WE REMEMBER AND HONOR THE VICTIMS, THE HEROES AND HOW THAT HORROR AND TRAGEDY UNIFIED US AS
AMERICANS.
>> THIS WEEK IN SOUTH FLORIDA
CONTROVERSY AND CONFUSION LEAD
MIAMI DADE SCHOOL BOARD TO
REJECT AN LGBTQ HISTORY MONTH.
A PILLOVER CROWD, AND HOURS OF
HEATED SPEECHES ENDED WITH ALL
BUT ONE BOARD MEMBER REJECTING
THE DESIGNATION OF A MONTH TO
CELEBRATE LGBTQ IDENTITY THIS
SCHOOL YEAR AND ALSO REJECTED
THE IDEA OF TEACHING HIGH SCHOOL
SENIORS ABOUT TWO LANDMARK
SUPREME COURT CASES.
THAT VOTE MAY BE THE CLEAREST
INDICATION YET OF THE AFFECTS OF
FLORIDA’S NEW PARENTAL RIGHTS
LAW SCHOOL BOARD VICE CHAIR
STEVE GALEN IS ONE OF THOSE WHO
REJECTED L GRRKS BTQ MONTH AFTER
REPORTING IT LAST YEAR.
GOOD TO SEE YOU, WELCOME TO THE
PROGRAM.
>> GOOD MORNING, GLAD TO BE
HERE, THANK YOU.
>> LET’S START OUT WITH DOES
THIS REALLY VIOLATE IN YOUR MIND
THE PARENT’S RIGHTS IN EDUCATION
LAW BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE THE
RATIONAL FOR THE VOTE.
>> I THINK THE IMPLEMENTATION
DEFINITELY HAS SOME POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES FOR VIOLATIONS TO
OCCUR.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I
HAVE ONLY CONTEMPLATED.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN
EXPRESSED BY TEACHERS IN THE
FIELD WHO ARE VERY, VERY
CONCERNED RELATIVE TO SOME OF
THE CONSEQUENCES THAT CAN BE
LEVIED AGAINST THEM INDIVIDUALLY
FOR VIOLATIONS TO THIS
PARTICULAR LAW.
>> LET ME JUST, AND I DON’T MEAN
TO INTERRUPT, I JUST DON’T WANT
TO LET THAT MOMENT PASS BECAUSE
WERE THE THINGS YOU ARE HEARING
FROM TEACHERS IS KIND OF WHAT I
AM SEEING IS THE CHILLING AFFECT
IS WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT,
IS THAT VALID?
IS THIS SOMETHING STICKILY FOR
THIS VOTE OR IN GENERAL AFTER
THE LAW.
>> AFTER THE LAW, AFTER THE LAW,
AND GLENNA, THIS WAS SOMETHING
THAT I EXPRESSED ACTUALLY IN
COMMITTEE.
SO BEFORE WE ACTUALLY HAD THE
SCHOOL BOARD MEETING I DID SHARE
MY SENTIMENTSES AND THE
COMMUNICATIONS THAT I PERSONALLY
RECEIVED FROM TEACHERS FROM THE
FIELD.
THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS
CALLED ACADEMIC FREEDOM SO WHEN
WE GET DOWN INTO THE SPECIFICS
OF WHAT COURSES AND WHAT
PARTICULAR TOPICS SHOULD BE
TAUGHT, THOSE THINGS DEFINITELY
RESONATED WITH TEACHERS,
SPECIFICALLY WITH THE DISCUSSION
AROUND CRT, AROUND THE PARENTAL
BILL OF RIGHTS.
SO TEACHERS ARE VERY MUCH AWARE,
VERY MUCH IN TUNE AND VERY MUCH
CONCERNED THAT THEY DON’T WANT
TO CROSS THE LINE.
SO WE, I DID HAVE CONCERNS
RELATIVE TO IMPLEMENTATION.
THE LAW SPEAKS SPECIFICALLY TO K
THROUGH THREE FOR INSTRUCTION
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT A SCHOOL
WIDE, DISTRICT WIDE INITIATIVE
THAT WILL POTENTIALLY HAVE
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE
DISTRICT, TEACHERS DID EXPRESS
CONCERNS.
BUT I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING, I
KNOW WE HAVE A SHORT AMOUNT OF
TIME.
I WANT TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR.
WHAT HAPPENED LAST WEDNESDAY
WITH RESPECT TO THIS VOTE.
SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS AND
TEACHERS CAN STILL CELEBRATE.
THEY CAN STILL RECOGNIZE AND
TEACHERS CAN STILL TEACH THOSE
PARTICULAR CASES WITH RESPECT TO
THE LGBTQ ISSUES THAT CAME UP.
SO I WANT TO BE VERY, VERY
CLEAR.
THERE WAS NOTHING TAKEN AWAY,
THERE WAS NOTHING THAT
CURTAILED, THERE WAS NOTHING
THAT PRECLUDES.
WE HAVE AN ANTIDISCRIMINATION
POLICY IN THE DISTRICT AND WE
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND AN
OBLIGATION TO LET STUDENTS AND
TEACHERS BE ABLE TO EXPRESS
THEMSELVES AND INDIVIDUALITY IN
A WAY THAT DOES NOT DISRUPT,
DISRESPECT OR DIVIDE THE SCHOOLS
SO I WANT TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR
ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE I HAVE HEARD
A NARRATIVE THAT SOMETHING WAS
TAKEN AWAY, SOMETHING IS BEING
PREVENTED AND THAT IS PATENTLY
FALSE.
>> JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT IS
NOT OUR NARRATIVE, RIGHT.
THAT IS ANOTHER NARRATIVE.
>> NO, ABSOLUTELY, GLENNA, THAT
IS NOT YOURS, I WANTED TO JUST
GET THAT OUT FOR THE PUBLIC.
I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PHONE CALLS
EVEN JUST BEFORE THIS INTERVIEW
TO CLARIFY THOSE THINGS THAT I
KNOW NOT ONLY AS A POLICY MAKER
BUT THINGS THAT I SERVE WITNESS
TO AS A HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPAL
FOR SEVEN YEARS.
>> SO LET ME JUST CLARIFY, WHAT
YOU JUST SAID WAS AN INDIVIDUAL
TEACHER CAN TEACH, HAS SOME KIND
OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM, CAN TALK
ABOUT LGBTQ MONTH, CELEBRATE THE
CULTURE, AND YET YOU’RE SAYING
THAT THE BOARD VOTED AGAINST IT
BECAUSE IT MIGHT VIOLATE THE
PARENTS RIGHTS AND EDUCATION LAW
WHICH INCIDENTALLY YOUR OWN
SCHOOL BOARD ATTORNEY SAID IT
PROBABLY WOULD NOT.
HE KIND OF CLEARED IT.
SO I’M HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF
COGNITIVE DISNANCE HERE,
TEACHERS CAN TEACH IT EVEN
THOUGH THE BOARD DOESN’T SUPPORT
IT.
>> LET ME BE CLEAR.
THERE ITEM WILL TWO
RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDATION
ONE WHICH IS TO RECOGNIZE AND
CELEBRATE.
THOSE RECOGNITIONS AND
CELEBRATIONS CAN OCCUR AT A
SCHOOL SITE.
MOST OFTEN THOSE RECOGNITIONS TO
CELEBRATE-- CELEBRATIONS ARE
STUDENT-LED AND CAN BE
FACILITATED THROUGH AN ACADEMIC
ADVISOR.
SECONDLY ON THE RECOMMENDATION
IT WAS ABOUT THE TEACHING OF TWO
SPECIFIC SUPREME COURT CASES.
THOSE CASES CAN STILL BE TAUGHT
WITHIN THE CONTENT OF A COURSE
THAT ADDRESSES SUPREME COURT
CASES SUCH AS BROWN VERSUS THE
BOARD, ROE VERSUS WADE, THE DOD
CASE, SUPREME COURT CASES ARE
DEFINITELY ON THE BOOK TO BE
TAUGHT IN THE APPROPRIATE
CONTEXT AT THE APPROPRIATE
LEVEL.
>> SO FOR THOSE ANYONE, WHO
MIGHT NOT BE CLEAR, THOSE CASES
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE TWO
LANDMARK CASES THAT GAVE THE
LGBTQ COMMUNITY RIGHTS TO MARRY,
CIVIL RIGHTS, AND RIGHTS NOT TO
BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST IN THE
WORKPLACE.
SO THOSE ARE SUPREME COURT
CASES, THAT IS HISTORY NO
MATTER.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
TEACHERS CAN TEACH THOSE CASES
WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THEIR
COURSE, ABSOLUTELY.
>> OKAY.
SO ON WEDNESDAY PRETTY HEATED
MEETING.
YOU HEARD A LOT OF PASSIONATE
SPEECHES FROM PEOPLE WITH ALL
KINDS OF PERSPECTIVE.
HOW MUCH DID THOSE KINDS OF
SPEECHES AND THOSE KINDS OF
CROWDS IMPACT WHAT YOU AND YOUR
FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS DO?
>> I THINK, I CAN’T SPEAK FOR MY
FELLOW COLLEAGUES BUT CAN I TELL
YOU AND IF YOU HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO WATCH ME DURING A
SCHOOL BOARD MEETING, I DON’T
COME IN WITH ANY PREDISPOSITION,
DO I LISTEN EITHER SIDE AND I
FIND IT SOME WHAT INTERESTING
THAT, AND IT’S NOT A DEFENSIVE
POSTURE, LISTEN.
I UNDERSTAND THE PASSION, THE
CONVICTION RELATIVE TO THIS
PARTICULAR ISSUE.
WE WENT INTO THIS MEETING WITH
THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM
KNOWING THAT IT HAD THE
POTENTIAL FOR A GREAT DEGREE OF
PASSION,nd A GREAT DEGREE
EMOTION.
SO WE ANTICIPATED THAT.
ON EITHER SIDE OF THIS ISSUE.
BUT WHAT WE DO UNDERSTAND IS
THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND
PUBLIC HEARING FOR A REASON AND
I HAVE BEEN THE ONE THAT LISTENS
TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, TAKES THE
FEED BACK, LOOKS AT ALL SIDES OF
THE ISSUE AND MAKE A DECISION.
I HAD A CONSTITUENT THAT SPOKE
AT THAT MEETING, SHE IS NOT A
MEMBER OF THE PROUD BOYS, SHE IS
NOT A MEMBER OF MOMS FOR
LIBERTY.
SHE IS NOT A MEMBER OF ANY
PARTISAN OPERATIVE.
SHE IS A 70 PLUS YEAR OLD
STAKEHOLDER IN DISTRICT ONE, A
LIFELONG DEMOCRAT, IF I MIGHT
ADD, AND A LADY WHO HAS SOME
STRONG FAITH.
AND SHE SPOKE AT THE MEETING.
AND SO THIS IS NOT AN OPERATION
RELATIVE TO PRESSURE FROM EITHER
SIDE.
BUT I UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT THE
PASSION ON EITHER SIDE, JUST
LAST MONTH WE HAD SOME PEOPLE
THAT CELEBRATED OUR POSITION ON
THE TEXT BOOK ISSUE.
AND GLENNA, YOU HAD SOME PEOPLE,
THE SAME PEOPLE, HAVE A-- THE
DECISION WE MADE LAST WEDNESDAY.
>> YOU READ MY MIND BECAUSE I
WAS GOING TO ASK YOU, THAT TEXT
BOOK DECISION, YOU REVERSED, NOT
YOU PERSONALLY, CHAIR PERLA
HATMAN IN THAT VERY CLOSE VOTE
FIRST WAS VOTING TO REJECT THE
BOOK AFTER THE SAME SORT OF
HEATED MEETING, CHANGED HER VOTE
A FEW WEEKS LATER, THAT ONE
CHANGE OF VOTE NOW HAS THAT TEXT
BOOK BACK IN THE SCHOOL.
SOME PEOPLE OBJECTED TO SOME OF
THE SEX ED COMPONENTS OF IT,
PARENTS HAVE AN OPT-OUT.
WHY IS THIS DIFFERENT?
WHY WAS THIS ONE DIFFERENT THAN
THAT WEDNESDAY?
>> WELL, I WANT TO HONE IN ON
JUST THAT REALITY.
SOME OF THE SAME STAKEHOLDERS
THAT APPLAUD IT, THAT DECISION,
HAVE NOW CONDEMNED THIS
DECISION.
AND THEY BROUGHT FORTH SOME
LEVEL OF CONDEMN NATION WITH
RESPECT TO THIS IS AN ACT OF
HOMOPHOBIA.
ST NOT.
I DON’T WANT TO GET INTO THE
WHOLE NARRATIVE THAT I HAVE A
GOOD FRIEND THAT’S BLACK.
BUT I HAVE A SIBLING, MY BROTHER
WHO I LOVE, WHO I CARE ABOUT,
WHO I AM PASSIONATE ABOUT, HE IS
GAY.
SO THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANY OF
THOSE PARTICULAR THINGS BUT IT’S
JUST IRONIC.
SO WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE,
GLENNA?
THE DIFFERENCE IS THE TEXT BOOK
ISSUE WENT THROUGH A PROCESS.
IT IS A PROCESS OF SCHOOL
ADOPTION FOR TEXT BOOKS DRIVEN
BY THE STATE.
THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS BASED ON
A HEARING OFFICER AND THAT
IMPLICATION HAD RAM ANY
KAITION-- RAMIFICATIONS FOR
INSTRUCTION.
MEANING IF STUDENTS DID NOT HAVE
THAT RESOURCE IN THE CLASSROOM,
TEACHER WAS NOT BE ABLE TO TEACH
TO THOSE PARTICULAR STANDARDS.
SO THE DIFFERENCE WITH THIS
PARTICULAR IDEA IS THAT THIS IS
A CELEBRATION AND A RECOGNITION
BY WHICH IT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED
AS SYMBOLIC IN NATURE.
VERY IMPORTANT SYMBOLISM, LET ME
BE VERY, VERY CLEAR STRKS VERY
IMPORTANT THAT EVERYBODY FEELS A
PART OF OUR EXPERIENCES IN OUR
SCHOOL SYSTEM AND OUR SCHOOLS
AND OUR CLASSROOMS BUT THAT IS
THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE.
ONE HAS SIGNIFICANT IMPLICATIONS
FOR INSTRUCTION AND CURRICULUM
AND TEACHING AND LEARNING.
AND THIS CELEBRATION DID NOT.
>> DR. STEVE GALEN, VICE CHAIR
OF MIAMI DADE SCHOOL BOARD,
GREAT TO HAVE YOU WITH US.