And at last night’s School Board meeting, they did – passed the Transgender and gender non-conforming students policy unanimously except for one of the Gilmanton School Board members in dissension. Even after it was pointed out during the Public Comment session #1 that there were STILL internal and diametrically opposing inconsistencies within the policy – ones that matter and ones that can be legally actionable. The Gilford School Board didn’t care so after the meeting, there was some concerns as to what the remedies would be at this point. Certainly “elections have consequences” (and there is one position up for election in March and two next year) is one avenue. Legal action still remains an option especially as the Board seems hellbent on going and denying Parental Authority by saying that guidance counselors believe their clients are students and thereby excluding Parents from knowing their kids may be expressing gender dysphoria / transgender behavior at school and not at home (e.g., the school will willingly help students lie (by omission) to their Parents and “cover” for the kids).
Can anyone say violation of the Federal FERPA law that prohibits such behavior? And there is still more.
Sidenote: they had a “pre-meeting” before the regular meeting so as to vote on the “Area Agreement” renewal by which Gilmanton sends their kids to the Gilford High School on a tuition basis. That passed unanimously and that was the main reason the Gilmanton Board was present.
And I observed, along with others, that Gretchen Gandini, the Vice-Chair, started up the meeting. OK, where was Chris McDounough, the Chair? One would think that at a meeting where two of the biggest votes of his term, the renewal of the Area Agreement and the highly contested and controversial Policy JBAB. Now, I know I missed last weeks BudComm meeting (TMEW’s birthday) and I know that things come up. But more than one person noticed he was missing and thought it odd – especially as he had expressed thoughts that he would not support JBAB if the original language of Guidance C (in which the Government (the School) was mandating certain speech codes be used by students and staff when speaking to or about transgenders) as well as that biological boys / transgender girls would be allowed to play on the girls teams. While I was able to get rid of Guidance C (threatening legal action), the boys on girls teams remained (i.e., promoting Transjacking).
Funny thing, it seems, with most School Boards – they all have this policy which requires that they all act and speak in lockstep. Once decided on a course of action, EVERY Board member MUST support the vote even if they voted to oppose. In short, a Policy has removed their First Amendment Rights. Imagine that, running to have your mouth taped over? They even have another policy that ONLY the Chair or the Superintendent can speak the media or “outside” people. Again, a short circuit of First Amendment Right to speak freely.
Sidenote: NO office, no matter how low or high, should EVER take that Right away. There is no legislation that does that and why ANYONE would voluntarily do that to themselves is beyond me. The rest of the Board can’t censor them or not count that person’s vote – there is no authorizing legislation that allows that. Once elected, a person has the full complement of rights and responsibilities of the office for their full term (or until they quit, which ever comes first).
I wonder if that is why he wasn’t present – the facade that the Board must ALWAYS present a single front. Knowing that all other members (all female, btw) were in favor of the policy and that he would have been outvoted simply on the sports issue, he took a walk. I have no idea why he was absent (and perhaps for a very good reason: family, work at Fratello’s, sick, accident, other?) but that was the scuttlebutt after the meeting as to why he passed on the vote.
