In these troubling times, our school boards, who are running our publicly funded schools, need to include in board policy that hate speech is forbidden and hate speech includes the N word, “your body, my choice” words, and the Nazi salute.
Changes to the areas of the brain responsible for social processes can lead teens to focus more on peer relationships and social experiences. The emphasis on peer relationships, along with ongoing prefrontal cortex development, might lead teens to take more risks because the social benefits outweigh the possible consequences of a decision. These risks could be negative or dangerous, or they could be positive, such as talking to a new classmate or joining a new club or sport.
Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, said on All Things Considered, “how dangerous it is to speak of people in these broad categories … To be united as a country with so many riches of diversity, we need mercy. We need compassion. We need empathy.” … Budde said at a prayer service turning her gaze towards the president, “I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now,”
Musk has a track record of using antisemitism to spread fear and division, including expressing support for Germany’s far-right party and promoting the “great replacement theory” — both of which the ADL has declared antisemitic. And he’s turned Twitter into X, the world’s largest mainstream platform where white supremacist ideology is promoted and its leaders are paid and verified.
The N-word, a racist and offensive slur, has been used throughout history to demean, humiliate and degrade Black people. Learning about its history, use and harm is critical—especially in schools today.
Sexist and abusive attacks on women, like “your body, my choice” and “get back to the kitchen,” have surged across social media since Donald Trump’s reelection, according to an analysis from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue.
School board elections are important. Many times the races are decided in August in Duval County.
NPR’s First Coast Connect invited all DCPS board candidates on the show.
Here’s the two interviews of the candidates for DCPS district 1.
The interviewer asked Nadine this question:
An organization that has endorsed Tony Ricardo has the mission statement that they believe God has created government to punish evil and protect the good. What are your opinions about that?
I wonder why the interviewer didn’t ask Tony that same question. The mission statement has a vibe of Christian Nationalism or other militant religious organization that aims to use the government to punish based on religious doctrine. Shouldn’t she have asked Tony about that since the organization endorsed him?
She asks Dr. Ebri that question after the 8 minute mark in this video:
Please notice that Dr. Ebri promotes computer literacy, not teaching DEI as Tony Ricardo claims in the below interview. Dr. Ebri alludes to some of the racist and sexist remarks that Tony has said on FB but declines to repeat them. Yasmine calls in about them, but she also declines to repeat them on the air. You can see them in the Tributary article.
The interviewer in the below interview doesn’t challenge Tony by saying, “she didn’t say on my show that she wanted DEI classes; she said she wanted more STEM classes.” The interviewer also doesn’t challenge Tony when he says he’s opposed to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). He says he is opposed to quotas, but that doesn’t answer the question.
Here’s the segment with Tony:
Please notice Tony’s comment about the assassination attempt where he claims that DEI is why the assassin wasn’t spotted earlier. Here’s a link to some facts to counter Tony’s claim. The article/podcast includes the proposition that the secret service is understaffed.
Tony Ricardo won the race and will represent District 1. Why do you think less than 20% of Duval registered voters voted in August? Why do some NPAs still think they can’t vote in the August school board election? I wish more people read the below article back in August. I think it would have motivated District 1 voters to get out and vote for Nadine.
The below article exposes Tony’s bigotry, but did voters read it?
James Muwakkil wrote that letter of recommendation for Dr. Bernier in May of 2024. I don’t think he gives out praises easily based on this October 2023 article. Link below. A few excerpts:
James Muwakkil said, “If they were sincere, we would already know because they would have went and done something. We would know that they’ve suspended students, we would know that they’ve terminated teachers, we would know that they removed coaches,” “We would know, but they haven’t done any of that. They’ve left everything in place, and so we see no reason at this point in time to meet with them. Our goal is to pursue civil rights violation complaints. We want civil rights laws upheld.” “Them reaching out to us to meet doesn’t mean a hill of beans to me,” Muwakkil said. “I don’t necessarily want to meet with them. I want what they’re allowing to be stopped, but they haven’t done so. They have not stepped up and said, ‘We won’t tolerate this.’” Muwakkil said the plan is to protest and hold picket signs outside of the school with the names of the staff members they’re calling to resign on them.
“I recommend Dr. Bernier as a candidate for superintendent without reservation,” former Orange County Superintendent Barbara Jenkins wrote in a reference letter praising his “passion for student success, combined with his intellect and work
This article is about the School Board Chair in Lee County. I post here to demonstrate the toxic environment that Bernier joined.
Lee County School Board member Chris Patricca is under fire after an investigative report found a pattern of bullying and demeaning behavior, leading to school leaders taking action tonight. The school board took almost all night to address the issue. Quite a few people spoke during public comment, some of them even former board members themselves. This investigative report dates back to May 12, 2022, when school board attorney Kathy Dupuy-Bruno filed a written complaint, hoping to get whistleblower protection. The allegation was that board member Chris Patricca engaged in a pattern of bullying and demeaning behavior toward Dupuy-Bruno and created a hostile working environment. The investigation took place over the course of six months with 12 witnesses, including Patricca and other board members. “I can attest to the fact that demeaning behavior is part of Ms. Patricca’s M.O.,” said Vaughn. The board voted to accept the investigative reports, barely passing 4 to 3 with Patricca rejecting the findings. But the board unanimously agreed on one thing— voting to require all board members to take bullying and harassment training, as well as attend and participate in a whistleblower and retaliation workshop. Meaning board members will need to complete that training by October 1.
To: “Lori O. Hershey” <hersheyl@duvalschools.org>, “April A. Carney” <carneya1@duvalschools.org>, “Kelly G. Coker” <cokerk@duvalschools.org>, “Cynthia H. Pearson” <PearsonC1@duvalschools.org>, “Charlotte D. Joyce” <joycec@duvalschools.org>, “Warren A. Jones” <jonesw2@duvalschools.org>, “Darryl D. Willie” <willied@duvalschools.org>
Honorable School Board,
I heard Mayor Deegan and Councilman Diamond say at a Atlantic Beach City Commissioner meeting that ABE isn’t going to be closed. Why does it still remain on the closure list?
Why hasn’t the school board already taken ABE, Fishweir, Stockton, Holiday Hill , and other schools that the community made passionate pleas to save off the list?
The board can adjust the list gradually, yes? Why won’t the board vote to save the schools that the community loves? They could also develop more alternates based on the feedback they’ve received so far. Alternate 2 for the Terry Parker feeder pattern does keep Holiday Hill open. Why not suggest more alternates? Is the board seriously listening to the community and will the board adjust the plans based on feedback they are getting?
At a recent community meeting for District 3 to discuss the proposed changes to the MFP (Master Facility Plan) Moms For Liberty (M4L) were there making public comments. Someone in the audience called out the Moms For Liberty (M4L) lady in the orange dress after she spoke and loudly said, “Yea well you send your kids to Private!”
Charter schools and private schools are doing a good job getting their supporters out to vote as evidenced by Moms For Liberty April Carney winning her election. We need public school supporters getting out to vote so no more M4L candidates get on our school board. M4L’s goal seems to be to harm our public schools, in my opinion (of course) and the opinion of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
What can our neighborhoods do to keep the school board from closing their neighborhood school?
Excerpts from this article:
In both these cities and others with proposed closures, communities fought back, and school closures lost political favorability.
Thus, while state and federal policies are certainly to blame for school closures, school district leaders make moral decisions … without adequately assessing the harms that closures cause or the projected cost savings.
The job of the locally elected school board is to make every public neighborhood, magnet, and center school EXCELLENT! The charter schools have their own governing boards. As a 2013 TU article makes clear, “One of the biggest policy priorities for the charter school industry in recent years has been expansion.”
In a recent TU article Marks Woods quoted a public-school supporter, “If the school shuts down, I believe you start to see a decline in the whole neighborhood. In my opinion, it would be devastating.” The article continues to quote the supporter saying the neighborhood school is the main pillar of “cohesiveness and stability” for a neighborhood.
I’d like to argue that vouchers are a better idea than charters IF
They have a large endowment
They subsidize the tuition for students who can’t afford the tuition that the voucher doesn’t cover
They are subject to the same grading system that the public schools are subject to. This could also help to revamp the testing system to be more meaningful.
They are subject to the same non-discrimination laws as the public schools—they can’t have a RFRA type exemption.
Charter schools keep asking for more and more money. They are now competing for the same exact dollars that fund the public schools. When I say public schools, I mean the real public schools.
Here’s an example of a charter school conglomerate that
1. Closed a charter school located at a place where the grifters weren’t profiting from the lease payments. They gave the parents of the students one day notice before they closed
2. They are expanding in Jacksonville
3. The people (who seem to me to be grifters) went to a school board meeting advocating for public schools to be closed. Someone told me this guy is an employee of the charter school mentioned in item #2.
(Sorry about the ad that’s showing in the website preview)
Here’s an example of a private school that I think meets the criteria I mentioned above:
I definitely do NOT think the district should allow staff (including teachers) to carry guns into the school. NRA (and their advocates such as Board Members Carney and Joyce) are wrong to think more guns are the answer. Even Gualtieri in his presentation said arming staff will not prevent a child from getting shot. To keep guns out of the school is what is necessary. DCPS already has a number of prevention procedures that Parkland didn’t use. The school has its own police force that routinely checks to make sure school doors are locked so unauthorized people can’t enter. Gualtieri said in his city, the city’s police budget helps fund security for the schools. Would JSO fund metal detectors for every district-run and charter school? One thing Gualtieri emphasized was “see something, say something.” If you hear a student threatening, report it. Here’s the safety protocols for the district-run schools:
If your child attends a charter school, ask the charter school governing board for their safety protocols. Each charter school governing board can make its own decision about staff carrying guns into the schools. And if the charter school allows it and that bothers you, transfer your child out. District-run schools do have a uniformed officer, at every school, whose only job is school safety. The armed uniformed school safety officer needs extensive training to be able to properly react under pressure. I’d like the required training to be increased.
References:
Armed adults frequently mishandle their guns in schools. Keeping kids safe means keeping guns off K-12 campuses.
The most effective physical security measures—the ones on which most experts agree—are access control measures that keep shooters out of schools in the first place.
A coordinated group of people read book excerpts that were inappropriate for most young children at a recent school board meeting, a meeting that is open to all.
The district should not remove books in response to those antics. There is a formal review process to remove challenged books.
I support the school district’s efforts to respect the parental rights of all with its formal opt-out process for parents who want more restrictions for their children.
I support the school district’s committee review process—it allows a book to be considered in its entirety.
What is appropriate in a self-selected book for independent reading is different from what we expect to find in a book read aloud to a captive audience of various ages. In addition, books selected for 12th graders may not be appropriate for younger people.
According to state law, “Parents shall have the right to read passages from any material that is subject to an objection” but it does not say the book must be “read aloud at a school board meeting.”
Some books are approved for specific ages so reading them out-loud in a public forum is a bad idea in my view. BUT if the majority of the school board feels it is important to allow people to read provocative passages from books out of context to all of the school board, I suggest placing the reading of passages from books that are in our school libraries LAST on the school board meeting agenda so audience members can decide if they want to leave the meeting before that agenda item. I don’t think it is a good idea because there is a process for book reviews that the school board should insist people follow
I also have asked the school board to require people who speak during the public comment period to not only state their name but also what city they live in. I’d like to know if the provocateurs reside within our city or belong to a statewide organization trying to stir up trouble with its main goal to harm our public neighborhood schools.
Plain Reading of the Law
There is a plain reading of the law that needs to be considered before entertaining these performances and taking action against books in response to these antics.
1006.28(2)(a)(2.) starts with, “each district school board must adopt a policy regarding an objection by a parent or a resident of the county to the use of a specific material, which clearly describes a process to handle all objections and provides for resolution.” Everything falling underneath this provision is related to the formal policy for objection created and upheld by the district. The district’s current policy has a clear objection process that does not include the immediate removal of a book that is not allowed to be read aloud at meetings.
The last provision within 1006.28(2)(a)(2.) reads as follows:
Any material that is subject to an objection on the basis of sub-sub-subparagraph b.(I) or sub-sub-subparagraph b.(II) must be removed within 5 school days of receipt of the objection and remain unavailable to students of that school until the objection is resolved. Parents shall have the right to read passages from any material that is subject to an objection. If the school board denies a parent the right to read passages due to content that meets the requirements under sub-sub-subparagraph b.(I), the school district shall discontinue the use of the material. If the district school board finds that any material meets the requirements under sub-subparagraph a. or that any other material contains prohibited content under sub-sub-subparagraph b.(I), the school district shall discontinue use of the material. If the district school board finds that any other material contains prohibited content under sub-sub-subparagraphs b.(II)-(IV), the school district shall discontinue use of the material for any grade level or age group for which such use is inappropriate or unsuitable.
“Parents shall have the right to read passages from any material that is subject to an objection” doesNOT continue to say “aloud at a board meeting.”
Notice that it states that materials that are challenged due to criteria found to meet II.-IV. are not required to be completely removed from all students, but from students where it is not age or developmentally appropriate for them to have access to this kind of content. This means books with descriptions of “sexual conduct” as defined in 847.001(19) may be available to some high school students.
Some of this information is from Florida Freedom to Read. You can find more about them at:
1. Please put a limit on the total expenditure so that the cost is not “indeterminate.” Representative Tuck has offered her estimate. Please make that amount or less the cap.
2. Also please put it as a separate line item in the budget and a guarantee it won’t hurt the funding of the neighborhood and magnet schools!
3. Also please make it so only private schools that have a large endowment will be eligible for the voucher. Experience shows that schools with the vouchers as their only revenue are subpar. IF you don’t do this, then please at least have an accountability and transparency element of the bill so the taxpayers can be assured our money is spent ONLY on quality schools.
4. In addition to putting a dollar limit on the effect of the bill, please prioritize the vouchers as follows:
Kids with disabilities and family income less than 375% of poverty level
Kids with disabilities and family income less than $300,000
Other kids with family income less than $300,000
Everyone else
5. Also please institute some sort of penalty if the private school misleads the parent as to what services they offer.
I wish you wanted to make EVERY neighborhood school excellent and include lots of choices within each neighborhood school rather than funding the private schools which parents were willing to pay for themselves. Residents can opt out of public services, but it shouldn’t mean the taxpayers have to pay for it.
THIS BLOG, however, is about how the voucher expansion bills appear to allow double dipping by ESA recipients when they enroll part-time in Florida’s traditional public, magnet or charter schools. This is a problem that needs to be fixed. Currently part-time students (mostly homeschoolers) are funded through the state’s funding formula, the FEFP. … Line 212 says the ESA can be used to purchase contracted services provided by a public school or school district, including classes, and makes it clear that part-time enrollment is not considered public school enrollment. No mention is made regarding the determination of costs for these contracted services. Beginning on line 1324 of SB 202:
1002.44 Part-time public school enrollment.— (1) Any public school in this state, including a charter school, may enroll a student on a part-time basis who meets the regular school attendance criteria in s. 1003.01(13)(b)-(e), subject to space and availability according to the school’s capacity determined pursuant to s. 1002.31(2)(b). (2) A student attending a public school on a part-time basis pursuant to this section shall generate full-time equivalent student membership as described in s. 1011.61(1)(b). (3) A student attending a public school on a part-time basis pursuant to this section is not considered to be in regular attendance at a public school as defined in s. 1003.01(13)(a).
Translating that legalese: The bill says that ESAs [line 212] can be spent for contracted services, including taking classes on a part-time basis at a public school or school district. Later the bill says [line 1325] that part-time attendance at a public school is reimbursed via the FEFP, the state funding formula. Which is it? Do school districts negotiate contracts for services with ESA recipients or do they continue to get funded for part-time attendance via the FEFP? When my question was asked to House Appropriations staff, I was told the intention was to pay public schools via the FEFP, which would mean taxpayers would be paying double for ESA recipients to attend public schools part-time – once via the ESA and again via the district’s FEFP.
This is what I sent to the committee that will hear SB 202 on March 8, 2023:
SB202 will be heard in your committee on March 8 at 11am.
If students receiving the voucher money use public school services, then payment for those services should come out of their voucher money not via the FEFP. Please fix that. Otherwise taxpayers would be paying double for ESA recipients to attend public schools part-time – once via the ESA and again via the district’s FEFP. Please allow the school district to negotiate a fair price to be paid out of the voucher including the amount to cover the capital outlay funds that the school didn’t receive because the voucher student isn’t included in the per student count when the capital outlay funds are distributed.
If the students want to make use of the public school services or facilities, they need to reimburse the school district, i.e. the taxpayers. Parents can opt out of the public schools, but taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to fund that decision. If you continue to force taxpayers to fund that decision, you need to make sure that taxpayers are funding quality education in these alternative choices PLUS make sure it isn’t hurting the quality of our public schools.
Please don’t ignore the experience of Arizona and New Hampshire by underestimating the cost of the Universal Voucher expansion. There needs to be a cap! How much can Florida’s budget handle before it starts to hurt the funding of our public schools?
Also, do millionaires really need this subsidy for the elite private school tuition of their children? The current income limit is 375% of poverty level. Raise it if you want, but don’t raise it to a family income of a million dollars. It’s outrageous that you want middle class families to subsidize the elite private school tuition of millionaires.
Just last week, the Idaho legislature rejected a similar Universal ESA bill with GOP lawmakers concerned they had “absolutely no clue what the dollar amount on this is” and saying “It’s actually against my conservative Republican perspective to hand this money out with no accountability that these precious tax dollars are being used wisely.”
Since it passed, DeSantis has repeatedly mischaracterized what the bill does. He’s said the bill will stop young students from being “sexualized” in the classroom. Amendments offered by Democratic and Republican lawmakers to broaden the bill to include a prohibition on teaching young kids about all kinds of human sexuality — not just topics that appear to relate to LGBTQ Floridians — were roundly rejected by GOP lawmakers.
Some charter and school choice advocates are clear about their goal. The ultimate hope of many, as Milton Friedman wrote (see Page 8), is to bring about a transfer from government to private enterprise, in part by “enabling a private, for-profit industry to develop” in education.
This excerpt from that 2018 Integrity Florida Report caught my eye because the Florida legislature just passed SB 758 which will establish a statewide charter school authorizer:
“The Florida Supreme Court removed from the November 2018 ballot a constitutional amendment that would have established a statewide charter school authorizer. Approval of that amendment would have added momentum for further charter school growth.”
A March 21st letter to the TU mischaracterized HB 1557. If HB 1557 was really about banning discussion of sexual activity in grades K-3, then Senator Baxley would have changed his bill to include Senator Brandes’ amendment (which replaces the “don’t say gay” language with “don’t discuss sexual activity”).
This is a great video that explains Brandes’ amendment that Baxley refused to include in his bill:
You can listen to Senator Baxley’s words on the senate floor as well as in the committee meetings defending his bill. He clearly didn’t write the bill. Some group wrote it and got him to sponsor it. From his own words, it appears he agreed to sponsor it because he thinks it’s not OK to be gay. Of course, that’s incredibly sad. I find it comparable to saying “it’s not OK to be black or disabled or anything that’s different from me.“
I posit that the real goal of HB 1557 (by the people who actually wrote the bill) is to harm the district-run schools because the bill doesn’t apply to charter or voucher funded private schools. Please take a look at the bill analysis (ref 9). The real goal of the bill is to harm the neighborhood and magnet schools by allowing parents to bring frivolous lawsuits based on the vague wording in the bill or at least that’s how it appears to me. A recent article in the New York Times (ref 10) clearly explained how the bill is vague and could lead to frivolous lawsuits.
If the bill was truly about the health and safety of the students, then it would apply to all publicly funded schools. Charter schools and voucher funded private schools are required to comply with health and safety laws.
I offer as support for my suggestion the wording in HB -1B signed by the Governor late in 2021 specifically exempting charter and voucher funded private schools. The real purpose (of HB-1B) is to allow Education Commissioner Corcoran to financially harm the district-run schools that followed CDC guidelines. Corcoran didn’t want to financially harm the charter or voucher funded private schools that also disobeyed Dr. Ladapo’s rule by following CDC guidelines. That’s how it seems to me. IF it was really about the health of the students, wouldn’t it apply to ALL publicly funded schools?
HB 1557 as well as HB-1B are attempts at financially harming the schools run by the locally elected school boards rather than an actual health concern. They appear part of the movement to privatize our public school system. We must vote out these legislators who are trying to harm our neighborhood and magnet schools in their efforts to privatize public education.
At minute 31 in the Appropriations committee meeting, Senator Gibson asked if HB 1557 (the Don’t Say Gay bill) covered charter schools. The bill sponsor, Senator Baxley, said he didn’t know and went to ask the staff. He came back and said it only applies to the traditional public schools. Senator Stargel, the chair of the Appropriations Committee, said Baxley was wrong–she said his bill covered the traditional and charter schools. I followed up with Senator Stargel asking her under what statute HB 1557 will apply to charter schools. She hasn’t replied to my email. The main Florida statute governing charter schools is f.s. 1002.33. It specifically says charter schools are exempt from statute chapters 1000-1013 (except a few covering such things as health, safety, and testing). During the public comment period of the committee meeting around the one hour and 36 minute mark, Senator Stargel again insisted the bill applied to the charter schools, but seemed to indicate it didn’t apply to voucher funded private schools. The bill’s language specifically mentions district schools (but not charter schools) so how does it apply to charter schools? And if it does apply to charter schools because of its supposed health aspect, then it would also apply to voucher funded private schools according to f.s. 1002.421 Link to the video of the committee meeting that I mentioned:
3. F.S. 1002.421 reads in part as follows: A private school participating in an educational scholarship program established pursuant to this chapter must (g) Meet applicable state and local health, safety, and welfare laws, codes, and rules …
4. HB 1557 references f.s. 1002.20 which uses the vague term public school and says: K-12 student and parent rights.—Parents of public school students must receive accurate and timely information regarding their child’s academic progress and must be informed of ways they can help their child to succeed in school. K-12 students and their parents are afforded numerous statutory rights including, but not limited to, the following …
5. But notice that f.s. 1002.33 says 1002.20 doesn’t apply to charter schools. F.S. 1002.33 reads in part: (a) A charter school shall operate in accordance with its charter and shall be exempt from all statutes in chapters 1000-1013. However, a charter school shall be in compliance with the following statutes in chapters 1000-1013 …. Those statutes pertaining to student health, safety, and welfare.
7. Charter schools and voucher funded private schools are supposed to comply with health and safety laws BUT the wording in HB -1B signed by the Governor late in 2021 specifically exempted charter and voucher funded private schools. The bill reads in part: A district school board, a district school superintendent, an elected or appointed local official, or any district school board employee may not…
8. F.S. 1014.04 appears to apply to all schools, not just publicly funded schools. I hope a journalist will do a deep dive on what “public school means” and which bills apply to ALL schools whether they are publicly funded or not. 1014.04 Parental rights.— All parental rights are reserved to the parent of a minor child in this state without obstruction or interference from the state, any of its political subdivisions, any other governmental entity, or any other institution, including, but not limited to, all of the following rights of a parent of a minor child in this state …
9. Excerpt from the bill analysis for HB 1557 which does NOT say charter and voucher funded private schools BUT only district schools: Bring an action against the school district to obtain a declaratory judgment that the school district procedure or practice violates the provision in the bill and seek injunctive relief. A court may award damages and must award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to a parent who receives declaratory or injunctive relief.
10. This article examines Florida’s HB 1557 and explains why it is vague and can lead to frivolous lawsuits:
Unite Us Do Not Divide Us 