SCHOOL VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT

SCHOOL VIOLENCE PROTECTION ACT

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA

SESSION 2009

SESSION LAW 2009-212

SENATE BILL 526*S526-v-5*
Whereas, the General Assembly of North Carolina finds that a safe and civilenvironment in school is necessary in order for students to learn and achieve high academic standards; andWhereas, bullying and harassment, like other disruptive or violent behaviors, isconduct that disrupts both a student's ability to learn and a school's ability to educate its students in a safe environment; andWhereas, bullying and harassing behaviors create a climate that fosters violence in our schools; andWhereas, it is essential to enact a law that seeks to protect the health and welfare of North Carolina students and improve the learning environment for North Carolina students; andWhereas, to do so, State and national data and anecdotal evidence have established the need to identify the most vulnerable targets and potential victims of bullying and harassment; andWhereas, the sole purpose of this law is to protect all children from bullying and harassment, and no other legislative purpose is intended nor should any other intent be construed from passage of this law;

Now, therefore,The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:SECTION 1. Subchapter VI of Chapter 115C of the General Statutes is amendedby adding a new Article to read:Page 2 Session Law 2009-212 SL2009-0212"Article 29B.

"School Violence Prevention."§ 115C-407.5. Bullying and harassing behavior.

(a) As used in this Article, "bullying or harassing behavior" is any pattern of gestures or written, electronic, or verbal communications, or any physical act or any threatening communication, that takes place on school property, at any school-sponsored function, or on a school bus, and that:

(1) Places a student or school employee in actual and reasonable fear of harm to his or her person or damage to his or her property; or

(2) Creates or is certain to create a hostile environment by substantially interfering with or impairing a student's educational performance, opportunities, or benefits. For purposes of this section, "hostile environment"means that the victim subjectively views the conduct as bullying or harassing behavior and the conduct is objectively severe or pervasive enough that a reasonable person would agree that it is bullying or harassing behavior.

Bullying or harassing behavior includes, but is not limited to, acts reasonably perceived as being motivated by any actual or perceived differentiating characteristic, such as race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, socioeconomic status, academic status, gender identity, physical appearance, sexual orientation, or mental, physical, developmental, or sensory disability, or by association with a person who has or is perceived to have one or more of these characteristics.

(b) No student or school employee shall be subjected to bullying or harassing behavior by school employees or students.

(c) No person shall engage in any act of reprisal or retaliation against a victim, witness, or a person with reliable information about an act of bullying or harassing behavior.

(d) A school employee who has witnessed or has reliable information that a student or school employee has been subject to any act of bullying or harassing behavior shall report the incident to the appropriate school official.

(e) A student or volunteer who has witnessed or has reliable information that a student or school employee has been subject to any act of bullying or harassing behavior should report the incident to the appropriate school official.

"§ 115C-407.6. Policy against bullying or harassing behavior.

(a) Before December 31, 2009, each local school administrative unit shall adopt a policy prohibiting bullying or harassing behavior.

(b) The policy shall contain, at a minimum, the following components:

(1) A statement prohibiting bullying or harassing behavior.

(2) A definition of bullying or harassing behavior no less inclusive than that set forth in this Article.

(3) A description of the type of behavior expected for each student and school employee.

(4) Consequences and appropriate remedial action for a person who commits an act of bullying or harassment.

(5) A procedure for reporting an act of bullying or harassment, including a provision that permits a person to report such an act anonymously. This shall not be construed to permit formal disciplinary action solely on the basis of an anonymous report.

(6) A procedure for prompt investigation of reports of serious violations and complaints of any act of bullying or harassment, identifying either the principal or the principal's designee as the person responsible for the investigation.

(7) A statement that prohibits reprisal or retaliation against any person who reports an act of bullying or harassment, and the consequence and appropriate remedial action for a person who engages in reprisal or retaliation.

(8) A statement of how the policy is to be disseminated and publicized, including notice that the policy applies to participation in school-sponsored functions.

SL2009-0212 Session Law 2009-212

Page 3

(c) Nothing in this Article shall prohibit a local school administrative unit fromadopting a policy that includes components beyond the minimum components provided in this section or that is more inclusive than the requirements of this Article.

(d) Notice of the local policy shall appear in any school unit publication that sets forth the comprehensive rules, procedures, and standards of conduct for schools within the schoolunit and in any student and school employee handbook.

(e) Information regarding the local policy against bullying or harassing behavior shall be incorporated into a school's employee training program.

(f) To the extent funds are appropriated for these purposes, a local school administrative unit shall, by March 1, 2010, provide training on the local policy to school employees and volunteers who have significant contact with students.

"§ 115C-407.7. Prevention of school violence.

Schools shall develop and implement methods and strategies for promoting school environments that are free of bullying or harassing behavior.

"§ 115C-407.8. Construction of this Article.

(a) This Article shall not be construed to permit school officials to punish student expression or speech based on an undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance or out of a desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.

(b) This Article shall not be interpreted to prevent a victim of bullying or harassing behavior from seeking redress under any other available law, either civil or criminal.

(c) Nothing in this Article shall be construed to require an exhaustion of the administrative complaint process before civil or criminal law remedies may be pursued regarding bullying or harassing behavior.

(d) The provisions of this Article are severable, and if any provision of this Article is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions of this Article which can be given effect without the invalid provision.

(e) The provisions of this Article shall be liberally construed to give effect to its purposes.

(f) Nothing in this act shall be construed to create any classification, protected class, suspect category, or preference beyond those existing in present statute or case law."

SECTION 2. This act is effective when it becomes law and applies, unless otherwise provided in G.S. 115C-407.6, as enacted by Section 1 of this act, beginning with the 2009-2010 school year.
In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 23rd day of June,2009.

s/ Walter H. DaltonPresident of the Senate

s/ Joe HackneySpeaker of the House of Representatives

s/ Beverly E. PerdueGovernor

Approved 5:27 p.m. this 30th day of June, 2009

Letter to County Commission

May 15, 2009



Ms. Ruth Ann Suttle
Chair, Burke County Commissioners
PO Box 219Morganton, NC 28680-0219

Via Facsimile to Ms. Vicki Craigo: 828-438-2782


RE: Burke County Board of Education Funding


Dear Madame Chair:

In this time of economic uncertainty and shortage of funds, I understand that sacrifices must be made by everyone. The company I work for, Environmental Inks and Coatings Corporation (“EIC”) has done its best to travel through these lean times by sharing sacrifice among all employees. Because it is important to the leadership of our company to preserve jobs here in Morganton, all of the employees at our local plant took a 5 to 10% pay cut for the second quarter – administration took 10% cuts, and some executives took pay cuts up to 50%. This way EIC was able to avoid extensive layoffs here in Morganton. Fortunately, our business is picking up and the need for continued sacrifice is lessening – we plan to restore everyone’s pay to prior levels on June 1.

I mention the above so as to contrast the efforts of the leadership at my company to the leadership of the Board of Education. Below is an email sent out to the schools in the Burke County System from the Central Office:

From: Thompson, JulieSent: Thu 5/14/2009 12:43 PMTo: All PrincipalsCc: Bagley, Winston B; Lawson, Keith; Burleson, DavidSubject: Substitute Teachers/Aesop
Good Afternoon … Mr. Lawson and Mr. Bagley have instructed me to remove all substitute teacher assignments from Aesop as absences are to be filled internally by the school effective 5/18/09. If your school does not use Aesop, it will be your responsibility to contact any subs you have scheduled for future absences and cancel with them. If you do not cancel with the sub and they show up, your school will be required to pay for the substitute. Substitutes for teachers on Leave of Absence will not be affected. If you have an emergency situation and cannot fill the absence internally, please contact Winston Bagley at 828-439-4301 or Julie Thompson at 828-439-4322 for approval to get a substitute. Teachers will still be required to enter their absences on Aesop; however Aesop will not post absences or call to find substitutes. This will allow us to continue to track absences through the end of the year. We apologize in advance for the inconvenience; however with the current budget issues we must do all that we can to reduce excess spending in any way possible.
Thank You ~
Julie Thompson
Burke County Public Schools
Pre-Employment Specialist
Substitute Administrator

After discussing the above with a teacher, it appears that in the inevitable circumstance that a substitute is needed, the class with the absent teacher will have to be “babysat” by another member of the school staff. Although that may not sound horrendous, depending on the situation that may mean that one teacher has to manage two classes together – thereby “killing two birds with one stone” as Aesop might say. (Except not in a good way – two classes will suffer instead of just one.)

So, given the fact that the Board leadership continues to spend funds on legal matters of their own creation, has refused to consider the reduction of their own monthly stipend and has flatly rejected the notion of dropping membership of the NCSBA, please know that those of us who understand “shared sacrifice” are relying on our County Commissioners to redirect the self-serving financial decisions of the Board if possible.

In this time when our school personnel must do “all that we can to reduce excess spending in any way possible,” it seems to me that the Board majority would be wise and considerate enough to do the same.

Sincerely,


Catherine Thomas
1660 Plantation Court
Morganton, NC 28655

Letter to Governor and State Superintendents

Governor Bev Perdue


Dear Madam Governor:

I am sure the situation regarding the Burke County Board of Education has come to your attention. I have written about the Board’s exploits on my blog, www.barkburke.com for some time now.

I understand that you may be hearing from many Burke citizens regarding the handling of the superintendant’s (Mr. David Burleson’s) contract – as a lawyer, I think that the termination of the contract prematurely was a terrible decision fraught will all kinds of liability. I think that the majority school of the school board has been less than cordial to Mr. Burleson for years, and their treatment of him has been an embarrassment. If you have read anything about Mr. Burleson, you would find that he is an exceptionally nice, pleasant, capable person, and that there would be no reason to treat him with so much derision., let alone terminate his contract prematurely.

The superintendent issue is only one of many problems the school board has caused. To wit:

I have been contacted by several teachers who feel that they have “targets” on their backs. Ms. Norman has contacted school offices to see which teachers took days off on days that she held afternoon school board meetings regarding Mr. Burleson.

Mr. Buff has gone so far as to call principals and ask them who they voted for in the last school board election – not an actionable crime, but inappropriate nonetheless.

Ms. Norman spends hours at the central office going through personnel files.

Ms. Norman continually holds meetings in venues that do not accommodate the attending public, and people are made to wait outside of the building in which she holds the meetings. Ms. Norman was quoted in the local newspaper as saying “Mr. Burleson only has 200 supporters” and then insisted on having the meetings in a venue that accommodates 85 – demonstrating that she willfully holds meetings in small venues to limit public participation.

Ms. Norman stifles public comment. She has ruled that only items on the school board agenda can be discussed during a board meeting – so if a member of the public wants to talk about any other aspect of the school –needed repairs, praising teachers, commenting on curriculum – they are not allowed to speak.

Mr. Rob Hairfield has admitted sending emails containing racist jokes to friends and acquaintances. This is highly inappropriate and offensive to most of the citizens of Burke County.

Mr. Hairfield insists on being present at meetings in which the principal makes determinations regarding school budget, although these meetings should only include administrators and the principal.

Ms. Karen Sain votes according to her Christian Conservative constituency, and declares so in open meetings (you may hear her do so if you listen to the meeting recordings available on the school system website.)

In conclusion, we are very upset that we seem to have no recourse in this matter, and our legislators have told us there is nothing they will do. The SACS-CASI is a very serious issue, but several board members have commented that it does not concern them, and one even made the statement that the SACS-CASI issue has nothing to do with the board.

It is true that 3 members of the board come up for re-election in November. Although that is true, even if all three of these positions are filled by people who have a sense of their fiduciary duty to the schools and citizens of this county, the board majority that is running the system into the ground will still be in control.

Please help us.

Sincerely,

Catherine Thomas
1660 Plantation Ct.
Morganton, NC 28655
(828) 433-9207

PS - I am also including a recent letter to the board from the ACLU regarding the board's refusal to allow public comment.

Response to Jacumin and Blackwell's Canned Response

Dear Mr. Blackwell and Mr. Jacumin:

I received your bulk responses to my emails pleading for intervention into this rapidly deteriorating situation, and I am extremely disappointed that you don't have the political will to assist us. Please know that this will be an issue for you both when you run for office in the future.

Since you have claimed to have “friends” on both sides of the issue, and since it is clear to the majority of Burke Countians that your “friends” are causing the destruction of the county school system, wouldn’t it be “friendly” and responsible to persuade your “friends” on the board to resign?

As someone who supported the board majority in their elections, you must feel some personal responsibility for their actions – they are destroying the school system and appear to be self-destructing at the same time. Please be a “friend” to them and pressure them to step down.

You both can fill their seats with other republicans if you want, just make sure they have the interests of our children as their first priority. (I do not endorse any partisanship in this election, but I am not so naïve that I think you and the party haven’t had a hand in this situation by supporting the board majority.) As a registered Republican, I am ashamed that my local representatives act in this manner.

We will certainly be thinking of you both as our property values plummet and people leave the county to seek better educational options for their children.

Sincerely,

Catherine R. Thomas
1660 Plantation Court
Morganton, North Carolina 28655

Email to Jacumin and Blackwell

Jim.Jacumin@ncleg.net
Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.net


Dear Mssrs. Jacumin and Blackwell:

Although the school board membership is supposed to be non-partisan, it is rumored that you both have continued to support and guide school board members like Mr. Rob Hairfield and Mr. Tim Buff. I am disheartened that you would both continue to support someone who has been shown to have racist tendencies, and I am disheartened that you seem to be so out of touch with your constituency that you have not offered to help right this matter.

As you are aware, the Burke County School Board majority has been the focus of several scandals: Ms. Tracy Norman lived out of her district for a year and a half without notifying anyone, Ms. Norman changed the lines on a district map that had been voted on previously at then chairman Tim Buff's direction, Ms. Norman becoming chair person and then limiting both the opportunity for and the content of public comment at monthly meetings. Ms. Norman and Mr. Buff have allegedly threatened school employees as well. Just this week several schools reported that Ms. Norman contacted them to get lists of teachers who took the day off to go to Monday's school board meeting. Ms. Norman spends much of her free time in the central office reviewing personnel files for no other reason than to have information to intimidate school employees.

I do not think you understand how grave the situation is. I have written about several issues on my blog, http://www.barkburke.com/, and hope that you find the time to read my entries and the comments that follow. Several school employees have commented that they feel they have targets on their backs.

It has been my experience that corporate boards, non-profit boards and public body boards are charged with overseeing the administrators of the body they serve. The majority of the Burke county school board seemed to have taken over administration of the school system themselves. The most recent actions of the board in prematurely terminating Mr. Burleson's contract are just the tip of the iceberg.

Since the Burke County Public Schools system is the largest employer in the county, it seems to me that it would behoove you to take this matter seriously and try to find a way to assist us in removing these people from the offices they hold. Our teachers, principals and students are suffering. It is difficult to attract business to this area when such buffoonery and intentional destruction of the school system is allowed to occur.

I understand that Mr. Jacumin has a "blank bill" that could be used for such a local bill. I am told that these kinds of bills are passed by other legislators as a courtesy.

Please consider my request and the other requests that you will receive regarding this matter.

Respectfully,

I am,

Catherine Thomas

Attorney at Law
1660 Plantation Court
Morganton, North Carolina 28655



DRAFT:
AN ACT to provide a procedure to recall elected officials on the burke county board of elections

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:


"CHAPTER ___
"RECALL OF ELECTED OFFICIALS.
"Sec. 1. The Members of the Burke County Board of Education who were elected in the 2007 election may be removed from office in the manner provided for in this act.
"Sec. 2. Any registered voter of the County may file an affidavit with the Burke County Director of Elections containing the name of the elected official whose removal is sought and a general statement of the grounds alleged for removal. The Director of Elections shall provide the registered voter filing the affidavit with petition forms for demanding the removal of a County elected official. The petition forms shall:
(1) Be signed by the Director of Elections.
(2) Be dated on the date of issuance.
(3) Be addressed to the Burke County Board of Elections.
(4) Contain the name of the person to whom the form is issued.
(5) Contain the name of the official whose removal is sought.
(6) Contain a general statement of the grounds on which the removal is sought.
(7) Provide a place for signatures.
The Director of Elections shall promptly deliver a copy of the petition issued by the Director of Elections to the County Clerk, who shall enter the copy of the petition in a record book kept for that purpose. The record book shall be maintained at the Office of the Clerk.
"Sec. 3. To be effective, a recall petition must be returned to the Board of Elections within 30 days after the filing of the affidavit. To be sufficient, a recall petition must bear the signatures of at least twenty five percent (25%) of the registered voters of the County as shown by the registration records of the last preceding general municipal election.
"Sec. 4. The signatures to the petition need not all be appended to one paper. Each signer shall add his or her signature and the signer's place of residence, giving the residence address including County. One of the signers of each paper shall take an oath before an officer competent to administer oaths that each signature to the paper appended is the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be.
"Sec. 5. The Board of Elections shall investigate the sufficiency of any petition and certify the results of the investigation to the County Commission. The Board of Elections may employ persons as it deems necessary to undertake that investigation. The County Commission shall reimburse the Board of Elections for the reasonable cost of the investigation. The Board of Elections may adopt rules concerning the validation of signatures appearing on the recall petition.
"Sec. 6. The Board of Elections shall complete its investigation and issue its certification of the results of the investigation within 15 days after the filing of any petition. If, by the Board of Elections' certification, the petition is shown to be insufficient, it may be amended within 10 days from the date of the certificate. The Board shall, within 10 days after any amendment, complete an investigation of the amended petition. If the certification of the results of the investigation shows the amended petition to be insufficient, a copy of the petition shall be returned to the person filing the petition, without prejudice to the filing of a new petition.
"Sec. 7. Upon a determination that a sufficient recall petition has been submitted, the Board of Elections shall submit the petition to the County Clerk, who shall submit it to the Board of Education and shall notify the officer whose removal is sought. If the officer whose removal is sought does not resign within five days after receiving the notice, the Board of Elections shall order and fix a date for holding a recall election. Subject to the remaining provisions of this section, an election shall be held not less than 90 nor more than 120 days after the petition has been certified as being sufficient. If any other general or special election is scheduled within this period, the Board of Elections shall schedule the special election at the same time. If the provisions of general law prohibit the holding of a special election during this time period and no general or special election is otherwise scheduled during that period of time, then the Board of Elections shall schedule the special recall election for a date within 10 days after the last day of the period of time during which special elections are prohibited by general law.
"Sec. 8. The Board of Elections shall cause legal notice of the election to be published. That notice shall include the general statement of the grounds on which the recall is sought as alleged in the affidavit and shall make all arrangements for holding the election in accordance with general law. The recall election shall be conducted, returned, and the results declared as in other elections in Burke County. The County shall reimburse the reasonable costs of the recall election to the Board of Elections.
"Sec. 9. The question of recalling any number of officials may be submitted at the same election. But as to each such official, a separate petition shall be filed and there shall be an entirely separate ballot.
"Sec. 10. The ballots used in a recall election shall submit the following proposition:
"[ ] FOR [ ] AGAINST
The recall of (name and title of official)."
"Sec. 11. If less than a majority of the votes cast on the question of recalling an official are for recall, the official shall continue in office for the remainder of the unexpired term and, except as provided by Section 13 of this act, shall be subject to the recall as before. If a majority of such votes are for the recall of the official designated on the ballot, the official shall be deemed removed from office.
"Sec. 12. If an official concerning whom a sufficient recall petition is submitted to the County Commission resigns before the recall election or is removed from office as a result of the recall election, the vacancy shall be filled in the manner provided by law for filling vacancies in that office. An official removed from office by the voters as a result of a recall election shall not be appointed to fill the vacancy caused by that official's own removal or resignation.
"Sec. 13. No recall petition shall be filed against an officer who has been subjected to a recall election, and not removed thereby, until at least six months after that recall election. No recall petition shall be filed against an officer during the first three months of the term of that office.
"Sec. 14. If the recalls of a majority of the members of the Burke County Board of Education are effected at a single recall election, the successors of the officers recalled shall be elected by the registered voters of the County at a special County election, and the successors shall serve for the remainder of the terms of the officers recalled. The members of the Board of Education who have not been recalled shall call that special election, which shall be conducted by the Burke County Board of Elections under the laws then governing elections in the State. If the recall of all the members of the Burke County Board of Education is effected at a single election, they shall continue in office for the purpose, and only for the purpose, of calling a special municipal election for the election of their successors as provided in this section. That election shall also be conducted by the Burke County Board of Elections under the laws then governing elections in the State."
SECTION 2. This act is effective when it becomes law.
In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the ____day of _________, 2009.


President Pro Tempore of the Senate

Speaker of the House of Representatives

1/6/2009 School Board Comments Clarified

School Board Comments Clarified

I was one of the speakers at the December 15 Board Meeting at Draughn High School. I had much to say and only five minutes to speak, so I wanted to clarify my comments from that meeting for anyone who may be interested, and to comment on the Board Meeting held January 5th.

At the December 15 meeting I asked the Board to post the draft policies and any ancillary documents relating to the Board meetings on the School Board website. The following is an excerpt from my comments: “My first concern is the public’s access to board minutes, non-confidential attachments to board minutes and access to current board policy and procedure. The December 3, 2007 Minutes reflect that the Superintendant indicated that the current board minutes with attachments were available online. On March 3, 2008 the Superintendant indicated that the current board policy manual was online. I am sure you are all aware that the Board Minutes have not been posted online since June, 2008. Of the available minutes online, there are seldom ancillary documents posted with the minutes. Additionally, procedures followed by the Board that should be part of the current policy manual are not included online either.”

I also asked the Board to clarify its policies – I specifically said “My second concern is the clarity of posted board policies and procedures. Having reviewed policy manuals of other districts, I know that it is possible to adopt clear and specific policies that give the public notice of what is expected of all of the parties that have business with the school board.”

My third point was concern regarding the language in the draft media policies. At this meeting I commented on draft versions of the policies that had been published in The News Herald, and urged the Board to enlist the help of the NCHSA (North Carolina High School Association) in customizing the policy, because the draft that I had access to did not appear to have any legal review. I knew that the NCHSA had reviewed policies in the past for Burke, and I contacted NCHSA to see if they were helping draft this policy (they were not). Another speaker at the meeting (who is also a lawyer) must have been referring to the same policy I read when he called the draft policies “ludicrous.”

My concern at the time was that the Board had not submitted the policy to their attorney, and I thought that perhaps they were trying to save money by drafting the policy without legal guidance. I specifically said: “The NCBSA has developed sophisticated and valuable expertise in assisting local school districts in keeping their policies current and in compliance with legal mandates. The NCBSA is a resource that the board has relied on in the past as a source of policies, and it seems prudent that they are consulted regarding policies of such significance to our community.”



At the time I spoke I was not aware that the draft that I was publicly commenting on had already been scrapped and a new draft had been submitted to the Board. The newer draft (draft #5) had obviously been reviewed by Board Attorney Jonathan Jones and had come a long way in addressing my concerns. Although embarrassed that I did not have the current policy (not for lack of trying), I was pleased that some legal guidance had been implemented in the newer version.

At the January 5th Board meeting , Mr. Richard Avery, another local attorney, spoke generally about his concerns regarding the language in the draft policies (Draft #5), that policies were already in place to deal with the issues, and that all that was needed to address parental concerns was an “opt out” provision added to the current policy. Mr. Avery’s comment period was abruptly cut off by Ms. Norman before he finished, because he had reached the five minute mark. His was the only public comment.

In spite of Ms. Norman’s obvious intent to close the matter regarding Mr. Avery’s comments and concerns, I was pleased that the Board Attorney later addressed the Board regarding the need to hear the public’s opinions (including Mr. Avery’s legal concerns) about the language in the proposed policies.

I was also pleased to hear that Ms. Norman planned to update the Board Policy Manual. She has charged Mr. Rick Sherrill with that task. For what it is worth, I am personally very impressed with Caldwell county’s online policy manual and found it very professional and progressive (who knew?), and hope that Mr. Sherrill will consult that Policy Manual as one of his resources for the Burke Manual.

I was extremely impressed with Mr. Tony Cox, the new Assistant Superintendant in charge of Finance and Auxiliary Services. He seemed incredibly professional, approachable and capable. As a parent I appreciated that he referred to his department as the “Caregivers” since his department is responsible for the care and safety of the children while they are in school.

Although this meeting was much more “tame” than previous meetings, I urge the citizens of Burke County to continue to attend the Board Meetings. It is your right to address the Board with your concerns, and to hold the Board members accountable for their comments and decisions.

Catherine Thomas
Morganton, NC 28655

Comments to the School Board 12/15 (5 minutes!)

My name is Catherine Thomas and I would like to comment on three things tonight: 1- public access to school board policies, procedures and minutes online, 2- clarity of board policies and 3- the drafting of board policies.

My first concern is the public’s access to board minutes, non-confidential attachments to board minutes and access to current board policy and procedure. The December 3, 2007 minutes reflect that the Superintendant indicated that the current board minutes with attachments were available online. On March 3, 2008 the Superintendant indicated that the current board policy manual was online. I am sure you are all aware that the board minutes have not been posted online since June, 2008. Of the available minutes online, there are seldom ancillary documents posted with the minutes. Additionally, procedures followed by the board that should be part of the current policy manual are not included online either.

My second concern is the clarity of posted board policies and procedures. Having reviewed policy manuals of other districts, I know that it is possible to adopt clear and specific policies that give the public notice of what is expected of all of the parties that have business with the school board. In my own dealing with the superintendent’s office regarding the transfer and athletic policy, I was extremely frustrated trying to navigate through the requirements of parents and students by relying on the posted policy. Although the policy explains how the determination of the transfers and athletic eligibility is determined, it does not provide any information as to the actual process one must go through, including the procedure to appeal decisions the school board has made. Another example is the application of some kind of notification timeline that Chairman Buff referred to at the last board meeting that required a speaker to request to be added to the board agenda at least 48 hours prior to a board meeting. Reviewing the minutes of March 19, 2007, it appears that there was some discussion among the board regarding requests to be added to the agenda. However, in spite of attempts to adopt a policy, there was never a policy adoption, a clear explanation of the expectations of a person who wanted to be added to the agenda or a motion to incorporate any changes into then current board practices at that meeting or any meeting since.

My third concern is the drafting of the current Media Polices. I support the modification of the current policy and I appreciate the work of all parties who have spent their blood sweat and tears trying to draft a policy that will be fair to all views espoused. However, I am concerned about the viability of the policy.

It is my understanding that the Superintendant is working with the Media and Technology Advisory Committee to make changes to these policies. It is not clear to me what procedure is being followed in drafting this policy, but it would be extremely helpful if the process by which this policy is being drafted as well as the drafts of the policies offered, were available online. According to past board minutes, the drafts should be posted online as attachments to board minutes. I have gathered from letters to the editor and listening to past board meetings that the Media Committee is the group drafting the new policies. However, according to Board Policy 9.6100P, the Media and Technology Selection Policy, the Media and Technology Advisory committee’s mandate is not to draft policy, it is to review the use of books in the class room.

I was able to review the current drafts of the proposed policies recently, and although it was evident that there had been a sincere effort to write policies that accommodate all of the parties’ concerns, as an attorney I had questions as to the substance of the policies. I contacted the senior staff attorney at the North Carolina School Board Association and asked her if she had been working with Burke county on these policies, and she replied that she had not. She indicated that the NCBSA was currently reviewing some policies for Burke County, but that the media policy was not one of them. When I read some of the language from the draft policies to her that I was concerned about, she stated that the language I read did not reflect the model policies of the NCBSA. She said that it is generally problematic for a school board to draft policies in parallel with the NCBSA’s review of policies, because often the policy adopted does not comply with statutes or the NCBSA has tested the policy in other venues and had found that the policy is easily challenged. So, I urge you to share the drafts of the media policies with the NCBSA so that they may offer some guidance to whomever is drafting the policies. The NCBSA has developed sophisticated and valuable expertise in assisting local school districts in keeping their policies current and in compliance with legal mandates. The NCBSA is a resource that the board has relied on in the past as a source of policies, and it seems prudent that they are consulted regarding policies of such significance to our community.

In sum: Regarding public access: I would like to see the Minutes and all missing attachments to the minutes that are for public view to be maintained online. Regarding clarity of policy and procedure: I would like for the board to clearly explain the procedures that are used in place of policies, and for those procedures to be added to the website, and regarding the drafting of the media policies, I would like for whomever is leading the process of drafting the new media policies to enlist the services of the NCSBA so that the individuals who have put so much time and emotional energy into the drafting of these policies won’t have wasted their time on points that have already been settled by the constitution, law or past practice of other NC schools.

Dress Code - February 5, 2009

The School Board is considering implementing a dress code at the high schools and has begun drafting a dress code policy. Associate Superintendent Rick Sherrill presented a first draft of the policy to the board at the meeting on February 2. After some discussion of the merits of the policy, Ms. Norman commented that she didn’t think that the draft policy should be included on the Burke County Public Schools website for public review, because people would not understand that it was just a draft. She went on to elaborate on how she wanted this policy to be drafted “in a respectful way.” When Mr. Wilkinson stated that he wanted the public’s opinion on the policy, Ms. Norman responded with a rant about people starting rumors about policies and said something about people who write letters to the newspaper because they like to see their name in print. Mr. Buff went so far as to have Mr. Sherrill “look in to the camera and tell everyone on TV that this is a draft.” Several of the Board members (Wilkinson, Armour and Barnard) indicated that they had no problem with posting the draft on the school website, as long as the public understood that this was a draft policy. Those same members wanted to hear the public’s comments about the draft policy and the dress code in general.

I don’t think it is too presumptuous to assume that I am perceived by some on the Board as one of the folks who “likes to see their names in print” so I’ll indulge those members by stating my opinion in print. I remind the board chair that when I spoke at the December 15th board meeting, I asked that ancillary documents be posted on the website if they were presented to the board. The board has caused the previous confusion by not posting updates of the media policies as they were drafted. The only access the public had to the media policy before I spoke to the board was the draft that was published in the News Herald in November of 2008. By the time the “second reading” rolled around in December, that policy had been updated/modified two times, but citizens who were unhappy about the previously published policy had no idea the document had been changed.

Ms. Chairperson, the problem is not that people get “carried away” with board policy making or that people like me are “disrespectful.” The problem is the lack of transparency the board demonstrates when making policy. If you do not want people like me making judgments about the language in a policy, then allow the public access to the drafts, (or at least explain to the public in a forum that the public has access to) that the board is considering drafting a policy, and the reasons why that policy is being considered. The dress code policy has many facets – good and bad – and the citizens of Burke County should be aware of the Board’s motivation and action every step of the way. You will get cooperation from the public when you let the sun shine on the board’s activity regarding the drafting of policies that affect the public.

Catherine Thomas
1660 Plantation Ct.
Morganton, NC 28655

January 10th, 2009 : The Mike is Hot!!!!

I was astounded that Ms. Norman, Mr. Buff and other Board members stated at the January 5th Board Meeting that the Media Policy issue had been “blown out of proportion.” I think that the Citizens of Burke County ought to do themselves a favor and access the recording of the School Board meeting on November 17th, 2008, Part 2 that is available on the Burke County School Website: http://www.burke.k12.nc.us/boeaudio/. I have listened to this recording and am incensed at the comments of particular Board Members.

This particular recording is of the meeting at which over 30 students, parents and former students came to speak to the Board about the Proposed Media Policy. Most of them were responding to Ms. Norman’s own words at a previous meeting that certain books should be “pulled” from the schools. Many of the former students communicated with each other via Facebook to arrange to speak at the meeting. Although the Board denies ever mentioning “banning” books, it is public record that Ms. Norman made the statement that some books should be “pulled.” And I am happy to write that the Media Policy drafts are becoming more reasonable and constitutionally sound with every draft that is written.

Listening to the November 17th meeting , you’ll hear lots of crowd noise, exasperation from the public attendees regarding the right to speak at the meeting, threats by then Vice-Chair Tracy Norman to have the room cleared, and most distressingly, comments from the Board Members themselves regarding the public attendees. Apparently the Board Members didn’t realize they were being recorded, and that their comments would be accessible to the public.

At about 5 minutes into the audio, while the crowd is situating itself, some of the Board Members engage in what seems to be “small talk”. Mr. Barnard opines that the group who has come to speak has been recruited. Mr. Hairfield says “of course they have been recruited to speak, do you think they came because they were homesick?” Mr. Hairfield remarks once they have heard three people speak the Board can go on standby because they’ll all sound the same. As the non-speakers are leaving the room, Mr. Hairfield remarks “Shoot to kill if necessary.” (5’24” into the audio) Then Mr. Barnard says, “I mean you can find out . . .... “

At 5 minutes 48 seconds into the audio, Ms. Norman remarks “Eric, you need to get a copy of the email that’s been sent out to recruit them. There’ve been emails and if you trace back where these. . . Trace back where they . ... what their high school English class is, their English class. Trace back to their English class. English class.”

I don’t know who “Eric” is. Why does it matter to Ms. Norman who recruited students to speak? Americans have the right to organize. Americans have the right to dissent. Even teachers.

This is not a new tactic. Any time there is audible dissension in the audience at a school board meeting, the meeting is stopped and the chair and vice chair demand to know who made the remarks. At one Board meeting Ed Redman stood up and took the blame for a comment he did not make. When I asked him why, he said two things: “they are acting like a bunch of Nazis up there – I was waiting for them to bring out the police dogs, the bright lights and to start shooting hostages until someone confessed. We would have been sitting there all night if someone hadn’t ‘confessed,’ and I figured it might as well be me.” When I asked him why he thought the exclaimant didn’t confess, his reply was “He was probably a teacher. Can you imagine being on their (Buff and Norman’s) list?” Enough said.

Catherine Thomas

Whistling girls and crowing hens . . .

always come to speak before the school board!

Letter to Board - Draft 8/9

February 24, 2009

Burke County Board of Education
Superintendent
Attorney Jonathan Jones
Attorney Christopher Campbell


Members of the Board of Education, Administration and Attorneys for the Board:

I am disheartened that the draft of the Media Selection Policy 9.3210 (labeled as Draft “8” but dated February 16, 2009 – hereinafter referred to as the “proposed” policy) has progressed in a way that favors the agenda of a few vocal citizens of the county, and discounts the concerns and opinions of our educators. In the interest of seeing the proposed policies also reflect the views of western North Carolina, I have surveyed policies in neighboring counties to see if they require similar tasks and considerations from their teachers and administrators.

Notwithstanding the fact that these new policies contradict the Burke County Media and Technology Selection Policy Revision 9.6100P, I find that most policies in neighboring counties do not share several significant aspects of the proposed policy. In fact, the language that has been added to the current draft changes the whole complexion of what appear to be generally accepted media policies.

The proposed policy modifies the model IMPACT policy (which most western NC counties have adopted) and has expanded upon it in a most “paternalistic” way. The language used in the IMPACT model is used in the following districts: Asheville City Schools, Buncombe, Caldwell, Catawba, Haywood, Henderson, Jackson, McDowell, Watauga, and Forsyth-Winston-Salem. (Note that several of these school districts are represented by Mr. Christopher Campbell, whom the chair has indicated has also reviewed the proposed policy.) Below is the Model Media Policy promoted by IMPACT:

OBJECTIVES FOR SELECTING MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY
The primary objective of each school’s library media and technology program is to enrich and support the instructional program of the school. The media and technology program makes available, through the school’s collections, a wide range of print, nonprint, and technology on varying levels of difficulty with a diversity of appeal compatible with the different needs, interests, and viewpoints of students and teachers.
To this end, the __________________ Board of Education in keeping with the ideas expressed in the Library Bill of Rights, asserts that the responsibility of the media program is as follows:
3. to provide resources that will enrich and support the curriculum, taking into consideration the varied interests, abilities, socio-economic backgrounds, learning styles, and developmental levels of the students served.
4. to provide resources that stimulate growth in factual knowledge, literary appreciation, aesthetic values, and ethical standards.
5. to provide a background of information enabling students to comprehend their role as citizens in society and to make intelligent judgments in their daily lives.
6. to provide resources on opposing sides of controversial issues so that students may develop, under guidance, the practice of critical thinking and of critical analysis of all media.
7. to provide resources representative of the many religious, ethnic, and cultural groups in our nation and the contributions of these groups to our American heritage.
8. to place principle above personal opinion and reason above prejudice in selecting media of the highest quality in order to assure a comprehensive collection appropriate for all users. (http://www.ncwiseowl.org/Impact/appendices.htm#baseline)

Compare the above to the bolded language in the Burke Board of Education’s Proposed 9.3210 Selection of Supplementary Media:

a. to provide materials that will enrich and support the curriculum and the North Carolina Standard Course of Study (NCSCOS), taking into consideration the individual needs and varied interests, abilities, socio-economic backgrounds, and maturity levels of the pupils served;

b. to provide materials that will stimulate growth in factual knowledge, literary appreciation, aesthetic values and ethical standards;

c. to provide a background of information that will enable students to make intelligent judgments;

d. to provide materials representing various points of view so that students as young citizens may develop, under guidance, the skills of critical thinking and critical analysis;

e. to provide materials representative of the many religious, ethnic, and cultural traditions in our nation, and the contributions of these groups to our American heritage;

f. to provide materials which are considerate of the values of the various religious, ethnic, and cultural traditions in our community and which are not so inconsistent with such values so to give rise to significant negative objections from such groups; and

g. to place principle above personal opinion and reason above prejudice in the selection of material of the highest quality in order to ensure a comprehensive collection appropriate for our students.


None of the schools mentioned above, including Rutherford County (which has
similar language represented in proposed “d” – “various” instead of “opposing”) or
Hickory, Cherokee, Macon, Lincoln or Wake County have any language relating to
the proposed language in Section “f”:

In this same document under the provisions of Section 2, for “Process of Selecting Supplementary Materials,” the language in the proposed policy tracks with other area policies until these two provisions are added:

The Committee will consider:

i. the extent of anticipated objections to chosen materials and the impact that the number of parents/students likely to object and make use of the “opt out” policy (BCPS Policy 9.3220) will have on the orderly presentation of the overall educational objectives of the course;

j. in situations where it appears that conflicts are likely to arise between the school’s educational interests and a student’s rights from the use of a particular selection, whether a reasonably available alternative selection could achieve the same educational goal.


Apparently, we are the only area county that finds it necessary to judge media based on negative objections (legitimate or not) or the likely use of the opt-out policy. Further, Burke is the only county (among those I surveyed) who will choose media based on “conflicts likely to arise.” This not a “tweak” of the model policy, this is a departure from the notion of freedom to read altogether.

Opt Out Policy:
None of the schools mentioned above have “opt-out” policies per se. Several of the policies indicate they will accommodate parents/students if they have legitimate legal or constitutional concerns. McDowell’s policy requires that teachers provide alternative books. Most of the counties have a “reconsideration” process whereby the material is reviewed by the Media Committee to determine if the book is to be removed from the curriculum, and an appeals process for that (essentially the same as our 9.6100-P policy.) These policies also follow the model IMPACT policy.

Parental Notification:
The counties that do not require parental notification from the teachers prior to using supplementary material are:

Asheville City
Caldwell
Catawba
Cherokee
Haywood
Henderson
Hickory
Jackson
Lincoln
Macon
Rutherford
Watauga

Of the counties that I surveyed, three that require parental notification are Buncombe, McDowell and Wake. Wake does not specify what information about supplemental materials must be supplied to parents. McDowell and Buncombe require only a list of classroom novels or supplementary materials be sent to the parents at the beginning of the year. This list can be updated as the novels are added.

None of the abovementioned schools have any language in their parental notification policy like the bolded language below:

1. Notification to Parents of the use of Supplemental Instructional Reading Materials

At the beginning of each school year, each teacher will prepare a list of supplemental instructional reading materials which are expected to be assigned to students and shall send the list to the parents/guardians of each student so that timely objections may be made. Teachers may supplement that list at any time during the progress of the course of instruction upon further notification to parents in accordance with this policy. The Superintendent shall establish a schedule for each year setting forth the dates before which such notice must be given. The notice shall be in a format established by the Instructional Reading Selection Committee and approved by the Superintendent. The notice shall include the following:

a. The title and author of the supplemental materials selected:
b. Short description of the selection, including, if desired, a statement of the merits of the chosen materials.
c. Whether the selection may contain objectionable content related to the following areas:
a. Language
b. Sexual content;
c. Violence or other abuse;
d. Offensive to certain religious or other values;
e. Age inappropriate/inconsistent with NCSCOS.

d. A list of references where the selection is summarized, reviewed, and critiqued from sources customarily used by educational professionals to evaluate such materials and from sources with special sensitivity to religious and other moral concerns of teachers, students, community members and parents. In addition reference must be given to locations where such reviewing sources can be accessed (example: public library, Internet, etc.). By way of example, and not of limitation, reviewing sources may include the following:

1. The Horn Book (Burke County Library);
2. School Library Journal;
3. National Council of Teachers of English (www.ncte.org);
4. Booklist.com (online – fee charged);
5. Amazon.com;
6. kirkusreviews.com;
7. ALA.org;
8. MLA.org;
9. International Reading Association (www.reading.org);
10. classkc.org (online);
11. pabbis.org (online);
12. Parents may request copies of materials from Superintendent’s office

Further, none of the districts I reviewed have any language at all similar to the language identified in italics.

This language puts an undue burden on the teachers and directs parents to look at biased websites like classkc.org (online) and pabbis.org (online). The policy contradicts itself since the policy requires selection of text based on “unbiased reviews” and that “materials that include references of a sexual nature or profanity must be carefully evaluated as to their total literary value,” and then directs parents to two Christian conservative websites that list profanity out of context to evaluate materials.

Again, none of the policies I surveyed direct the teachers to supply a list of references or websites (including references “from sources with special sensitivity to religious and other moral concerns”). So, the teacher has to determine if little Ahmed is a Muslim and seek out and provide references for that child, and then determine if little Abraham is Jewish, and do the same for him. I personally know Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and even Sikh like students in Burke County system.

Since teachers are prohibited from inquiring about a student’s religious background according to Title 20, 1232h without the prior consent of the parent, it seems that determining which resource to provide the parent would be problematic. This is an undue burden on teachers.

Standing to Challenge a Book
Most of the policies reviewed refer to the “Parental Inspection of Supplemental Materials”. The language in some of these policies vacillates between allowing any concerned district resident or employee of the district to request reconsideration of educational resources and then using the terms “parent” or “complainant.” The policies are inconsistent internally on this point. However, the policies seem to recognize that the appropriate person to challenge a material is the parent or guardian of a child affected. By way of example, McDowell’s policy states:

“No parent has the right to determine the reading, viewing or listening resources for students other than his/her own children.” McDowell Policy on Selection of Instructional Resources 6604, Section 7, C.

It seems that allowing any citizen to challenge books whether they have affected children or not puts an undue burden on the school system. It also seems if anyone is going to have standing to challenge the materials, then the teachers should be sending their reading lists along with all of the other ancillary information required by the policy to everyone in the district, whether they have children in schools or not. I know we do not pay teachers enough to require this.

My concern about this issue is genuine. Any abridgement of my child’s educational experiences by those who would control the curriculum based on their religious values is infuriating to me and most other citizens who value their children’s pubic education.

Sincerely,

Catherine Thomas
1660 Plantation Court
Morganton, North Carolina 28655