Carl Ladd, a paid lobbyist for the New Hampshire School Administrators Association, is fighting against accountability in the local public schools.
This past year, Ladd opposed HB140 which creates a private right of action for bullying and cyberbullying. HB140 was signed into law by Governor Sununu which means any person aggrieved as a result of gross negligence or willful misconduct in violation of any provision of RSA 193-F:4 may initiate an action against a school district or chartered public school and may recover court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees as the prevailing party. This was a big win for parental rights in New Hampshire.
The old anti-bullying law had no teeth. If you don’t have highly motivated administrators in your district, some of these bullying cases were being swept under the rug.
RSA 193-F:7 is the section that gave immunity to school districts and employees for “good faith conduct arising from or pertaining to the reporting, investigation, findings, recommended response, or implementation of a recommended response under this chapter.”
Section 9 of the law explicitly stated that the statute created no private right of action for a student who is harmed because the authorities didn’t follow the law, and failed to protect the student from bullying. The court case of Gauthier v. Manchester School District, 168 N.H. 143 (2015) demonstrated how useless the anti-bullying law was.
A female student was assaulted on a school bus. The school principal failed to notify the student’s parents as required by the law. Eleven days later, the young bully assaulted the female student again in the cafeteria, this time causing injuries that required hospital treatment.
The mother of the injured student sued the School District for failing to follow the law to protect her child, but the case was dismissed due to the immunity section of the law.
HB140 was a way to hold accountable those who showed gross negligence or willful misconduct:
Any person aggrieved as a result of gross negligence or willful misconduct in violation of any provision of RSA 193-F:4 may initiate an action against a school district or chartered public school and may recover court costs and reasonable attorneys fees as the prevailing party. For the purposes of this chapter, “gross negligence” means deliberate indifference.
Who could possibly oppose HB140 when there is gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of the school administrator? Carl Ladd from the NHSAA!!
Now Ladd is back trying to protect school employees if they violate the new anti-discrimination law. He’s not happy that the Education Commissioner set up a system so that those who violate the law can be reported to The New Hampshire Department of Education. Who is he trying to protect? Those who discriminate against students or teachers?
The new law applies to discrimination practices which have been aimed at teachers too. Since teachers have been subjected to Critical Race Theory propaganda in professional development, they now have an avenue to present evidence.
There are teachers who do not appreciate the blame and shame CRT message aimed at them through the propaganda presented during professional development. I know, they’ve reached out to me!
Parents know that the vast majority of teachers come to school with a professional attitude to help their kids learn the academics. They are valued and appreciated by all of us.
Carl Ladd denies that this propaganda is being used in our public schools. He says that CRT is taught at the college level. He is technically right, but CRT has been co-opted by radicals who want to push prejudice, hate, and discrimination. I know, I’ve seen the evidence in our New Hampshire public schools.
Some of the administrators have scrubbed their websites knowing that what they published contained hate-filled CRT propaganda. In Litchfield, when parents complained to the school board, the Superintendent removed the links he had posted and apologized to the residents. Instead of denying this has happened, he took responsibility, rectified the situation and apologized. I give him a lot of credit for his response. He put to rest concerns by taking responsibility and correcting the situation.
Carl Ladd is claiming this isn’t happening. Maybe he should attend the school board meetings once in a while. I was at the Litchfield School Board meeting with those angry parents who addressed the CRT related materials that were published on the website.
School districts take valuable resources from their budgets and pay dues to the NHSAA. So in essence, parents pay this organization to fight against them. Talk about a scam on taxpayers.
Parents should tell their local school board members to stop paying dues to the NHSAA. If school administrators want their lobbying services, pay for them out of their own pocket. Teachers have to pay their lobbyists. Why should taxpayers fund lobbyists who lobby against parental rights?
If you are wondering, why there is little or no accountability in our local schools –look no further than the NHSAA. They are at hearings every year lobbying against parental rights and against improving the academics in your local schools. They even opposed parents who wanted better quality standards than what Common Core offered.
The new anti-bullying law now allows parents to sue school districts if administrators do not follow the law. That is a financial penalty that holds administrators accountable. Moms of Liberty will now pay $500 if a public school staff member breaks the anti-discrimination law. One financially penalizes through the courts, the other rewards a whistle blower. Both are a means to hold accountable, those who are violating the rights of your children.
Who opposes that kind of accountability? Carl Ladd and the NH School Administrators Association.
Who supported HB140 and accountability in our public schools? I did. I’m an unpaid lobbyist focused on parental rights and academic excellence in our public schools.
The NHSAA is not working for families in New Hampshire but working against them, and you pay their salaries.
