Dearest Reader of the Page,
Every student, every day. This is the motto of the Sarasota County School District and it has become a sort of rallying cry for many to remind the school board why they occupy the seats they currently sit upon.
Now, dearest reader, I ask you to bear this motto in mind as we proceed into this offering. The reason for the accommodation request is related to a subject which is, to wit, a rather hot-button topic of late. We ask you to suspend your personal opinions of the catalyst on which this communication is being inspired. Instead, we ask you to refer back to every student, every day.
Some context.
Title IX (an expansion to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that extended protections against discrimination based on sex into education) has been revised by a few administrations; most recently at the request of President Biden to Miguel Cardona to roll back restrictive revisions - particularly as it relates to sexual assault that favor the accused - imposed during the Trump administration under Betsy DeVos. This request by the Biden Administration began back in 2022. Beginning on August 1, 2024, those newly revised policies will go into effect following a lengthy process of review, procedure, public notice, and implementation.
Under the newly minted Title IX protections, the protections have been reverted back to the prior Obama Administration verbiage to include “sexual orientation or gender identity.”
Violation of Title IX protections can result in litigation or loss of federal funding. As of the most recent reporting (2022 - 2023 Funding Report) the state of Florida received 13.99% of its funding through the federal level.
Yes, we are aware that the context provided is a cliff notes version of a significantly substantial law but is necessary, as is the reminder that at the most recent workshop, a resolution was presented by board member Tom Edwards to codify the “every student, every day” motto into action. This offering went over like a lead balloon over a cliff with his fellow board members. Robyn Marinelli was utterly insulted, demanded an apology on behalf of the citizens, and insinuated that anyone bringing such a resolution forward should “resign” before tearing up the document in front of her.
Tim Enos, far more collected, explained his thought process that as a law enforcement officer of 32 years and a school board member, he felt the resolution was redundant as he would always follow the laws and there should be no need for further affirmation of that. Karen Rose somehow managed to fall in between the two, also reiterating that as a sworn constitutional officer she would always adhere to the law while also dismissing political theater and “activism”.
Bridger Ziegler proceeded to question the use of legal counsel to construct such a resolution, reminded the board they had previously decided to NOT bring forward resolutions, and utilized what essentially became a bully pulpit to double down on bringing political theater into the chamber. In addition, she also stated “…to prepare a document without any discussion as a board, I think that’s a reckless use of taxpayers dollars.” (Timestamp 2:40:00)
And so the foundation being laid, we enter into the crux of this article for your consideration.
Agendas for workshops and meetings are to be publically noticed no less than 7 days prior to the scheduled event. This means that the agendas for the May 7th meeting needed to be posted by no later than April 30. In theory, all substantiating documentation should also be publically available no less than 7 days prior but given the need for clarification and revision, the board (we believe) has until the Thursday prior for all documents to be uploaded.
There is no workshop on May 7, nor was one scheduled between posting and the meeting itself, so no further opportunity to discuss policy, suggestions, or issues in advance.
An agenda was posted on April 30, but it was noted that the agenda was revised on May 1 to include a resolution from Mrs. Ziegler to be discussed during member comments at the end of the meeting. We could not find anything within either Florida’s Government-In-The-Sunshine or Roberts Rules of Order to indicate that such an item has to be discussed before being put forward for motion, but perhaps others more educated than your intrepid author can elaborate on that. (See also: Mrs. Ziegler’s quote just a bit back.)
The resolution being put forward by Mrs. Zielger would be to publically state that this board will NOT follow the revisions going into effect on August 1st to Title IX, that they will support Gov. Ron DeSantis in challenging the revisions, and define “sex” as being binary as biologically male or biologically female and immutable.
Now, dearest reader, we ask you to suspend your personal beliefs on the topic described by Mrs. Ziegler in this resolution. We are sure the obvious irony of the resolution after the antics of the previous episode of As The Board Vacilates is apparent and far more the focus of our session here.
The situation that has been created by Mrs. Ziegler is leading her fellow board members as well as Superintendent Connor into a proverbial rock and a hard place. Rose, Enos, and Marinelli have gone on record to repeatedly affirm their positions as “constitutional officers'“. The resolution itself has no teeth; even if it were to be signed, if/when an injunction into the revisions is filed none of them will take effect until the injunction is resolved - but Ziegler is now asking her fellow board members and Superintendent to sign on to actively and openly defying the law - whether they agree with the Department of Education or not.
In addition, the district recently hired Chris Parenteau as the Supervisor of Government Affairs. His department “serves as an advocate for the District’s legislative priorities on behalf of the Superintendent and School Board at the local, state and federal levels.” If an injunction is never brought forward officially, then the federal regulations would supersede the state. When considering all possible outcomes to this, the remaining members of the board are in a no-win situation. But the one thing they can fall back on is their oath.
“I, do solemnly swear or affirm, that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida and that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the State of Florida and I will well and faithfully perform the duties of a member of the Sarasota County School Board on which I am now about to enter.”
So we leave this to you, dear reader, to consider. We ask you all to remove emotion and beliefs on ideology from the equation and look purely at law, procedure, policy, and precedent. Every student, every day means everyone - free of discrimination. If so inspired, we encourage you to contact the board to make them aware of your stance on this matter.
I think the question is, will they be dumb enough to vote against it? With republicans almost unanimously against transgender women in girls bathrooms, etc and a ratio of about 1.75 Republican voters to 1 Democratic voter in Sarasota, they would be foolish to.