Nadia Combs: GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. WELCOME TO THE WORKSHOP -- THE SCHOOL BOARD WORK SHOP JANUARY 17, 2023. WE WILL BE GOING OVER TWO PARTS. FIRST PART WILL THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. AND MR. PORTER, YOU WILL BE LEADING THAT. AND THE SECOND PART IS ANALYZING AND LOOKING AT THE LEGAL SERVICES. THAT WILL BE TWO PARTS OF THE WORKSHOP. AND MY GOAL IS TO HOPEFULLY FINISH THE FIRST PART IN AN HOUR AND AN HOUR TO TALK ABOUT THE SECOND PART. AND -- I MEAN, MR. PORTER, WE WILL BEGIN AND GO AHEAD -- IF YOU WILL GO AHEAD -- MOTION TO ME TO TAKE NAMES SINCE MR. PORTER WILL BE LEADING THIS. I WILL TAKE NAMES FOR TODAY'S WORKSHOP. MR. PORTER, YOU MAY BEGIN. Jim Porter: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS. WE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IN NOVEMBER INDICATING THAT TWO -- ONE POLICY AND ONE PROCEDURE MAY BE OUT OF LINE WITH CURRENT LAW.
SO WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION TO GET MORE CLARITY. THEY SENT MORE CLARITY. BEFORE YOU TODAY IS OUR -- REALLY TWO ITEMS. ONE THAT THE BOARD ACTS ON AND THE OTHER IS MORE FOR YOUR INFORMATION THAT THE BOARD DOES NOT HAVE TO ACT ON. THE FIRST INVOLVES THE BOARD'S RACIAL EQUITY POLICY. THIS POLICY WAS ADOPTED BY THE BOARD AND REALLY WAS CONSIDERED A NATIONAL MODEL AND RECEIVED NATIONAL AWARDS FOR THE POLICY. THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IN THEIR LETTER IDENTIFIED THAT THE PURPOSE STATEMENT IN THE POLICY IS OUT OF LINE WITH CURRENT STATE LAW. A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. TYPICALLY YOUR POLICIES DON'T HAVE PURPOSE STATEMENTS. THIS WAS DONE BECAUSE IT WAS CONSIDERED A NATIONAL MODEL AND THE BOARD ADOPTED IT WITH A PURPOSE STATEMENT. I AM GOING TO READ THE PURPOSE STATEMENT TO YOU. THIS IS WHAT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IDENTIFIED AS PROBLEMATIC.
PURPOSE, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS DESERVE RESPECTFUL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH THEIR RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY IS VALUED FOR SUCCESSFUL ACADEMIC OUTCOMES. INSTITUTIONAL RACISM THAT RESULT IN PARTICULARLY LOWER ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF PEOPLE OF COLOR THAN THEIR WHITE PEERS. WILL INCREASE ACHIEVEMENT INCLUDING ONE-TIME GRADUATION FOR ALL STUDENTS WHILE NARROWING THE GAPS BETWEEN THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST-PERFORMING STUDENTS. THAT IS THE PURPOSE STATEMENT. THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION INDICATED THAT RUNS AFOUL OF FLORIDA STATUTE 1000.05 AS WELL AS ADMINISTRATIVE RULES THAT WERE SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED AFTER THE CHAPTER DOCTOR AFTER THE LAW WAS PASSED. BEFORE YOU, YOU HAVE TWO OPTIONS. REMOVE THE PURPOSE STATEMENT AND KEEP THE POLICY IN PLACE. THE POLICY WOULD STILL BE THERE AND WILL STILL HAVE THE EFFECT OR YOU COULD CHOOSE -- THE BOARD COULD CHOOSE TO WRITE BACK TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND INDICATE THAT WE FEEL OUR POLICY IS ALIGNED WITH STATE STATUTE AND THAT WE -- WE DESIRE TO KEEP IT.
THERE ARE RISKS INVOLVED WITH THAT APPROACH. AS YOU HAVE KNOWN FROM THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS WHEN WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND THE GOVERNOR, THEY HAVE BEEN SWIFT TO TAKE PUNITIVE ACTION AGAINST SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT DON'T FOLLOW WHAT THEY BELIEVE THE LAW IS. THOSE COULD INCLUDE FINANCIAL PENALTIES, WITHHOLDING MONEY, FINES AND POTENTIALLY REMOVING BOARD MEMBERS FROM OFFICE IF THE GOVERNOR FEELS YOU ARE NOT FOLLOWING THE LAW. THOSE ARE OPTIONS FOR YOU. I WILL TELL YOU THAT NOWHERE IN THE STATUTE IS THE WORD INSTITUTIONAL RACISM MENTIONED BUT THAT IS THEIR OPINION OF THE LAW. THAT IS THE CHOICE BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY. I BELIEVE BECAUSE THIS IS A POLICY, THE SUPERINTENDENT DOES HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR YOU. AND YOU SHOULD HEAR THAT AND DISCUSS IT AND WE CAN GO FROM THERE. SO BASICALLY, TO BOIL IT DOWN, THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HAS INDICATED OR DETERMINED THAT A PIECE OF OUR POLICY, THE PURPOSE STATEMENT, VIOLATES STATE LAW.
YOUR OPTIONS ARE TO REMOVE THE PURPOSE STATEMENT AND KEEP THE POLICY OR PUSH BACK AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IN WHATEVER FORM THE BOARD THINKS IS APPROPRIATE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE RISKS INVOLVED WITH PUSHING BACK. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE SUPERINTENDENT. Addison Davis: THANK YOU, SIR, THROUGH THE CHAIR, TO MAKE CERTAIN WE CONTINUE TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW AND AT THE SAME TOKEN ADDRESS THE UNIQUE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY. WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT OUR COMMUNITY FEELS THAT WE CELEBRATE RICH DIVERSITY. AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. I THINK THIS POLICY DOES. I WILL GO BACK TO WHAT MR. PORTER SAID RELATING TO CONSISTENCY IN OUR POLICIES. NONE OF OUR OTHER POLICY SOME TYPE OF PURPOSE STATEMENT. IF YOU LOOK IN THIS PARTICULAR POLICY AND YOU REMOVE THE PURPOSE STATEMENT, IT STILL CONTINUES TO PUT OWNERSHIP OF THE SUPERINTENDENT TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT I AM ACCURATELY ENGAGED IN OUR COMMUNITY.
THAT WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT THERE ARE SYSTEMS ADDRESSING RACIAL EQUITY WITHIN OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT. THAT OFFICER FOCUSED ON LEADERSHIP, TEACHING AND LEARNING. ABLE TO ACCELERATE THE WORK FOR EVERY ONE OF OUR STUDENTS. AT THE SAME TOKEN RECRUIT AND RETAIN A WORKFORCE THAT IS RICH AND DIVERSE AND ONE THAT REALLY ADDRESSES THE CONTINUOUS, YOU KNOW, OFFERINGS OF OUR STUDENTS AND BEING ABLE TO HAVE THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. THROUGH THIS PROCESS HOUSE BILL 7 PROVIDES, YOU KNOW, LANGUAGE RELATED TO BEING ABLE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE. AND IT ALSO TALKS OF HOW INDIVIDUALS SHOULD NOT INHERENTLY FEEL THAT THEY ARE RACIST, SEXIST OR OPPRESSIVE AND ALSO BEING ABLE IN INDICATOR OF THE NEW SEXUAL REQUIREMENTS THAT NO PERSON REGARDLESS OF HIS OR HER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIENTATION OR SEX, THEY FEEL ANY TYPE OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST RELATED AND COMMITTED BY -- WITH ACTIONS COMMITTED IN THE PAST BY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SAME RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN OR SEX AS WELL.
FOR ME, MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO REMOVE -- REMOVE THE PURPOSE STATEMENT AND CONTINUE TO IMPLEMENT THIS POLICY WHICH CONTINUES TO PROTECT OUR -- OUR COMMUNITIES. MR. GIBSON, ANYTHING THAT YOU MUCH WANT TO ADD FROM OUR SIDE? NO, I THINK YOU HIT THE MAJOR POINTS OF THE LEGISLATION THAT COULD BE PROBLEMATIC. Nadia Combs: OKAY, THANK YOU, SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS. I AM GOING TO GO AROUND.
MEMBER GRAY. YOU WANTED TO SPEAK FIRST? Lynn Gray: I WANT TO THANK YOU, MR. PORTER, MR. GIBSON, AND SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS. THERE IS A FINE BALANCE THAT IS GETTING MORE DIFFICULT TO -- TO KEEP ON THE SCALE IN A EQUAL WAY. WE WANT TO PROMOTE DIVERSITY. AND WE DO THANKING TERRI CONNOR FOR PUTTING DIVERSITY BOOKS IN EACH CLASSROOM. AND WE NEED TO BE THE VOICE OF DIVERSITY. AS I SAID TO MONICA, I WANT US TO HAVE -- TO BE RECOGNIZED AS A DISTRICT OF DIVERSITY. IN SO DOING, IT IS A DANGEROUS WAY TO TAKE OUT WHAT PERCEIVABLY IS REAL, INSTITUTIONAL RACISM, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, AS WE ALL ARE LEARNING, IF WE DO NOT, AND THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE PARENTAL BILL OF RIGHTS, WE COULD FACE ANYTHING FROM A CLASS-ACTION SUIT TO REMOVAL OF BOARD MEMBERS BECAUSE IT IS NOW NOT ACCORDING TO FLORIDA STATE STATUTE.
SO IT IS A DIFFICULT MANEUVER TO MAKE, BUT I AM SAYING IN PUBLIC THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSENSUS THAT I DO AGREE WITH SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS' RECOMMENDATION THAT WE REMOVE THAT PARAGRAPH. AND ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT DIVERSITY IS PARAMOUNT IN WHAT WE SAY, IN WHAT WE DO, AND ALL THE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS AND ALL THE PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES WILL ALWAYS COMPLEMENT THE IDEA OF INCREASED DIVERSITY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
Nadia Combs: THANK YOU, MEMBER GRAY. MEMBER WASHINGTON? Henry "Shake" Washington: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I GUESS I AM THE ONLY ONE IN HERE THAT HAS FACED RACISM. I DISAGREE. I MEAN, I RESPECT YOU, I RESPECT EVERYBODY. I DISAGREE. I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IT IN BECAUSE WORRIES PLAY A LOT WITH HOW WELL PEOPLE OPERATE. WE CAN KEEP -- WE CAN PUT IN THE NEW ONE AND STILL COULD -- COULD STILL NOT DO WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE -- WE DON'T HAVE THAT PIECE THERE THAT WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT. RACISM IS LIVE. IT'S FOR REAL. I HAVE BEEN THROUGH IT. AND IT'S HARD. IT'S HARD. I CAN REMEMBER WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL, IN HIGH SCHOOL WHERE I DEALT WITH RACISM. WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, WE MADE IT. WE DID THE THINGS WE HAD TO DO BECAUSE WE UNDERSTOOD THE IMPORTANCE OF RESPECTING EVERY PERSON.
I AM KIND OF UPSET BECAUSE I ALWAYS HAVE BEEN A PERSON WITH HONESTY AND DEALT WITH PEOPLE IN A POSITIVE WAY. AND I THINK IT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE CANNOT ELIMINATE THAT PART. SOME THINGS YOU CAN'T ELIMINATE. MAYBE ANOTHER WAY TO PUT IT, I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE WE CAN SIT DOWN AND DO IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY, BUT THIS PART IS IMPORTANT. BECAUSE I AM TELLING YOU, WHEN THEY CLOSE THE SCHOOL IN 1969 AND '70, THEY CLOSED THE SCHOOL BECAUSE WE SAID WE WANTED EQUALITY. WE WANTED EQUALITY, AND THEY CLOSED THE SCHOOL AND SAID WE ARE GOING TO GIVE YOU EQUALITY. I AM GOING TO SEND YOU -- I WILL CLOSE BLAKE AND MILTON DOWN AND GIVE YOU EQUALITY. AND THEY CLOSED IT DOWN. AND THEY GAVE US EQUALITY BECAUSE WE HAD THE SAME -- WE WENT TO THE SAME SCHOOLS THEY WENT TO.
AND I HATE TO USE THE TERM "THEY" BUT THE WHITES, WE WENT TO THE SAME SCHOOL AND IT WAS DIFFICULT BECAUSE WE USED WORDS THAT THEY COULD CHANGE IT AROUND AND TOTALLY TURN IT AROUND. IT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR US TO NOT FORGET WHERE WE CAME FROM. THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART. I AM IN TEARS. I AM A LITTLE UPSET. I STAYED UP ALL NIGHT -- HALF OF THE NIGHT CONTEMPLATING BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO EVER BREAK THE LAW -- THANK YOU, SWEETHEART. I DON'T EVER WANT TO BREAK THE LAW. SHAKE WASHINGTON DON'T WANT TO BREAK THE LAW, BUT WHAT I WANT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WE NEED TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT BY PEOPLE AND I JUST HAVE TO APOLOGIZE, PEOPLE, I AM LITERALLY IN TEARS BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN THROUGH ALL OF THIS. A LOT OF YOU HAVE NOT, BUT I HAVE BEEN THROUGH IT.
AND I HAVE BEEN THROUGH RACISM -- I HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS WHERE WE COULDN'T GO TO THE REST ROOM BECAUSE WE WERE BLACK. WE COULDN'T DRINK OUT OF THE WATER FOUNTAINS BECAUSE WE WERE BLACK. WE CAN'T GO TO CERTAIN STORES BECAUSE WE WERE BLACK! AND I DON'T WANT THIS TO TURN INTO NO RACE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, BUT WE GOT TO LOOK AT THIS, PEOPLE. THIS IS CLOSE. WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS. AND SOMETIMES YOU GOT TO GO AGAINST THE SYSTEM.
EXCUSE ME, I -- Jim Porter: CAN I -- Nadia Combs: THANK YOU, MEMBER WASHINGTON. SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS, YOU WANTED TO COMMENT BACK. Addison Davis: I APPRECIATE MEMBER WASHINGTON AND HIS COMMENTS. UNFORTUNATE THAT ANYBODY WILL BE EXPOSED TO ANY TYPE OF UNDESIRED BEHAVIORS. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR IT IS ONLY BECAUSE OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION. AND WE HAVE A DUTY IN THIS COMMUNITY TO CONTINUE TO BE ADVOCATES BUT ONLY BASED ON THE LEGAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THIS PROCESS. Nadia Combs: THANK YOU, SUPERINTENDENT DAVIS.
MEMBER VAUGHN. Jessica Vaughn: THANK YOU. I ANTICIPATE PROBABLY NEEDING TO GET BACK IN THE QUEUE, BECAUSE I HAVE A LOT OF THOUGHTS TO SHARE ABOUT THIS. FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MEMBER WASHINGTON FOR SHARING HIS PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AROUND THAT. HAS MORE POWER THAN ANYTHING. THAN ANY OF US CAN SHARE TO THIS. BEING A PART OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
DAY YESTERDAY AND HEARING SO MANY PEOPLE FROM OUR COMMUNITY SPEAK ABOUT INSTITUTIONAL RACISM AND THE DIRECTION OF OUR COUNTRY, ESPECIALLY OUR COUNTY, AND THEN GOING TO THE PARADE AND SEEING MEMBER WASHINGTON'S COMMUNITY JUST SO EMBRACE HIM. I WAS ON A FLOAT WITH HIM, AND EVERY SINGLE SECOND I HAD, THERE WERE MEMBERS FROM THE COMMUNITY RECOGNIZING HIM AND CALLING HIM AND SAYING HI. I MEAN HE HAS DONE SUCH A GOOD JOB OF REPRESENTING HIS COMMUNITY. SO, I THINK, MORE THAN ANYONE, HIS THOUGHTS ON THIS ARE IMPORTANT, BUT WHEN WE GET TO THE PART WHERE WE TALK ABOUT LEGALITY. YOU HAVE SAID THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED MORE CLARITY THAN WHAT WAS IN THIS LETTER SPECIFICALLY TALKING OF VIOLATING THE STATUTE. AND I FEEL UNFORTUNATE AGAIN, AND, AGAIN, I WILL SAY THIS PERSONALLY, THAT THE LAWS COMING OUT ARE SO VAGUE THAT WE HAVE TO SPEND A LOT OF OUR TIME ACTING LIKE LAWYERS INSTEAD OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS AND PUTTING OUR EFFORTS INTO EDUCATION AND INSTEAD INTERPRETING VERY VAGUE LAWS THAT LAWYERS FROM AROUND THE COUNTRY -- STATE ARE ALL HAVING DIFFERENT CONVERSATIONS INTERPRETING THAT BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THE STATUTE SPECIFICALLY, IT IS AIMED AT UNIVERSITY.
THE UNIVERSITY LEVEL. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. AS THE TWO THINGS IT CLARIFIES WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE NOT, YOU KNOW, BRINGING IN -- MAKING PEOPLE FEEL GUILTY WITH RACISM IS SPECIFICALLY INSTRUCTION AND ALSO TRAINING OUR EMPLOYEES. PER THIS POLICY THAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT INDICATES THE WORD "INSTITUTIONAL RACISM" OR THE PURPOSE TALKING ABOUT EMBEDDING THAT IN ANY OF OUR INSTRUCTION OR THE WAY WE ARE TRAINING OUR EMPLOYEES. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT VIOLATES THE LAW. ALSO, INSTITUTIONAL RACISM, I PULLED THE DEFINITION OF IT, RIGHT, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO BE IMPORTANT IN THIS. WHAT IS "INSTITUTIONAL RACISM?" USED INTERCHANGEABLY WITH RACISM. IN WIKIPEDIA, PERPETUAL DISCRIMINATION OF RACE BY POLITICAL, ECONOMICAL OR LEGAL INSTITUTIONS AND SYSTEMS. DOESN'T TALK ANYWHERE ABOUT INDIVIDUALS. NOT SAYING THERE IS ONE INDIVIDUAL. IT IS NOT SAYING THERE IS ANY ONE PERSON WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS.
IT'S ILLUSTRATING THAT BASED ON LAWS AND POLICIES, WHICH WE CAN'T ERASE OR DENY. WE HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE NAACP BECAUSE WE TOOK SO LONG TO DESEGREGATE OUR SCHOOLS. WE TALK OF RED LINING AND PREDATORY LENDING. ABSOLUTELY NO WAY WE CAN DENY OR ERASE THAT SINCE JIM CROW, THERE HAVE BEEN LAWS WHETHER IT IS EDUCATIONALLY, WHETHER IT IS FINANCIALLY, WHETHER IN HOUSING DISTRICTS THAT HAVE BEEN AIMED AT MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES AND INEQUITY. I UNDERSTAND WE SAY WE HAVEN'T HAD PURPOSE. IF WE WANT TO TAKE THE WORD "PURPOSE" OUT OF IT, I THINK EVEN THE SUBSEQUENT PARTS OF THE POLICY WHEN WE STALK OF SYSTEMIC ISSUES ARE ALL INHERENTLY TIED TO INSTITUTIONAL RACISM TO TAKE THAT POLICY OUT OR TAKE THAT WORD OUT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO THE REST OF THE POLICY IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. AGAIN, WHAT I WOULD APPRECIATE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OR ANYONE WHO IS ASKING US TO REVIEW THAT, BECAUSE FROM WHAT I SAW IN THE LETTER AND I WOULD LIKE MONICA OUR CHIEF OF EQUITY AND DIVERSITY WHOSE JOB IS TO HELP US INTERPRET THIS AND UNDERSTAND THIS TO GIVE FEEDBACK.
MY UNDERSTANDING THEY ASKED US TO READ THE POLICY. IF I MISSED SOME CORRESPONDENCE OR CLARITY FROM THE LAWYERS. GOTTEN ANY SPECIFIC FEEDBACK OF HOW DIRECTLY THIS IS IN VIOLATION OF THE STATUTE THAT I READ. AGAIN, THE STATUTE DOESN'T SAY INSTITUTIONAL RACISM. THIS HERE DOESN'T TALK ABOUT ANY ONE PERSON OR DEMONIZING ANYONE AS FAR AS RACISM. TALKS ABOUT HAVING EQUITY IN OUR -- AND OUR MISSION IN GENERAL TO MAKE SURE OUR STUDENTS OF COLOR GET ACCESS TO THE BEST EDUCATION AND WE HAVE ENVIRONMENTS THAT UPHOLD DIVERSITY AND MAKE THEM FEEL INCLUDED. I THINK THIS IS SHORTSIGHTED. I WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE ARE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF ANY LAW WITH THIS POLICY SPECIFIC AND CLEAR FEEDBACK FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION THAT CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND. BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEVEN BOARD MEMBERS WHO WILL SIT HERE AND TELL YOU WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF BREAKING THE LAW.
AND HAVE REPEATEDLY OVER AND OVER AGAIN SAID IT IS OUR PRIORITY TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW. BUT ALSO THE WHOLE REASON WE HAVE SCHOOL BOARDS AND NOT JUST GOVERNED BY STATE STATUTE BY HOME RULE SO WE CAN LEAN INTO OUR COMMUNITIES. THAT IS WHAT THEY ELECTED US FOR, TO REPRESENT THEM BECAUSE HILLSBOROUGH'S PRIORITIES WHEN IT COMES TO EDUCATION MIGHT BE DIFFERENT THAN A SMALLER COUNTY OR A DIFFERENT COUNTY RIGHT. WE HAVE SCHOOL BOARDS TO SET POLICY FOR OUR COMMUNITY. SO IF WE ARE GOING TO BE BYPASSED WHAT WE THINK OUR PRIORITIES ARE AS FAR AS STATE LEGISLATION IS CONCERNED ABOUT EVERY LITTLE THING. WHAT IS THE POINT OF HAVING A SCHOOL BOARD OTHER THAN BEING THE DEPOSITORY OF ALL THE FRUSTRATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY WHEN EVERYTHING GOES WRONG. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE GETTING LETTERS TO REVIEW THIS WITHOUT MUCH CLARITY AND AGAIN IF WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AFTER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE SPOKEN AND I WOULD LIKE OUR CHIEF OF DIVERSITY TO GIVE INPUT ON THIS.