Your recent headline and article claiming that the recent school board meeting was “shut down by anti SOGI protesters” did not accurately report the events of the School Board meeting March 10.
I attended the School Board 72 meeting that evening. I had not done so previously, although I am sympathetic to concerns about the real objectives of SOGI and its misuse. I understood that McCay of the Christian Coalition (CC) hoped to present evidence of instances of inappropriate behaviour in schools apparently as a result of SOGI. Prior to their attendance, the CC group had been told by McCay that it was to be respectful and not disruptive. I know many of 20 or so grandparents and parents who attended and none are disruptive or extreme. Except for the unexpected short outburst by one unhappy parent, they conducted themselves quietly and respectfully.
I was aware that McCay believed he could present his concerns at the end of the meeting. The chairman began the meeting by quickly reading through the process to be followed. It seemed, but it was unclear to me, that he was saying that no presentations would be heard other than those related to items already on the agenda. At this point McCay tried to ask for clarification. His point was that if no presentations outside the agenda would be heard, than his group would leave for there would be no reason for them to be there. Now, I think he was wrong to interrupt at this point, but it was also obvious to me that the chairperson reacted poorly and simply tried to shut him down. He could easily have let the question be asked, answeredit with a warning against further interruptions and moved on. The CC group would have left.
It was immediately at that point, less than a few minutes in, that a trustee made a motion to move the meeting to a closed session. He claimed that the board could not discuss their business given the disruption This was nonsense and premature. Without discussion the Board agreed to the motion. It seemed evident that the Board used McCay’s question as an excuse to exclude the CC group.
There was another very troubling aspect to this event. The counter protesting LGBT group did not just “appear” as your article indicates, but rather they were expressly invited in a Facebook message by a school trustee to show up in opposition to the CC group.
Chairman Franklin claims the board is open to hearing from parents, but on this evening they were antagonistic to the CC group’s attendance, unnecessarily closed down an open meeting on a pretext and invited a preferred group to oppose the attendance of the group concerned about the wrongful use of SOGI. This does not suggest that in the future they will fairly consider and address complaints as to the sexualizing of school classrooms resulting from SOGI.
Howard Milner