRENT POSITION. AND BEFORE THE NEW SELECTION CRITERIA WAS CREATED. SO THIS GIVES US A CHANCE TO GO BACK THROUGH IN PHASES AND SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO GET A FRESH LOOK AT SOME OF THE BOOKS BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY, ESPECIALLY AT THE HIGH SCHOOLS, TO GO THROUGH. AND SO THAT'S PART OF THAT WEEDING PROCESS, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE RECONSIDERATION, WHICH IS, INITIATED BY THAT FORMAL COMPLAINT, SO, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS JUST YET. I'LL HAVE TO STEP UP AND DO IT. SO I WILL. OKAY. GO. OKAY. SO ARE YOU READY? WHAT TIME IS IT? 817. BECAUSE I MIGHT TAKE THE REST OF THE EVENING. OKAY SO, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, MISS HUBBARD. AND THANK YOU, MR. WILBANKS, THANK YOU, MR. BRUSH, FOR BEING HERE, SO FOR THOSE OF YOU, I PASSED, A PAPER OUT, AND IF YOU WOULD RATHER. AND, YOU KNOW, KOBE AND I DID NOT CONSPIRE TOGETHER, BUT WHAT YOU HAVE THE DOCUMENT WITH THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTING AND THE RED, RECTANGLE. AND THAT COMES FROM BECAUSE I DO APPRECIATE IT THAT MR. WILBANKS SAID THE TEXAS STATE LIBRARY ARCHIVES CHECKLIST WAS EASIER, BUT I'M A SUPER FAN OF THE REAL DOWN AND DIRTY. SO I GAVE YOU THE, CHAPTER 4.2 OF, TITLE 13 FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. SO WHAT I, I WANT TO SAY, BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THIS, I WANT TO SAY THAT THAT AND I WANT TO SAY THIS DIRECTLY TO MR. HAMILTON. AND MY FELLOW TRUSTEES. MY CONCERN WITH THE DRAFT POLICIES THAT HAVE THAT CAME TO US IN MARCH ISN'T THAT THERE AREN'T BOOKS THAT SHOULD BE REMOVED. AND I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. AND YOU KNOW, AND I TAKE IT SO SERIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, I SPENT PART OF MY SPRING BREAK READING ONE OF THE BOOKS OF CONCERNS FROM COVER TO COVER. AND, AND I READ A LOT OF YOUNG ADULT FICTION BECAUSE I HAVE AN 18.5 YEAR OLD AND HAVE BEEN READING THEM. SO I KNOW WHAT SHE'S READING AND I DON'T ALWAYS DO THAT. AND SOME OF IT'S SHOCKING. AND I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY LIMIT HER TO THAT. BUT I DO THINK THERE ARE BOOKS IN OUR LIBRARIES THAT ARE VERY APPROPRIATE ONLY FOR SPECIFIC AGES. SO I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT. AND SO MY CONCERN THEN IS, IS JUST WHAT IT WAS BACK IN MARCH IS I DO THINK THE RECONSIDERING PROCESS IS IMPORTANT AS A COMMITTEE FOR SEVERAL REASONS. AND THEN WE'LL LOOK AT THIS. BUT ONE IS ABOUT TRANSPARENCY. AND I KNOW THAT THIS BOARD AND I KNOW EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD WANTS TRANSPARENCY . AND I THINK WHEN YOU REMOVE[01:00:04]
THE RECONSIDERATION PROCESS ENTIRELY, AND, AND AS A BOARD, WE DON'T CODIFY THAT BECAUSE WE MAY TRUST DOCTOR MARK SMITH TO ESTABLISH THAT WHEN WE USE LANGUAGE LIKE WE SEE IN THE DRAFT, WHERE IT JUST SAYS, YOU KNOW, HE MAY DO IT, YOU KNOW, I LIKE THE SHALL DO IT. AND, AND BECAUSE IT TO ME, THERE COULD BE SITUATIONS WHERE THINGS BECOME NOT TRANSPARENT. AND I THINK IF BOOKS ARE REMOVED THROUGH THROUGH THE AUDIT PROCESS, I MEAN THAT'S TRANSPARENT. THEY ARE THEY ARE CAPTURING WHAT IS BEING REMOVED AND THAT I WOULD ASSUME, WOULD BE OPEN TO PUBLIC RECORDS, A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST, IS THAT CORRECT? IT'S POSTED ONLINE AS OUR IN OUR DO NOT ORDER LIST, THEY'RE EMBEDDED IN THAT LIST, AND THEN WE WORK WITH THE LIBRARIANS. BEFORE THEY DID GRAPHIC NOVELS, THEY CALIBRATE IT, THEY WORKED THROUGH, THEY LOOKED AT BOOKS TOGETHER, THEY CALIBRATED TOGETHER. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO DO THE SAME THING FOR THE FICTION. AND SO IT STILL WORKED, NOT AS A SOLO EVENT. ONE LIBRARIAN WASN'T MAKING THAT DECISION. SO TRANSPARENCY IS ONE OF MY BIG ISSUES. AND THE SECOND BIG ISSUE IS REALLY PROTECTION OF STAFF BECAUSE AND THE STAFF IS NOT IS NOT ONLY THE LIBRARIAN , HAVING SOLE AUTHORITY, BUT THE PRINCIPAL HAVING SOLE AUTHORITY OR EVEN THE SUPERINTENDENT HAVING SOLE AUTHORITY. BECAUSE IF THE SUPERINTENDENT DETERMINES NOT TO CREATE A COMMITTEE, I DON'T EVER WANT THE SUPERINTENDENT OR AN ADMINISTRATOR OR A STAFF MEMBER TO HAVE SOME SORT OF RETALIATION, THAT GOES DOWN BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY ON THE BOARD, FOR INSTANCE, DOESN'T LIKE THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT CHOSE NOT TO REMOVE SOMETHING, AND THAT BECOMES PART OF HIS EVALUATION OR THAT BECOMES PART OF A PRINCIPAL'S EVALUATION OR THAT BECOMES PART OF THE LIBRARY'S OF EVALUATION. SO I'M TRYING TO ALSO REMOVE THAT RETALIATORY THAT, THAT POSSIBLE RETALIATION PROCESS OR, OR THAT FEELING OF, I HAVE TO DO THIS BECAUSE I HAVE TO HAVE A JOB TO FEED MY FAMILY. AND EVEN THOUGH AS THE LIBRARIAN , I DON'T FEEL THIS IS APPROPRIATE. BUT MY PRINCIPAL IS TELLING ME TO DO IT, SO I HAVE TO DO IT. SO THAT IS, THOSE ARE TWO OF THE BIGGEST REASONS THAT I FEEL SO, SO STRONGLY. IT IS ABOUT PROTECTION OF STAFF. DO I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS MAN RIGHT HERE, I MEAN, THE BUCK STOPS WITH HIM, RIGHT? HE'S HE'S HE'S GOT A HEAVY LOAD, BUT HE'S ALSO IN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE. RIGHT. BECAUSE THAT'S A, THAT'S, THAT'S A HEAVY THAT'S A HEAVY BURDEN TO, TO PUT IT ON ONE PERSON. SO, SO WITH THAT SAID, WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU AND I APOLOGIZE TO THE PUBLIC THAT YOU CAN'T SEE WHAT I'M LOOKING AT, BECAUSE THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS IN THIS, DRAFT POLICY THAT I TAKE ISSUE WITH.BUT TONIGHT I'M FOCUSED ON THAT RECONSIDERATION POLICY PART. AND, IN THE RED BOX, MY COLLEAGUES, YOU KNOW, IT SAYS THE SUPER INTENDENT ALSO HAS THE AUTHORITY AND DISCRETION TO CONVENE A REVIEW COMMITTEE TO INFORM DECISIONS REGARDING THE ACQUISITION, USE MAINTENANCE RESTRICTION TO ACCESS AND REMOVAL OR REJECTION OF ANY INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE. MY PROBLEM LIES IN THE WORDS IS HAS THE DISCRETION. I THINK AS A BOARD, WE WERE ELECTED AND OUR AND OUR POLICY IS OUR LEVERAGE. POLICY IS OUR LEVERAGE, TO DO WHAT WE THINK IS RIGHT AND BEST FOR STUDENTS. AND I KNOW, I KNOW, WE MAY DISAGREE, BUT I HOPE I'M I'M OPEN TO YOU WHEN YOU LISTEN. AND I HOPE THAT YOU'RE OPEN TO ME WHEN I LISTEN. SO I RECOGNIZE THAT WE MAY NEED THAT EXTRA LIKE EMERGENCY OUT OF THE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES CLAUSE . BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT THAT GIVING THE SUPERINTENDENT THE DISCRETION TO HAVE COMMITTEES OR NOT TO BE THE SOLE AUTHORITY OR TO APPOINT A SOLE AUTHORITY THAT THAT BOTHERS ME SOMEWHAT. SO IF YOU LOOK OVER TO THE NEXT COLUMN AND, LIKE I SAID, THIS, THIS TOBY, WHAT TOBY GAVE YOU THE ADMINISTRATION CODE IN BLUE IS WHAT I REFERENCED HERE. BUT I WANT I WANT THE BOARD AND I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THIS THIS BOARD IS A NONPARTISAN BOARD. WE RUN. WE DO NOT PUT A D BY OUR NAME, AND WE DO NOT PUT AN R BY OUR NAME. WE ARE A NONPARTISAN BOARD, BUT THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION AND OUR LEGISLATORS,
[01:05:01]
THEY ARE PARTIZAN. BUT WHAT I'M POINTING OUT HERE IS CHAPTER, I MEAN, HOUSE BILL 900 CAME DOWN TO SB, EVEN SUPPORTED THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS. IT'S TO MY UNDERSTANDING THEY EVEN SUPPORTED HOUSE BILL 900 BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO TAKE THIS ARGUMENT OUT OF BOARDROOMS TO A HIGHER LEVEL. RIGHT? IT'S NOT IT'S NOT FLUSHING OUT THAT WAY QUITE YET, BUT I'M HOPING THAT IT WILL. BUT WHAT I WANT TO EXPLAIN IS THAT CHAPTER IN HOUSE BILL 900, WHICH I HAVE READ MULTIPLE TIMES, IT CALLED ON THE TSLAC, THE TEXAS STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES COMMISSION, IN CONNECTION WITH AND IN COLLABORATION WITH THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, TO COME UP WITH THESE STANDARDS THAT THAT MR. WILBANKS SHARED WITH US, AND SO THERE ON YOUR BLUE AND YOUR WHITE AND KOBE'S, MR. WILBANKS PACKET. AND SO I WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND AND THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION IS A PARTIZAN COMMITTEE. THEY CURRENTLY HAVE TEN REPUBLICANS AND FIVE DEMOCRATS. THEY PASSED THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION BLESSED IN A VOTE. THE STANDARDS THAT THAT MR. WILBANKS GAVE TO US, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE DISSENT, THAT DISSENT WAS A MEMBER FROM DALLAS AND SHE'S A DEMOCRAT. SO THIS THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US IS A PARTIZAN. IT IS IT IS A NON PARTIZAN. EXCUSE ME. NON PARTIZAN BOARD MEMBERS AGREED ON THIS. SO AND I WANT EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND TO LACK THE SEVEN MEMBERS. IT IS A REQUIRED GOVERNMENT COMMISSION IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. IT'S NOT LIKE A NONPROFIT. THERE'S SEVEN MEMBERS. THEY'RE ALL APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR. THEY WERE ALL APPOINTED BY GREG ABBOTT. THEY VOTED SEVEN ZERO FOR THESE. SO I'M GIVING THIS BACKGROUND BECAUSE I WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW THAT WHEN I, WHEN I AND I'M SO GRATEFUL TO BE ON THE POLICY COMMITTEE. BUT WHEN I LOOK AND LEARN POLICY, I LOOK AT WHAT IS BEHIND THE POLICY, NOT JUST THE POLICY. THAT'S BEFORE ME. AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO THINK ABOUT. SO WE HAVE SOME NON PARTIZAN, SOME, SOME REALLY NON PARTIZAN SUPPORT FOR THE TSLAC STANDARDS THAT CAME OUT. AND IN THOSE STANDARDS THE EXCERPT THAT I'VE INCLUDED FOR YOU, IT'S, IT READS AS A RECONSIDERATION PROCESS AS REFERRED IN THIS SECTION SHOULD ENSURE THAT ANY PARENT LEGAL GUARDIAN OF A STUDENT CURRENTLY ENROLLED IN THE DISTRICT OR EMPLOYEE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT MAY REQUEST THE RECONSIDERATION OF A SPECIFIC ITEM IN THEIR SCHOOL LIBRARY CATALOG. A RECONSIDERATION SHOULD INCLUDE I'M SKIPPING DOWN TO NUMBER FOUR. INCLUDE A REASONABLE TIME FRAME APPROVED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR THE REVIEW AND FINAL DECISION BY A COMMITTEE. BY A COMMITTEE CHARGED WITH THE REVIEW OF THE ITEM IN ITS ENTIRETY, I.E, A DISTRICT SHOULD CONVENE A REVIEW COMMITTEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY THE DISTRICT TO ENSURE A THOROUGH AND FAIR PROCESS. A THOROUGH AND FAIR PROCESS. AND SO I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED SOME OTHER THINGS THAT MY COLLEAGUES CAN SEE, BUT I DO THINK, I'M GOING TO YOU CAN KNOW YOU CAN BE GUARANTEED. I DO NOT AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT COMES OUT OF THIS. THE STATE SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION IN. BUT I DO I DO AGREE WITH THE STANDARDS THAT THEY PASSED 13 TO 1 AND THE TSLAC PASSED SEVEN ZERO, I ALSO RECOGNIZE MY COLLEAGUES CONCERN ABOUT HAVING SOME DIRECT AUTHORITY GIVEN, BUT ONLY AS A CAVEAT, NOT AS NOT AS AN ISOLATED ISSUE, BECAUSE WE WON'T ALWAYS MAYBE HAVE MARK SMITH. WE MAY HAVE SOMEONE ELSE WHO DOES NOT WANT TO CONSIDER A COMMITTEE. AND IF WE DON'T CODIFY THAT, THEN OUR HANDS ARE TIED, OR WE HAVE TO REVISIT THIS. AND WHEN WE REVISIT THIS, THAT MEANS WE DON'T GET TO SPEND TIME ON SOMETHING ELSE THAT REALLY HELPS IMPROVE STUDENT OUTCOMES. SO THAT IS, MOST OF WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. SEE, I DIDN'T ACTUALLY TAKE UNTIL 9:00, BUT I WOULD I WOULD APPRECIATE ANYBODY WHO AND AGAIN, THERE'S LOTS OF ISSUES I COULD WALK THROUGH MY, MY PACKET AND TALK ABOUT THE OTHER ISSUES. I HAVE WITH THE BLUE LINED OR THE RED LINE VERSION, BUT I WON'T DO THAT BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES ON THEIR OPINION ABOUT WHERE I STAND, AND[01:10:02]
THEIR THOUGHTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS HANNAN. MR. SHOWIF, AND I'M. ALL RIGHT. SO I, I, I FEEL LIKE EVERYTHING'S BEING OVER COMPLICATED AND AS NORMAL. BUT THEN AGAIN, I MEAN, I AM A READER AND I DID WRITE A BOOK REPORT ON MOBY DICK AND ABOUT HOW THERE IS NO UNDERLINING TONES OF MOBY DICK, AND IT IS SIMPLY ABOUT A MAN AND HIS DESIRE TO KILL A GIANT FISH.TRUE, TRUE. BUT, SO THIS YELLOW, THIS YELLOW SHEET HERE IS, THIS IS THE DIRECT TEXT OUT OF HOUSE BILL 900 TO AMEND 33 021, BUT IT WHEN YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE LAW, THE WAY THAT IT SITS NOW, IT IT'S A LOT DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, SO LIKE IF EVERYBODY WERE TO GOOGLE TCS EDUCATION CODE 33.021 AND PULL UP THE STATUTES.CAPITAL.TEXAS.GOV POLICY, YOU'LL SEE IN D2AI IT REFERENCES PENAL CODE 43.24. WHICH IS THE DISTRIBUTION OF HARMFUL MATERIAL TO MINORS AND I FEEL I FEEL THAT THIS TWO SIDED ISSUE THERE'S A DISCONNECT IN COMMUNICATION. YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE THE, YOU KNOW, THE TAXPAYERS ARE YOU KNOW, THEY'RE LOOKING AT TWO SIDED R&D, THE ARE FEELS LIKE THE D IS TRYING TO PUT IN OUR SCHOOLS, AND THE D FEELS LIKE THE R IS TRYING TO REMOVE, BASICALLY PG 13 AND R-RATED BOOKS. WELL, I MEAN, THE WAY THAT I SEE IT IS, IF THE KIDS ARE RATED AGE AND THE PARENTS ARE OKAY WITH IT, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEM READING R-RATED BOOKS. I READ FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS AND QUOTED IT REGULARLY TO MY WIFE WHEN WE WERE IN VEGAS LAST WEEK, BUT THAT THAT DISCONNECT, IT'S MASKING THE MAIN ISSUE THAT WOULD. HOUSE BILL 900 AMENDED 33 OH TWO, ONE OF THE EDUCATION CODE, WHICH NOW REFERENCES THE PENAL CODE, WHICH MAKES IT A CRIMINAL OFFENSE WHICH IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE TO, PROVIDE OR MAKE AVAILABLE, CERTAIN HARMFUL MATERIAL TO CHILDREN THAT IS SEXUALLY EXPLICIT. AND I FEEL LIKE ON THE D SIDE OF THE OPINION IS THAT, WELL, THIS MATERIAL HAS NEVER BEEN IN LIBRARY, BUT I'VE SEEN I'VE BEEN PROVIDED EVIDENCE OTHERWISE, AND I'VE BEEN PROVIDED EVIDENCE THAT IT HAS. I MEAN, IT'S SPECIFICALLY LIKE CRITERIA THAT MEETS THE PENAL DEFINITION OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE ACTUALLY HAS BEEN IN, IN OUR LIBRARIES AT ONE POINT. AND I FEEL THAT OUR, OUR MAIN GOAL INITIALLY OFF THE BAT IS WE NEED TO WRITE A POLICY THAT'S IN ACCORDANCE WITH 43, 24, THE PENAL LAW AND I THINK THAT THE MORE DANCING AROUND JUST THAT PART, THE MORE WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING OUR LIBRARIANS AT RISK, BECAUSE I, I MEAN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, COUNCIL, BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY KIND OF POLICY AND, AND SOME OF THIS MATERIAL SNEAKS THROUGH ACCIDENTALLY OR IF IT, IF IT IS STILL IF THERE IS STILL SEXUALLY EXPLICIT MATERIAL MEETING THE CRIMINAL DEFINITION IS STILL ON THE SHELVES. AND WOULDN'T THAT MAKE THE LIBRARIANS CRIMINAL LIABLE IF WE DON'T HAVE A POLICY PROTECTING THEM? WELL, I, I HESITATE TO ASSESS, POTENTIAL CRIMINAL LIABILITY BASED ON HYPOTHETICAL FACTS, BUT TYPICALLY THE CRIMINAL LAW IMPOSES A MENTAL STATE REQUIREMENT. AND I IMAGINE THAT A LIBRARIAN WHO WAS UNKNOWING OF THE MATERIAL, AS YOU POSITED, WOULD LIKELY NOT FACE CRIMINAL EXPOSURE. OKAY. THAT YEAH, THAT MAKES SENSE. I, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE FIRST THING NEED TO PROTECT THE DISTRICT. WE CAN'T HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF ANYBODY BEING CRIMINALLY LIABLE. AND, IF THERE IS THAT MATERIAL STILL ANYWHERE, I MEAN, THERE'S IT'S THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT IT ONCE EXISTED HERE, IT NEEDS TO BE WRITTEN THAT THAT MATERIAL BE REMOVED. BUT THAT'S NOT THE R-RATED TYPE BOOKS THAT EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT AND BEEN CITING, YOU KNOW, IN THE WORDS BEING SPOKEN. THAT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT ANYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT, OR AT LEAST THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. I'M TALKING ABOUT, I MEAN, SOME OF THE STUFF THAT APPARENTLY RECENTLY DISAPPEARED FROM A SCHOOL LIBRARY, WHICH THAT DID MEET THE ELEMENTS, AND
[01:15:05]
THERE NEEDS TO BE POLICY PREVENTING THAT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DO THINK THAT PARENTS SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO, YOU KNOW, IF THEY DON'T WANT THEIR KID VIEWING SOME MATERIAL, THEN MAYBE LIKE CHECK A BOX TO WHERE THEY CAN NO LONGER SEE PAST PG 13 RATED BOOKS, YOU KNOW, DO IT JUST LIKE THE MOVIES. WE DON'T LET HER, YOU KNOW. YOU KNOW, 12 YEAR OLD CAN'T GO AND WATCH AN R-RATED MOVIE WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT. MAKES SENSE. THANK YOU, MR. SHOAF. SO I'M JUST GOING TO ASK YOU TO WEIGH IN ON THE, RECONSIDERATION PROCESS. IF YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT, BECAUSE THIS THIS IS GOING TO GO BACK TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE. THE POLICY COMMITTEE IS GOING TO HAVE TO DO THEIR WORK. AND I THINK PART OF THE PURPOSE OF TONIGHT IS FOR, FOR US TO WEIGH IN ON SOME SPECIFICS TO THE EXTENT YOU HAVE AN OPINION OR CAN. WELL, AND AS OF NOW AND MY OPINION OF THE RECONSIDERATION POLICY IS DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS EVEN A WEEK AGO AT THIS POINT. I THINK THAT IF WE DO WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WITH THE RECONSIDERATION POLICY, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE THAT THAT COMMITTEE WOULD GET STUCK ON ONE BOOK AND EVERYBODY WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT THAT ONE BOOK FOR WEEKS TO YEARS ON END. AND THERE THERE NEEDS TO BE. I THINK IT'LL BE SUCH AN INEFFICIENT PROCESS THAT IT'LL OVERALL END UP BEING A DISSERVICE TO THE ENTIRE SYSTEM AND, AND POTENTIALLY BOOKS THAT DON'T MEET THE CRITERIA TO BE REMOVED WILL JUST BE TALKED ABOUT FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE PROBABLY MORE EFFICIENT TO PUT THE TO FIND A WAY TO PUT THAT BACK ONTO THE INDIVIDUAL PARENT TO WHERE, OKAY , IF THERE IS MATERIAL THAT THE PARENT DOES NOT WANT THEIR KID TO BE ABLE TO CHECK OUT OF THE LIBRARY, I HEARD KATY ISD PARENTS CAN GO SCROLL THROUGH THE BOOK LIST AND CLICK ON BOOKS THAT THEY DON'T WANT THEIR KIDS TO BE ABLE TO CHECK OUT, AND THEIR KID IS NO LONGER ABLE TO CHECK THAT OUT OF THE LIBRARY. I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A MORE EFFICIENT PROCESS, AS LONG AS THE BOOK BOOK DOES NOT MEET THE CRIMINAL ELEMENTS. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. SHOW. MISS, DOCTOR GILLIAM. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH, WHAT TRUSTEE HANNON SHARED. AND I'D LIKE TO ADD TO THAT WHEN I THINK OF A CAMPUS AND I'VE BEEN AT SEVERAL CAMPUSES HERE, I'M GOING TO GO A LITTLE BIT WITH MY, WITH MY PRINCIPALSHIP. AND THERE WERE TIMES WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS SITUATION, BUT THERE WERE TIMES THAT BOOKS CAME UP OR WHAT HAVE YOU. AND I TOOK THE LIBERTY OF JUST AND I, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY EVERY NAME, BUT I HAVE ONE, TWO, THREE, SIX ENGLISH DEPARTMENT LEADERS. I'LL SAY WHERE I KNOW THEM FROM BECAUSE I DID NOT HAVE THE PERMISSION TO USE THEIR NAMES. ELKINS HIGH SCHOOL WILLOWRIDGE HIGH SCHOOL, BUSH HIGH SCHOOL, AND THEN I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE TWO. WHEN I WAS AT MADISON HIGH SCHOOL AND IT WAS MISS ARMOR AND MISS, MISS HARVEY, OUR MR. HARVEY AND I JUST REMEMBER HOW THEY ASSISTED US AND HELPED US. LET ME GO TO THE DEPARTMENT LEADERS TO WHERE ANYTIME THERE WAS AN ISSUE, THEY WERE THERE RIGHT THERE WITH THE LIBRARIANS AND THE PRINCIPAL. AND THAT WAS ME. AND THERE WERE THERE WAS ONE TIME THAT I CONNECTED WITH ONE OF THE SUPERINTENDENTS THAT I WORKED WITH HERE, AND THAT SITUATION WAS AS IT WAS RESOLVED, BUT IT WAS RESOLVED FROM MY JUST GOING TO THE SUPERINTENDENT AND ASKING , HEY, CAN YOU GIVE US SOME HELP? AND CAN YOU SHARE WHICH WAY WE SHOULD GO? AND SO FROM THERE, THE SUPERINTENDENT ACTUALLY PROVIDED MY BOSS, WHICH WAS THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, AND WE WORKED IT OUT. NOW THAT WAS MUCH LONG AGO.THAT WAS A WAYS BACK. AND NOW WE DO HAVE A COMMITTEE. AND THE RECONSIDERATION I BELIEVE IN IT, I SUPPORT IT. I JUST THINK RIGHT NOW WITH WHAT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH, WITH EVERYONE TONIGHT, I CAN'T IMAGINE DOCTOR SMITH HAVING THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION THAT HE
[01:20:04]
WOULD HAVE TO HE WOULD BE THE LEAD AND IT IS UP TO HIM TO DECIDE OR TO LEAD A COMMITTEE. I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE, OUR PEOPLE, OUR LIBRARIANS, OUR PRINCIPALS, OUR ENGLISH TEACHERS, THOSE DEPARTMENT LEADERS, AND THEN WE HAVE BACKUP. WE HAVE ALL OF THESE PEOPLE THAT WILL ASSIST AND HELP US, EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP TEAM THAT WILL ASSIST AND HELP US AT THE DIRECTION OF DOCTOR SMITH. THE LIBRARIAN KNOWS THE KIDS, THE ENGLISH DEPARTMENT LEADER KNOWS THE CHILDREN. AND WE CAN MAKE SOME THINGS HAPPEN. I REALLY THINK THAT WE NEED TO REALLY PAY ATTENTION TO EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON. AND HERE'S WHAT I HEARD. YOU ALL KNOW I LIKE TO REWRITE THINGS. I HEAR THAT WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER. WE'RE COLLABORATING TOGETHER. I HEARD, TRUSTEE HANNON TALK ABOUT PROTECTION OF STAFF THAT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. I FEEL THAT WHEN WE'RE ON THE DAIS AND WE'RE WE'RE WORKING VERY HARD TO DO THE RIGHT THING, MANY TIMES THE RIGHT THING IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF US, AND WE'RE JUST NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO IT. AND WE'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO IT BECAUSE WE THINK THAT WE KNOW WHAT IS RIGHT IN OUR MIND OR WHATEVER SOMEONE ELSE HAS SHARED . I WANT US TO THINK VERY CAREFULLY ON THIS. AS FAR AS HAVING HAVING OUR SUPERINTENDENT, WHO JOINED US IN JANUARY, GOING INTO HIS FIRST FULL YEAR AND HAVING THIS TYPE OF SITUATION AS FAR AS LEADING AND MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE BOOKS THAT SHOULD BE THERE, NOT BE THERE, TAKING THE TIME TO READ THE BOOKS, I JUST TRULY BELIEVE THAT WE CAN DO MUCH, MUCH BETTER. WE HAVE OUR STAFF, WE HAVE OUR LIBRARIANS, WE HAVE OUR DEPARTMENT LEADERS. AND WE HAVE MANY STAFF THAT ASSIST AND HELP US. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DOCTOR GILLIAM. MR. GARCIA, THANK YOU. CAN I GET THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT WAITING FOR ME TO CALL ON YOU TO PUT YOUR. THANK YOU SO I, I SEE THAT THE PROPOSED REVISION TASBIH DOES HAVE THE, RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE. AND WHILE I AGREE WITH TRUSTEE HANNON THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECT IN WHAT WE WANT. SO WE WANT A COMMITTEE. WE NEED TO SAY SHALL HAVE A COMMITTEE. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT WHEN MISS HUBBARD WAS GIVING HER PRESENTATION, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU REFERENCED WAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICY, WE HAVE THESE PROCEDURES IN PLACE. SO WHILE WE HAVE POLICY, WE DON'T NECESSARILY OUTLINE EVERYTHING THAT PROCEDURALLY IN OUR POLICY. THAT'S KIND OF UP TO THE SUPERINTENDENT TO DO SO. THERE IS A FINE LINE THERE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK THAT WE WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT. WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE, THE, THE RESPONSIBILITY AWAY FROM THE LIBRARIANS, THE LIBRARIANS WE TRUST, THE LIBRARIANS. I'VE TALKED TO MANY LIBRARIANS, AND, I TRUST THEM TO DO THEIR JOB. I TRUST THEIR TEACHERS TO DO THEIR JOB. I TRUST OUR PARENTS TO BE INVOLVED AND KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH. AND NOT ALL PARENTS DO. BUT SOME PARENTS HAVE MORE LEEWAY FOR THEIR THEIR, THEIR KIDS AND OTHERS. AND I THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT RECONSIDERATION, THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE WITH THE POLICY NOW IS WE'RE SORT OF HANDCUFFED BY OUR OWN POLICY. SO EVEN IF THE SUPERINTEND WALKS INTO A SCHOOL, HAPPENS TO GO AND PICK UP A BOOK AND SAY, WELL, THIS BOOK IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THE SUPERINTENDENT CAN'T REMOVE THE BOOK AND EVERYTHING THAT I'VE BEEN TOLD AND IS NO THAT THAT WE HAVE TO FILL OUT A FORM OF A TRUSTEE, GOES TO A LIBRARY AND THEY SEE A BOOK THAT'S NOT SUITABLE FOR ELEMENTARY OR FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND WE CAN'T GO TO THE SUPERINTENDENT AND HAVE THAT BOOK REMOVED. WE HAVE TO GO FILL OUT A CHALLENGE FORM. WE HAVE TO WAIT MONTHS BEFORE THE PROCESS IS COMPLETE. I THINK THAT'S A PROBLEM IN AND OF ITSELF. SO AT THE VERY LEAST, A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE IS VERY IMPORTANT. BUT I THINK WE'RE LIKE I SAID, WE'RE RAILROADED. SO WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN STREAMLINE THAT PROCESS. AND IF WE GO TO A LIBRARIAN AND A LIBRARIAN AGREES, AND THEY JUST LOOK AT THE BOOK AND THEY LOOK AT THE POLICY AND THEY SAY, YEP, IT DOESN'T DEFINITELY DOESN'T MATCH. BUT IF IT'S QUESTIONABLE, THEN WE DEFINITELY NEED SOME FURTHER REVIEW. MAYBE THAT'S WHEN THE COMMITTEE COMES IN, YOU[01:25:01]
KNOW, KIND OF KIND OF DEFER TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE. I KNOW THAT THE, TASBIH HAS ITS PROPOSED REVISIONS. IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE, THE POLICY COMMITTEE WILL, I'M SURE WILL TAKE UNDER ADVISEMENT. BUT I DO FEEL THAT AS THE INSTRUCTIONAL LEADER OF THE DISTRICT, THAT'S I WOULD DEFER TO DOCTOR SMITH AS THE SOLE AUTHORITY LIKE I THINK THAT WE'RE MAKING THE DECISION IF WE FEEL LIKE IT'S IT ALREADY GOES TO THAT LEVEL, THEN THAT BOOK SHOULD BE PULLED OR REMOVED , OR AT THE VERY LEAST, WHILE IT'S GOING THROUGH THE RECONSIDERATION PROCESS, THAT BOOK SHOULDN'T EVEN BE ON THE SHELF. I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT, AND THEN IF IT'S DEEMED TO BE LEFT ON THE SHELF, THAT'S, THAT'S UP TO THE COMMITTEE AND THAT'S FINE. AND I'LL ACCEPT THAT DECISION. NOW, ON THE FLIP SIDE, AND I WILL REFERENCE FORMER TRUSTEE, DAY, AND WE WERE BOTH IN AGREEMENT ON THIS FOR, A RESTRICTED ACCESS. AND I HAVE A, I HAVE A 13 YEAR OLD JUST TURNED 13, AND THERE'S CERTAIN BOOKS I DON'T WANT THEM TO READ. BUT THEN I ALSO HAVE A ALMOST IN TEN DAYS, 18 YEAR OLD, WHICH, YOU KNOW, HE CAN READ WHAT HE WANTS AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. I MIGHT NOT AGREE WITH THINGS THAT HE WANTS, BUT HE'S GOING TO BE 18 IN ANOTHER WEEK. AND IF HE WANTS TO READ SOME OF THE BOOKS THAT ARE DEEMED MORE QUESTIONABLE, HE'S MORE THAN WELCOME TO. BUT THEN IF I HAVE A 13 YEAR OLD OR A 15 YEAR OLD OR 16 YEAR OLD THAT I THINK MAYBE HE'S READY FOR SOME OF THE MORE QUESTIONABLE MATERIAL THAT HE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO. IF I GIVE HIM PERMISSION TO. SO AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE NOT BANNING BOOKS, BUT WE'RE ALSO SO AS A PARENT, YOU'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE INVOLVED IN YOUR EDUCATIONAL DECISIONS FOR YOUR CHILD AT CERTAIN LEVELS. SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN HIGH SCHOOL AND THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE AND SENIORS, THEY'RE 18. THEY CAN MAKE THESE DECISIONS FOR THEMSELVES AND THEY WANT TO HAVE ACCESS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A THERE'S OBVIOUSLY THERE'S WE YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE BOOK BANNING DEBATE, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY BOOKS DO WE HAVE ON THE DO NOT USE LIST. HOW MANY BOOKS ARE, NOT EDUCATIONALLY SUITABLE THAT ARE ON THE DO NOT USE LIST. SO THERE'S HUNDREDS PROBABLY SO.BUT GETTING TO WHEN WE TURN 18 OR WE'RE IN HIGH SCHOOL THERE IS THAT THAT FINE LINE. AND SO I WOULD SUPPORT, SOMETHING OF A RESTRICTED, ACCESS FOR, FOR OUR STUDENTS, I THINK WE NEED TO STREAMLINE THE RECONSIDERATION POLICY. I DO NOT AGREE WITH LEAVING BOOKS ON THE SHELVES WHILE THEY'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE POLICY. I THINK THAT TO ME, THAT DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. AND I FELT LIKE, OF THE BOOKS, THE MANY BOOKS THAT WERE CHALLENGED OR BEING CHALLENGED, I AGREED SOME OF THEM SHOULD BE REMOVED AND SOME I DON'T AGREE WITH, AND SOME, YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T EVEN READ YET, SO I'M, I'M INDIFFERENT. SO IT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I SUPPORT THE COMMITTEE, I SUPPORT THE DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE. AND IF THE IF THE COMMITTEE DEEMS THAT THE BOOK IS SUITABLE AND WE'RE FOLLOWING THE LAW, FIRST AND FOREMOST, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW. WE HAVE TO PROTECT THE DISTRICT. WE HAVE TO PROTECT STAFF. AND, YOU KNOW, MOST IMPORTANTLY OR AS IMPORTANT, WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR STUDENTS. YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD, AND EVEN WHEN, TRUSTEE SHOWIF WAS A PRIVATE CITIZEN, HE CAME TO ME, I THINK, A YEAR AGO ABOUT SOME SOME BOOKS IN A, IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THAT THAT JUST SORT OF MADE ITS WAY INTO WASN'T IN THE LIBRARY. IT WAS WHAT WAS THE BOOK FAIR A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT SITUATION, BUT SOMETIMES THESE THINGS HAPPEN, SO BEING AWARE AND BEING ALERT OF THESE THINGS AND TRUSTING OUR LIBRARIANS AND OUR STAFF TO, TO SNUFF THESE THINGS OUT, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE 80 PLUS SCHOOLS. WE'VE GOT TO WE'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH A LOT OF BOOKS. WE'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH A LOT OF CONTENT. SO THAT THAT'S KIND OF MY, MY POSITION ON RECONSIDERING AND THEN, AND I'LL JUST SORT OF LEAVE IT AT THAT. SO THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. THANK YOU, MR. GARCIA. MISS JONES.
THANK YOU, PRESIDENT THYSSEN, CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? SO WHEN WE WENT IN CLOSED SESSION. WELL, WHEN I GOT HERE, I HAD A BRIEF STATEMENT. BUT WHEN WE WENT INTO CLOSED SESSION, I STARTED THINKING ABOUT MY KIDS, AND I HAD TO GO BACK TO WHEN I FIRST GOT MARRIED, MY HUSBAND AND I HAD A LIST OF BOOKS THAT WE WANTED OUR KIDS TO READ BEFORE THEY LEFT HIGH SCHOOL AND WENT OFF TO COLLEGES BECAUSE THERE WERE CERTAIN THEMES, ISSUES, AND SITUATIONS THAT WE WANTED TO ADDRESS AS PARENTS. AND SO I'M GOING TO READ OFF THOSE BOOKS. AND SOME OF YOU ARE VERY
[01:30:02]
FAMILIAR WITH THE CONTEXT AND THE CONTENT OF WHAT'S ON OUR PARENTS LIST. AND NOW GRANDPARENT LIST OF WHAT'S REQUIRED READING. SO THE FIRST BOOK IS AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MALCOLM X SULA BY TONI MORRISON. BELOVED BY TONI MORRISON, THE BLUEST EYE BY TONI MORRISON, I KNOW WHY THE CAGED BIRD SINGS BY MAYA ANGELOU. SISTERS OF THE YAM BY BELL HOOKS. MAN'S SEARCH FOR MEANING BY VIKTOR FRANKL. BLACK BOY BY RICHARD WRIGHT. TELL ME HOW THE LONG TRAIN BEEN GONE BY JAMES BALDWIN, AND A LOT OF THESE BOOKS ADDRESS ISSUES OF INSTITUTIONAL RACISM, INCEST, HOMOSEXUALITY, RAPE, SEXUAL DEVIANCY. AND THESE ARE NOT THE BOOKS THAT WE WOULD WANT ANY OTHER ADULT TO PROVIDE FOR OUR CHILDREN. SO WE TOOK IT UPON OURSELVES TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? BEFORE THEY LEAVE HIGH SCHOOL, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN ISSUES THAT ARE ADDRESSED BY US AS PARENTS PRIOR TO BEING EXPOSED TO BY SOMEONE ELSE. AND SO OUR OUR INTENTION WAS TO ALLOW OUR KIDS TO BE EXPOSED TO CERTAIN ISSUES IS FACILITATED WITH PARENTAL GUIDANCE AND DISCUSSION REGARDING CENTRALIZED THEMES WITHIN THE CONTEXT AS IT WAS PRESENTED BY THE AUTHOR. AND THESE DISCUSSIONS WE HAD THEM WITH OVER SOMETIMES IN THE CAR, SOMETIMES OVER THE DINNER TABLE, IT COULD BE SCHOOL SITUATIONS. AND HONESTLY, ON THE WAY HERE, I WAS HAVING MY DAUGHTER WAS HAVING A CONVERSATION SITUATION AND I HAD TO REFER BACK TO ONE OF THE BOOKS WITH THE CHARACTER DID WHEN SHE WAS IN THIS SITUATION. SO REMEMBER IN 10TH GRADE, I TOLD YOU TO READ THIS BOOK? WHAT HAPPENED? OKAY. AND SO IT WAS THE CONVERSATIONS, THE DISCUSSIONS. NOW, THE REASON WE DID THIS IS BECAUSE WE DID NOT WANT ANYONE ELSE FOSTERING CERTAIN CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR CHILDREN ABOUT THESE ISSUES THAT CONFLICTED WITH OUR VALUES AND THE THINGS THAT WE TAUGHT THEM, AND WHAT WE WERE RAISING THEM, THE TYPE OF ADULTS THAT WE RAISED THEM TO BE. AND SO I RECENTLY HEARD SOMEONE SAY, DON'T OUTSMART YOUR COMMON SENSE. AND THIS ISSUE IS RATHER SIMPLE TO ADDRESS. AS PARENTS, WE SEND OUR CHILDREN TO SCHOOL TO LEARN HOW TO BE AN ADULT. THE GOAL IS TO TEACH CHILDREN THOSE THINGS THAT WILL HELP THEM TO MAKE GOOD CHOICES AND NOT TO DO THE WRONG THING. THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN SOME OF THESE BOOKS, NO MATTER WHAT THE CONTEXT, IS TEACHING CHILDREN TO DO WRONG THINGS WHICH IN SOME CASES PROMOTES ADULTS ENGAGE IN CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. IF SOME PARENTS THINKS THINK THAT THESE TYPES OF BOOKS ARE ACCEPTABLE FOR THEIR STUDENTS TO READ, THEN THEY SHOULD PURCHASE THEM FOR THEIR KIDS. LIKE WE DID. HOWEVER, IT IS THE EXPECTATION OF OTHER PARENTS AND TAXPAYERS FOR THE DISTRICT TO NOT PURCHASE DEGENERATE LIBRARY BOOKS THAT PROMOTE CRIMINAL AND SEXUALLY DEVIANT BEHAVIOR, WHICH WILL LEAD TO DEGENERATE ADULTS IN SOCIETY. I FULLY SUPPORT THE NEW POLICY CHANGES TO F LOCAL AS PRESENTED, AND I REALLY WANT TO ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT TRUSTEE HANNON SAID. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, BY MENTIONING PARTIZANSHIP, YOU'VE ALREADY MADE THIS. YOU'VE JUST MADE THIS ISSUE A PARTIZAN ISSUE. OUR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AND IDEAS HAVE CENTRALIZED AROUND BOARD POLICY, BOTH LEGAL AND LOCAL, AS WELL AS INFORMATION FROM TSLAC AND ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. WE CAN'T APPROACH IN DEVELOPING THIS POLICY. WE CAN'T APPROACH THIS ISSUE WITH SUBJECTIVE SUBJECTIVITY. WE CAN'T GO WITH I FEEL, I BELIEVE INSTEAD, WE HAVE TO TAKE AN OBJECTIVE APPROACH IN WHAT WE KNOW IN GOVERNING OUR INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES AND PROTECTING OUR STUDENTS. AND I ALSO WANTED TO SAY ABOUT DOCTOR SMITH AND HIS RESPONSIBILITY.[01:35:09]
HAVE YOU ALL MET DOCTOR SMITH? HE IS A COLLABORATIVE LEADER. HE'S NOT A RETALIATORY GUY. HE'S NOT THAT PERSON. HE'S MORE COLLABORATIVE. HE BELIEVES IN THE COLLECTIVE INTEREST OF PARENTS, STUDENTS AND HE'S JUST NOT THAT PERSON OR THAT PERSONALITY WHO'S JUST JUST GOING TO GO OFF AND SAY, I DON'T LIKE THIS BOOK. LET'S TAKE IT OFF. I HAVE WE HAVE EXPERIENCED AS A BOARD HOW COLLABORATIVE HE IS AND I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH THE FACT OF PAINTING DOCTOR SMITH IN A LIGHT AS IF HE WOULD BE RETALIATORY, RETALIATORY OR INCONSIDERATE OF ALL ISSUES INVOLVED. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU, MISS JONES, SO WE ARE GETTING REALLY CLOSE TO THE 9:00 HOUR. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU TO THE LAST JUST COUPLE OF MINUTES EACH, THEN I'M GOING TO SPEAK, AND THEN WE WILL GET TO OUR LAST PUBLIC COMMENT. SO MISS HANNON OKAY. THANK YOU. SO I'M GOING TO JUST ADDRESS SOME SOME QUICK QUESTIONS. SO, BECAUSE, MR. SHOWIF TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, THE PARENTAL ABILITY TO RESTRICT ACCESS. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT AS A NEW TRUSTEE IF WE COULD POSSIBLY SHARE THAT WE THAT OUR PARENTS DO HAVE THAT ABILITY, MAYBE IN A FRIDAY UPDATE, JUST AS A REMINDER TO EVERYONE, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT HIM TO THINK OUR WE ARE NOT ADDRESSING THAT ISSUE BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE DOING A GOOD JOB AT THAT, AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE TIMELINE OF, OF GOING ON AND ON ABOUT, CONVERSATIONS AND DIALOGS ABOUT A CERTAIN BOOK WITHIN THE COMMITTEE? IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, AND AS I READ OUR CURRENT POLICY, WE HAVE A VERY OBVIOUS TIMELINE, SO IT CAN'T GO ON AD NAUSEAM, SO I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THAT. MR. GARCIA UNDERSTANDS THE COMPLEXITIES OF THIS, AND IT'S AS I LISTEN TO YOU. AND BECAUSE I'M, I'M ASSUMING AND I'M LOOKING AT BOARD COUNSEL, THAT AFTER WE LEAVE HERE, THE ONLY FOLKS THAT WE CAN KIND OF, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOW ON THE BOARD POLICY. OTHERWISE IT BECOMES A WALKING QUORUM BECAUSE WE'VE ALL HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS. SO THAT'S WHY NOW I SOUND A LITTLE MANIC TRYING TO GET THROUGH THIS, BECAUSE I WANT TO SAY, HEY, I'M GOING TO GO DOWN MY LIST. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, SONIA? HOW LUCKY YOUR CHILDREN ARE THAT THEY THEY COME FROM A FAMILY OF CONSCIENTIOUS PARENTS WANTING TO EXPOSE THEM TO SUCH DIVERSITY IN LITERATURE AND SUCH DIVERSITY AND THOUGHT, BECAUSE THOSE ARE BRILLIANT AUTHORS WITH VERY SOPHISTICATED CONTENT AND NOT ALL OF THE CHILDREN IN OUR DISTRICT, NOT ALL OF THE KIDS CAN AFFORD TO GO GET BOOKS. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE FREE AND REDUCED LUNCH, BECAUSE THEIR PARENTS CAN'T AFFORD TO FEED TO, TO, TO, TO PROVIDE THEM ADEQUATE FOOD. SO THAT'S WHY OUR GOVERNMENT TAKES CARE OF THAT. THEY THEY DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO GET THEM. NOT ALL OF OUR FAMILIES HAVE THE CAPACITY TO GET THEM TO THE PUBLIC LIBRARY, OR TO HALF PRICE BOOKS, OR TO THEY DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY TO BUY THINGS ON AMAZON. AND SO DO I THINK INAPPROPRIATE BOOKS SHOULD BE IN OUR LIBRARY? NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT.AND I'VE SAID THAT. SO I JUST I DO I RESPECT YOU AND WHAT YOU DID WITH YOUR KIDS. AND I APPRECIATE YOU SHARING THAT WITH US, I PART OF THIS POLICY, I WANT THE I WANT EVERYONE ON THE BOARD TO KNOW I OPPOSE THE F AND G AND THE DBG. THE GRIEVANCE USING THIS TO GO THROUGH THE GRIEVANCE POLICY. SEE OUR F. AND I THINK THAT THAT FINANCIALLY AND THE TIME I THINK THAT WILL BE MORE TIME CONSUMING AND INVOLVED THAN THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW, AND THEN I, I WANT TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE I DID HEAR MR. GARCIA SAY HE WANTS ALL BOOKS PULLED, THAT ARE UNDER RECONSIDERATION, BUT ■BECAUSE OL BOOKS? CAN WE ANY ANY BOOK THAT'S UNDER RECONSIDERATION, CAN IT BE PULLED FROM THE SHELVES, OR DOES PICO DOES PICO SAY, WE CAN'T DO THAT? PICO DOESN'T SPEAK TO A TEMPORARY POLLING OR REMOVAL, CERTAINLY IF A BOOK MET THE CRIMINAL STATUTES, IT COULD BE REMOVED. AND I THINK THE DISTRICT LIKELY WOULD HAVE THE DISCRETION TO PLACE BOOKS ON RESTRICTED ACCESS DURING A CHALLENGE PROCESS. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, THANK YOU ALSO, MR. GARCIA, FOR I SAW YOU FLIPPING THROUGH THE, THE TASBIH, DRAFT. RIGHT. AND I REALLY DO HOPE THAT THAT AS WE CONTINUE AND MR. HAMILTON IS THE POLICY COMMITTEE THAT WE ACTUALLY DON'T START WRITING UNTIL WE ACTUALLY GET IN A
[01:40:04]
COUPLE OF WEEKS, GET THE ACTUAL DRAFT FROM TASBIH, BECAUSE I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE WHAT THEIR FINAL DRAFT LOOKS LIKE, AND THEN I'M GOING TO JUST BECAUSE I SAW PEOPLE SHAKING THEIR HEAD THAT WE HAD THIS MEETING, BUT NOW IT BECOMES A WALKING QUORUM WHEN EVERYBODY'S TALKING TO EACH OTHER, OTHER THAN THE POLICY COMMITTEE AND SO IT WAS KIND OF A ALMOST SPEAK NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE UNTIL IT COMES BACK TO THE DAIS. RIGHT. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MISS HANNA, MR. SHOAF. WELL THAT'S THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I WAS GOING TO I WAS GOING TO SAY IS, IS UNDER OPEN MEETINGS ACT, IT DOES GET VERY, VERY FRUSTRATING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS FORMAL SETTING IS THE ONLY WAY THAT WE'RE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THINGS. AND IT'S KIND OF HARD TO FIGURE ANYTHING OUT IN A SETTING LIKE THIS AND TO ACTUALLY GET DIALOG FROM ALL OF YOU, YOU KNOW, UNTIL WE'RE ACTUALLY IN ONE OF THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS. BUT, YOU KNOW, TO KIND OF GO IN THE DIRECTION OF WHAT, WHAT MISS JONES WAS SAYING, I THINK, PUTTING IT ALL ON, DOCTOR SMITH WOULD BE A LOT, HOWEVER, I DO, I MEAN, I, I TRUST HIM 100% WITH WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, WOULD PROVIDING BOOKS APPROPRIATE AGED BOOKS TO MY DAUGHTER WHO'S A, YOU KNOW, A TEN YEAR OLD, BUT I, I THINK THAT IN THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW, SOMEDAY DOCTOR SMITH IS GOING TO RETIRE. DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOING TO REPLACE HIM, SO. AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THAT'S A LOT OF LIABILITY ON A SINGLE PERSON WHO ALREADY HAS A LOT A LOT OF LIABILITY AS A SUPERINTENDENT, NOW, AS FAR AS WHAT, MR. GARCIA WAS SAYING WITH THE RESTRICTED SECTION, THAT'S KIND OF NOT A BAD IDEA, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT KIDS CAN'T CHECK OUT THE BOOKS UNLESS IT'S THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY SELECTED. BY THE PARENTS. BUT HOWEVER YOU KNOW, I'M FOR IT LOOKING LIKE, THE RESTRICTED SECTION AND HOGWARTS AND HARRY POTTER. THANK YOU, MR. SHOAFF. OKAY, SO I THINK, AS USUAL, I KNOW SHE'S. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? OH YEAH. OKAY. GO AHEAD. SONYA. AND I DIDN'T REALLY ADDRESS THE RECONSIDERING PROCESS. AND SO I DO BELIEVE IN PEDAGOGY, AND I BELIEVE IN PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY. AND ALL OF US WHO ARE EDUCATORS, INCLUDING THE LIBRARIANS, WE TAKE A LOT OF THAT TO HEART. AND IN SAYING THAT, I DO BELIEVE THAT IF DOCTOR SMITH HAS THE AUTHORITY AND HE FEELS IT'S WHAT'S BEST FOR THE KID, FOR KIDS IN THE DISTRICT, HE SHOULD HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY AND THE ABILITY TO REMOVE BOOKS. BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT IF HE FEELS HE WANTS TO CONVENE A COMMITTEE, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CREDENTIALS OF THOSE ON THAT COMMITTEE BECAUSE AS WE ALL TOOK THE PEDAGOGY AND THE PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TEST AS EDUCATORS, AND THAT'S ALSO INCLUDING THE LIBRARIANS. AND JUST AS WE TRUST AS OUR FAMILIES AND OUR KIDS SEND THEIR KIDS TO US, THEY HAVE TO TRUST THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. AS PROFESSIONALS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY RELY ON. US AS PROFESSIONAL ANGELS TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THEIR CHILDREN. AND WE HAVE TO KEEP THAT IN MIND THAT IT'S A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT, AND I THINK IT SHOULD REMAIN IN-HOUSE RATHER THAN IT BEING A COMMUNITY TYPE THING, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY. IT'S JUST KIND OF LIKE A KID COMES OVER TO YOUR HOUSE, PLAYS, WANTS TO WATCH A CERTAIN MOVIE WITH YOUR CHILD, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LET THEM DO IT, RIGHT? YOU'RE GOING TO CALL THE PARENT AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? LET ME CALL THEM. CAN THEY DO IT? BECAUSE IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY, AND WE HAVE TO SEE OUR ROLE IN THE SAME WAY THAT IS OUR WHEN THEY'RE WITH US, THEY'RE ENTRUSTING THAT WE WILL MAKE RESPONSIBLE DECISIONS FOR THEIR CHILDREN. AND WE HAVE TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. AND[01:45:06]
DEVELOPING THIS POLICY. THANK YOU, MISS JONES. SO I HAVE A LOT OF NOTES. I HAVE A LOT OF THINGS CIRCULATING IN MY BRAIN. SO I'M GOING TO DO THE BEST I CAN TO SPEAK ABOUT THEM AS LOGICALLY, AND AS CLEARLY AS I POSSIBLY CAN. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE GETTING BOGGED DOWN IN SOMETHING THAT, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IS NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE. AND LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT I MEAN.SO SCHOOL LIBRARIES ARE AN ADJUNCT TO THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS AND CURRICULUM. THE PERSON WHO HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS AND CURRICULUM IS SITTING TO MY RIGHT. I HAVE A LIST OF POLICIES WHERE WE DELEGATE AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY TO THE SUPERINTENDENT FOR INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS, FOR EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY, FOR CURRICULUM, FOR INSTRUCTION, FOR, I WOULD SAY, VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING IN THIS DISTRICT. WE DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE SUPERINTENDENT. AND THEN WITHIN HIS DISCRETION, WE SAY, THEN YOU CAN THEN DELEGATE TO THESE PEOPLE AROUND THIS CIRCLE, TO A COMMITTEE TO WHATEVER IT IS THAT YOU, DOCTOR SMITH, DEEM NOT JUST APPROPRIATE, BUT IT REASONABLE AND PRACTICAL AND EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT. SO I'M STRUGGLING. I'M STRUGGLING BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE DO THIS ALREADY. AND I DON'T THINK AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, ANYBODY THINKS THAT THIS MAN HAS TIME TO GO INTO OUR LIBRARIES OR READ BOOKS OR MAKE DETERMINATIONS. EVANS HERE'S WHERE HERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S NOT BEEN SPOKEN ABOUT BY ANYONE. TONIGHT. WE AS TRUSTEES HOLD ONE PERSON ACCOUNTABLE, AND THAT'S DOCTOR SMITH. I CANNOT HIRE AND FIRE ANY OF YOU, SO I DO NOT DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO ANY OF YOU . I CANNOT HIRE AND FIRE ANY OF THE LIBRARIANS, AND SO I DO NOT DELEGATE THAT AUTHORITY. I CANNOT HIRE AND FIRE A COMMITTEE . SO IT'S COUNTERINTUITIVE TO ME TO SAY I'M DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO A COMMITTEE. SO I MEAN, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IT JUST DOESN'T. AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, I THINK THE COMMITTEE IS WHAT WE NEED. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD CONVENE. I THINK THAT'S IN ALMOST EVERY CIRCUMSTANCE, WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. HOWEVER, IT DOESN'T FIT IN WITH ANYTHING ELSE WE DO TO SAY THAT I'M GOING TO DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO A COMMITTEE, I DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE SUPERINTEND, AND THEN THE SUPERINTENDENT, WITHIN HIS DISCRETION, CAN CONVENE A COMMITTEE AND TELL THAT COMMITTEE, WHAT TO DO. AND THAT COMMITTEE MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS AS ALSO, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, THE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN APPEAL PROCESS. AND THAT APPEAL PROCESS IS GOING TO EITHER COME TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OR THE BOARD OR BOTH, OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER WE DEEM APPROPRIATE. AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE THE FINAL ARBITERS. SO WHETHER REGARDLESS OF ANY DECISION THAT A COMMITTEE MAKES OR THAT DOCTOR SMITH MAKES , THE TRUSTEES ARE THE FINAL SAY, BECAUSE ANY APPEAL THAT IS MADE IS GOING TO COME TO US AT LEAST. AND THAT'S THE WAY IT READS NOW. I BELIEVE THAT'S THE WAY IT READS NOW. SO EVEN AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IF DOCTOR SMITH, AS A ROGUE SUPERINTENDENT WHO I WOULD ALSO SAY, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE'VE SAID, OH, WE DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOING TO BE THERE NEXT. WELL, HOLY COW, I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT THE CONSTITUENTS WHO VOTE FOR THE TRUSTEES TRUST THE TRUSTEES TO HIRE A SUPERINTENDENT WHO'S GOING TO BE JUST LIKE DOCTOR SMITH AND WHO'S GOING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. AND IF THEY ARE NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING, THEN THERE ARE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES FOR THAT. BUT LET'S SAY WE HAVE A ROGUE SUPERINTENDENT WHO SAYS, I'M GOING TO PULL, YOU KNOW, 25
[01:50:05]
BOOKS, THEN THEN AT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE CONSTITUENTS, THERE ARE TRUSTEES, THERE ARE I MEAN, THERE'S STILL A PROCESS IN PLACE AND ULTIMATELY IT'S GOING TO COME TO THE TRUSTEES, AND THE TRUSTEES ARE GOING TO SAY, NO, NO, I'M SO SORRY, DOCTOR SMITH. YOU CANNOT DO THAT. YOU HAVE EXCEEDED YOUR AUTHORITY OR YOU'VE GONE A LITTLE WACKO OR I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY GOING TO REFLECT ON YOUR EVALUATION. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE GOING TO DECIDE WHETHER WHAT EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY IS, BECAUSE THAT'S OUR JOB. THAT'S WHAT WE WERE ELECTED TO DO, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE HIRED TO DO. SO I STRUGGLE WITH THE CONCEPT OF DELEGATING THAT RESPONSIBILITY TO ANYONE OTHER THAN YOU. AND THEN I EXPECT YOU TO DO WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST, WHICH IS CONVENE A COMMITTEE AND THEN WE HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE AND YOU HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. AND THAT'S THE WAY THE STRUCTURE WORKS IN EVERY OTHER POLICY THAT WE HAVE. SO I GUESS I'M YOU KNOW, AS I FIRST STARTED APPROACHING THIS, I WAS STRUGGLING WITH THIS, WITH THIS ARGUMENT AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THE BOOK BANNING ARGUMENT DOESN'T EVEN REALLY COME INTO PLAY BECAUSE IT ONLY COMES INTO PLAY IF YOU START. I MEAN, REGARDLESS, YOU ARE THE FINAL ARBITER OF EDUCATION SUITABILITY OR WE ARE AND EVEN A COMMITTEE THAT MAKES A DETERMINATION. I MEAN, I MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT A COMMITTEE THAT MIGHT MAKE A DETERMINATION TO START PULLING BOOKS. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I THINK NO MATTER WHAT, THERE ARE THOSE CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT I THINK ARE HEALTHY IN ANY SYSTEM, SO I GUESS THOSE ARE MY THOSE ARE MY FIRST THOUGHTS. I AGREE THAT IF WE HAVE A CHALLENGED BOOK THAT IT SHOULD GO ON RESTRICTED ACCESS, AND THEN IF IT'S CLEARED, THEN IT CAN COME OFF OF RESTRICTED ACCESS. TO ME. THAT'S JUST A I MEAN, WE OPT IN AND OUT OF HEALTH, AND HEALTH IS SCIENTIFIC AND YOU KNOW, SO I HAD TWO KIDS THAT HAD THAT I HAD NO PROBLEM WITH. AND I HAD ONE DAUGHTER THAT, YOU KNOW, I HAD TO THINK ABOUT THAT, WHETHER OR NOT SHE COULD BE IN HEALTH AND I HAD TO BE VERY INVOLVED IN THAT. AND SO WITH THAT CAP, YOU KNOW, PARENT CAP ON, I THINK WE ON THE SIDE OF PROTECTING OUR STUDENTS. IT GOES ON RESTRICTED ACCESS. AND THEN IF IT'S CLEARED, THEN IT COMES OFF OF RESTRICTED ACCESS, I THINK THAT'S THE SAFE THING TO DO OR THE PRUDENT THING TO DO. AND THEN WE LET IT GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. I WOULD, I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT, MISS HANNAH, YOU TALKED ABOUT PROTECTING STAFF AND I, I FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THAT, TOO, ALTHOUGH I VIEWED IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE I REALLY FELT LIKE STAFF ON THE COMMITTEE WERE POTENTIALLY PUT IN MORE HARM'S WAY. I MEAN, WE HIRE DOCTOR SMITH TO BE THE PERSON THE, THE, THE BUCK STOPS WITH HIM. I THINK YOU SAID THAT, BUT THE BUCK DOESN'T STOP WITH COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS OR STAFF MEMBERS ALSO. AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE, WE'VE READ ABOUT INSTANCES WHERE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THROUGH FOIA REQUESTS, THEIR NAMES AND INFORMATION GETS OUT THERE, AND THEN THEY BECOME TARGETS. AND SO I BUT THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT. I MEAN, THAT HAPPENS . IT CAN HAPPEN IN ANY SETTING AT ANY TIME. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WORRYING ABOUT STAFF, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S EVERYBODY'S JOB TO DO THEIR JOB. AND CERTAINLY DOCTOR SMITH, THE BUCK STOPS WITH HIM. SO I FEEL LIKE IN EVERY INSTANCE THAT'S THE CASE. I THINK, I THINK THE ALLOWANCE OF THE COMMITTEE DEFINITELY EASES, ANY BURDEN THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT IT, AND OF COURSE, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, THE APPEAL PROCESS EASES THAT BURDEN. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM CONSIDERING OTHER LANGUAGE CHARGE, YOU KNOW, I IF THERE'S OTHER LANGUAGE THAT THAT COULD BE PRESENTED THAT GIVES US AN EITHER OR. YES. WRITE THAT DOWN. JONATHAN OR THAT GIVES US, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING ELSE TO CONSIDER. CERTAINLY OPEN TO THAT. JUST AS AN INITIAL THOUGHT, IT JUST DOESN'T. I GUESS I'M JUST NOT OFFENDED BY DELEGATE THE AUTHORITY TO THE PERSON THAT WE HIRED TO, YOU KNOW, TO DELEGATE LOTS OF AUTHORITY TO, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT, AND I HAD READ THE STUFF THAT THAT YOU GAVE US, ANDY, AND[01:55:12]
, AND, AND SAW THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND MY THOUGHT ABOUT THAT WAS, WELL, WE ALREADY HAD A SITUATION WHERE WE WROTE IN POLICY, CONVENING THE COMMITTEE, AND WE FELT LIKE, IT WAS TOO LIMITING OR THAT IT PUT SOME CONSTRAINTS ON, ON BEING ABLE TO HAVE BOOKS REMOVED THAT POTENTIALLY WE VIOLATED LAW OR ROSE TO THE LEVEL OF, OF NOT HAVING, YOU KNOW, EDUCATIONAL VALUE OR SUITABILITY. SO I THINK THERE ARE ALWAYS, WHEN THESE THINGS GO OUT, YOU PEOPLE CAN VOTE ON THEM. AND, I MEAN, SO I HELPED WRITE THE CAMERAS IN, IN SPECIAL ED CLASSROOMS, BILL, SEVERAL YEARS AGO. AND AND, IN FACT, I WROTE A LOT OF THAT LANGUAGE AND THE VERY NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WE HAD TO GO BACK AND REWRITE IT BECAUSE WE HAD LOTS OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. AND I WORKED PRETTY HEAVILY ON THAT. AND IT GOT YOU KNOW, ALMOST UNANIMOUS SUPPORT, IF NOT UNANIMOUS SUPPORT. SO, SO WHILE I THINK, IT'S DEFINITELY GOOD AND GOOD GUIDANCE AND WE SHOULD DEFINITELY, RELY UPON IT, I ALSO THINK THAT IF WE'VE ALREADY EXPERIENCED A SITUATION IN WHICH THERE MAY BE SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF THAT, THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK FOR A WAY TO DO IT BETTER, AND SO OR DIFFERENTLY OR, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PUT THAT, I ALSO THINK SOMEBODY SAID SOMETHING ABOUT DOCTOR SMITH LEADING THE COMMITTEE, AND I DON'T I DON'T THINK AND IF WE NEED TO PUT ANY LIMITATIONS ON ANY OF THAT YEAR, I CERTAINLY DON'T READ THIS AS LEADING A COMMITTEE. I READ IT AS DELEGATING YOUR AUTHORITY, AS CONVENING A COMMITTEE, WHICH PERSONALLY, I THINK IS THE BEST THING TO DO. AND ALMOST I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY, ALMOST EVERY CASE, I THINK THE FACT THAT IT'S AT YOUR DIRECTION MAKES MORE SENSE HIERARCHICALLY. AS OPPOSED TO COMING FROM THE TRUSTEES. AND THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST MY GENERAL THOUGHT. I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO OTHER SUGGESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY.AND YOU KNOW, I WAS THINKING TO SONIA WHEN YOU WERE READING YOUR LIST, I WAS THINKING, THERE'S THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD BOOKS ON THAT LIST AND BOOKS THAT MY KIDS WOULD ALSO HAVE ALSO READ, AND THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED, AND OUR HOME, AND I, I'VE SAID THIS TO A LOT OF YOU GUYS, AND A LOT OF YOU GUYS EVEN, THAT ARE SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE. I'M A LOOK, PARENTS ARE THE FIRST EDUCATORS.
PARENTS ARE THE FIRST EDUCATORS, AND THEY ENTRUST US WITH THEIR CHILDREN AND I, I THINK OUR OPT IN OPT OUT ON CERTAIN THINGS IS THE RIGHT WAY TO GO SO THAT PARENTS CAN DECIDE AT THE END OF THE DAY. AND WHILE YES, THERE ARE LOTS OF FAMILIES WHO DON'T HAVE, MAYBE THE MONEY TO GO BUY SOME OF THESE BOOKS, THERE ARE ALSO LOTS OF FAMILIES WHO DON'T HAVE PARENTS WHO WILL ENGAGE WITH THEIR CHILDREN WHILE THEY READ THESE BOOKS, LIKE MISS JONES WAS TALKING ABOUT. SO I JUST THINK THERE HAS TO BE A BALANCE, AND I THINK THAT'S WHY WE TALK ABOUT EDUCATIONAL SUITABILITY, BECAUSE BECAUSE THERE HAS TO BE A BALANCE. BUT FRANKLY, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THAT'S REALLY NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHETHER WE THINK A BOOK SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BE IN THE LIBRARY. I THINK IT'S WHAT PROCESS ARE WE GOING TO PUT IN PLACE, IF THERE ARE FOR RECONSIDERATION, IF THERE ARE PARENTS, GUARDIANS, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, CONSTITUENTS WHO HAVE AN ISSUE AND WANT TO RAISE A CONCERN TO ME, THAT'S OUR JOB.
WHAT WE THINK SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T BE THERE. IT'S ARE WE SUPPORT ING A PROCESS THAT IS REASONABLE, THAT'S FAIR, THAT'S CONSISTENT, AND THAT, CERTAINLY ALLOWS FOR PROTECTING CHILDREN.
CERTAINLY, BUT I REALLY THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON. AND THAT'S WHY I SAID THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANY ONE BOOK. IT'S REALLY NOT ABOUT THE BOOKS AT ALL. IT'S ABOUT THE
[02:00:03]
PROCESS. AND I YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT I FOCUSED ON WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS. I ALSO DON'T THINK WE SHOULD GO THROUGH THE GRIEVANCE PROCESS. I THINK THAT THAT GETS US INTO A WHOLE WORLD OF PROBLEMS. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE WE SHOULD DETERMINE WHAT THE RECONSIDERATION PROCESS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. THERE SHOULD BE AN APPEAL PROCESS, WHETHER THAT'S 1 OR 2 TIERS, WHETHER IT, YOU KNOW, I GUESS WHETHER IT GOES, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IT COMES TO THE TRUSTEES WOULD BE MY INITIAL THOUGHT. AND THEN AND THEN THAT'S THE PROCESS. I THINK GOING THROUGH GRIEVANCE GETS US INTO OTHER OTHER EXECUTIVE TEAM MEMBERS HAVING TO READ THE BOOK WHO WEREN'T ON THE COMMITTEE AND DIDN'T READ THE BOOK. AND THEN THEY HAVE TO DECIDE. AND I JUST THINK THAT THAT CAN CAUSE US ALL KINDS OF PROBLEMS. AND THEN I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT REGARDLESS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT THIS IS THIS PROCESS IS FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR CONSTITUENTS AND PARENTS AND GUARDIANS IS TO BE ABLE TO RAISE CONCERNS. THIS IS NOT IT. AND UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD A TRUSTEE BE ABLE TO COME TO DOCTOR TO DOCTOR SMITH AND SAY, THIS BOOK NEEDS TO BE REMOVED, GO REMOVE IT, I THINK THE PROCESS IS IMPORTANT, AND I THINK ANYBODY SHOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT, INCLUDING TRUSTEES, I, I THINK THERE'S A PURPOSE FOR HAVING THAT PROCESS. YOU KNOW, BACK BACK WHEN I SERVED ON THE BOARD A FEW YEARS AGO, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD.WE DID RAISE CONCERNS ABOUT BOOKS. WE BROUGHT THEM TO THE DOCTOR. DUPREE, WHO WAS THE SUPERINTENDENT AT THE TIME. AND THEN HE DID WHATEVER HE DID. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT HE DID. I MEAN, HE, YOU KNOW, HE MAY HAVE DELEGATED IT TO SOMEBODY WHO WHO WOULD BE SITTING AROUND THIS TABLE, OR HE MAY HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, WE JUST RAISED THE CONCERN. AND THEN HE WENT AND DID WHAT HE DID. SO I GUESS THAT MAYBE THAT'S ANOTHER REASON THAT I'M JUST NOT THAT CONCERNED ABOUT DELEGATING THE AUTHORITY TO THE PERSON WHO SHOULD HAVE THAT AUTHORITY, BUT IT WAS A LOT EASIER, AND WE WEREN'T GRAPPLING WITH THE LAWS THAT ARE OUT THERE NOW AND THAT KIND OF THING. SO. SO ANYWAY, I KNOW THAT'S A LOT OF MAYBE A LITTLE BIT RAMBLING, BUT I TEND, YOU KNOW, THE LAW. I ALWAYS START WITH THE LAW AND THE RULES AND THE REGULATIONS AND THINGS ARE USUALLY PRETTY. YOU CAN CONNECT A TO B AND B TO C AND C TO D. FOR ME, SO, SO IT'S ALL PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD TO ME. AND I ALSO THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON THE ON THE PRACTICALITY AND THE PRACTICALITY. PRACTICALLY SPEAKING DOCTOR SMITH, THERE'S ONLY SO MANY HOURS IN THE DAY THERE ARE SO MANY, ONLY SO MANY THINGS YOU CAN DO. AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US EXPECT YOU TO, TO, YOU KNOW, READ THESE BOOKS OR MAKE, YOU KNOW, MAKE A DETERMINATION UNLESS WE HAVE A CLEAR VIOLATION OF LAW, SOMETHING THAT THAT IS, YOU KNOW, A CLEAR VIOLATION OF LAW. AND I HAVEN'T EVEN THOUGHT THROUGH WHAT THAT MIGHT BE. AS MR. BRUSH SAID, I HAVEN'T EVEN THOUGHT THROUGH THAT. SO AS WE GET READY TO WRAP UP, BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY OVER OUR TIME, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN AS THE SUPERINTENDENT, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING A LOT ABOUT YOU. LIKE YOU'RE NOT SITTING HERE RIGHT NEXT TO US. AND MY KIDS HATE WHEN I DO THAT. AND SO I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF JUST WEIGH IN. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT, I APPRECIATE THAT. FIRST, LET ME SAY, I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK FROM OUR TRUSTEES TONIGHT. IT'S CLEAR THAT YOU'VE, GIVEN THIS A LOT OF THOUGHT, A LOT OF DEEP STUDY, AND, REALLY DOING YOUR DUE DILIGENCE TO TACKLE A VERY COMPLEX SITUATION, THAT WE'RE ALL DEALING WITH. THE SECOND THING I WOULD SAY IS, AS WE GO THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS, ASSESS, AND ULTIMATELY A DECISION IS MADE, I WANT TO ASSURE THE BOARD THAT OUR ADMINISTRATION, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND PUT A GOOD FAITH EFFORT AND EXECUTING THE POLICY WITH FIDELITY, AS YOU EXPECT IT TO BE , ADHERED TO, AND THEN THE LAST, COMMENT THAT I HAVE ABOUT, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, JUST THE IMPORTANCE OF ALWAYS HAVING, MORE THAN ONE VOICE AT THE TABLE WHEN YOU'RE MAKING SUCH, SUCH WEIGHTY DECISIONS. AND SO I THINK THERE IS VALUE AND THE
[02:05:03]
PORTION OF THE POLICY THAT SPEAKS TO THE SUPERINTENDENT'S DISCRETION, TO CONVENE A COMMITTEE. YOU KNOW, THE WAY I PROCESS THIS AT THIS STAGE IN THE PROCESS, DURING, YOU KNOW, AS WE ARE HAVING THE WORKSHOP, IS THAT IN MOST IF NOT ALL SCENARIOS, I SEE MYSELF EXERCISING THAT AUTHORITY TO CONVENE A COMMITTEE JUST SO THAT I CAN ENSURE THAT I HAVE THE PROPER FEEDBACK FROM ALL THE EXPERTS, AND THAT I AM TRANSPARENT IN TERMS OF THE FINAL DECISION FOR ALL THOSE WHO WOULD BE SO FOCUSED ON ON THE DECISION PROCESS. SO THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. THANK YOU FOR THE FEEDBACK. THANK YOU FOR THE GUIDANCE. I THINK WE'RE ON OUR WAY. I THINK THIS WAS A NECESSARY PART OF THE PROCESS. YOU HAVE TO KIND OF TALK THESE THINGS THROUGH. YOU HAVE TO PUT ALL THE IDEAS ON THE TABLE. AND I APPLAUD YOUR DECORUM AND HOW YOU MANAGE THAT. IT DEFINITELY GIVES A LOT OF CLARITY AND CONFIDENCE FOR US AS, ADMINISTRATIVE TEAM IN TERMS OF IMPLEMENTATION. SO I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, DOCTOR SMITH, AND BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT, I ALSO WANT TO, I WANT TO THANK THE TRUSTEES BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS WAS, HEALTHY CONVERSATION. AND I APPRECIATE THE WAY IN WHICH WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE IT, WHETHER WE AGREE OR DISAGREE. AND I THINK THAT IT, MAYBE WE'VE ALL GIVEN EACH OTHER A LOT TO THINK ABOUT AS WE AS IT GOES BACK TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE, AND THEN WE'LL PROCESS IT AND, AND BRING IT BACK FOR A VOTE. SO OKAY, LAST[6. Public Comment (Part 2 of 2).]
UP IS PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THAT'S YOU, TAMMY. YOU'RE ON AS YOU KNOW YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES AND YOU'LL BE GIVEN A 32ND WARNING. OKAY THANK YOU ALL. I WILL TRY TO BE FAST. I KNOW IT'S THE END OF THE NIGHT, AND I WILL BE RAMBLING A LITTLE BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION. SO I'M KIND OF GOING TO BE JUMPING FROM POINT TO POINT. I WANT TO START BY SAYING THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU. FIRST OF ALL, I AGREE WITH THE BOARD PRESIDENT. I THINK THIS WAS A GOOD, ROBUST, HEALTHY DISCUSSION. I WISH IT WAS LONGER BECAUSE I DO FEEL LIKE THERE'S STILL STUFF THAT NEEDS TO BE COVERED, BUT I'M HOPING THAT THE POLICY COMMITTEE TOOK IT ALL TO HEART, HAVING SAID ALL THAT, I'M JUST GOING TO ADDRESS A FEW THINGS THAT WERE SAID THAT I PERSONALLY TOOK ISSUE WITH. ONE THING THAT WAS SAID BY, TRUSTEE HAMILTON WAS THAT, WE SEE CURRENTLY, ADMINISTRATION CAN'T REMOVE A BOOK WITHOUT A FORMAL CHALLENGE, AND THAT GOES DIRECTLY AGAINST WHAT WE JUST LEARNED THAT 70 GRAPHIC NOVELS WERE REMOVED WITHOUT FORMAL CHALLENGES. SO THERE IS A SYSTEM AT PLAY THAT ALLOWS LIBRARIANS TO WEED THEIR COLLECTIONS AND ADMINISTRATORS TO HELP IN THAT PROCESS, JUST TO BE CLEAR. SO THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN INTERPRETATION SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE THAT AN ADMINISTRATOR CAN'T REMOVE A BOOK. BUT CLEARLY THAT'S NOT THE CASE, BECAUSE BOOKS HAVE BEEN REMOVED. I KNOW THAT, TRUSTEE SHOWIF SPOKE ABOUT A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE BEING A DISSERVICE, BUT IT IS RECOMMENDED BY HOUSE BILL 900 AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY TASBIH.SO IT SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY MUST INCLUDE IN OUR POLICY. AND THEN I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND JUMP AHEAD TO SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT THAT DOCTOR SMITH SAID, I AM WELL, FIRST I WANT TO SAY THAT I AM VERY PLEASED AT THE WAY, THE BOARD PRESIDENT EXPLAINED THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO THE SUPERINTENDENT, BECAUSE I DO FEEL THAT THAT WAS NOT COMMUNICATED CLEARLY IN THE PAST. AND I THINK WE ALL AGREE THAT DOCTOR SMITH IS SUPER RESPONSIBLE, RESPECTFUL, COLLABORATIVE. ALL THE WORDS YOU WANT TO USE. WE LOVE DOCTOR SMITH. HAPPY THAT YOU'RE HERE, DOCTOR SMITH, AND I LOVE THAT DOCTOR SMITH SAID THAT IF IN FACT, THE POLICY REMAINS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY THAT DOCTOR SMITH WOULD BE ABLE TO EXERCISE DISCRETION IN CONVENING A COMMITTEE THAT HE PLANS TO USE THAT DISCRETION ALMOST EVERY TIME, IF NOT EVERY TIME. AND THAT'S FANTASTIC. BUT AS SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN IN THIS DISTRICT FOR SO MANY YEARS, AND I STILL HAVE SO MANY YEARS TO GO, I'VE SEEN POLICIES. I'VE SEEN POLICY INTERPRETED POORLY. SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE POLICY WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT DOESN'T GET TO EXERCISE DISCRETION, THAT UNLESS A BOOK MEETS THE ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL CITY WHERE IT MUST BE PULLED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT, NO QUESTIONS ASKED, WHICH, BY THE WAY, REQUIRES THE BOOK TO BE READ IN ITS ENTIRETY BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE EVALUATED AS A WHOLE IN ORDER TO MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS. I WOULD LIKE THE POLICY TO BE WRITTEN SUCH THAT
[02:10:03]
THE SUPERINTENDENT MUST CONVENE A RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. OKAY MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? I* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.