This is Part 2 of "The Main Event". For full context, please click to read Part 1 of The Main Event including our opening commentary.
The following will be covered in this Part 2 of "The Main Event":
Continuation of Section B: Delegate Questions & Comments Period:
13. Proposal of policy/requirement of Teacher/Administrator neutrality on political matters.
14. Suggestions on effectively addressing widespread parental concerns (group meetings instead of meetings with individual parents)
15. We need to be counter-cultural in a sinful world, not follow society’s patterns.
16. Our teachers should be given adequately preparation to address controversial issues in the classroom.
17. A parent’s general reference to a past “racial incident” at SAA (without details).
18. There is a cloud hanging over school because of personnel and curriculum decisions.
19. SAA has a history and pattern of not giving parents chances to be heard on grievances.
Section E: Non-Delegate Questions & Comments Period:
1. What consideration will be given to forming a Parent-Teacher Association?
2. How was Judie Rosa’s termination on April 1 in the school’s best interests?
3. Expression of appreciation of SAA Staff.
4. Is there a policy on teacher neutrality on political matters?
________________________________________________
Speaker 5: Paul Rivera (Non-Delegate). I want to clearly understand the messaging here tonight. I had dialogue with Mrs. Steinert about “So You Want to Talk About Race?” but still had questions, and then asked to speak to Mrs. Bowerman. The big picture is that this book was never approved by any SDA curriculum committee at any level anywhere for use in the high school curriculum. Please correct me if I am wrong, either Mrs. Bowerman or you. And if in fact it was not approved for use among high-schoolers, then it had no business in my son’s classroom.
I am also concerned about bias and politics creeping into the classroom. This school and our church have no authority on matters of politics, political indoctrination, or taking sides on controversial political matters. It is a poor and terrible teaching practice to express personal opinions of sensitive political topics because it taints and poisons the learning atmosphere.
I am not a delegate, although I received 5 votes of which I am proud, [We hear you, Non-Delegate Rivera, and we addressed the non-democratic selection of CM delegates in our post Constituency Meeting or Couples' Retreat? ] but I would like for a delegate to make a motion or to move for an amendment to the SAA Constitution to prohibit faculty from expressing personal political bias or favoritism in the classroom. [Thank you Non-Delegate Rivera, this was the most important proposal of the evening. A measure to require neutrality of SAA personnel on controversial political matters is needed. But on the other hand, delegates approving an amendment to the SAA Constitution on the floor of the CM? Good luck with that! What you don’t realize sir is that the delegates are expected to smile and nod quietly and politely, but not actually do anything of substance other than rubber-stamp everything the Principal and Secret School Board Chairperson say. Don’t confuse a CM with a constitutional convention, or you’ll be disappointed. But you lucked out at this CM with some delegates that actually took their jobs seriously and spoke up to challenge the systems of power.] This is terrible for the classroom and for learning. We don’t send our children to a Christian school to be politically indoctrinated, whether it’s a hard or soft indoctrination. So I hope that this constituency will hold the school accountable to never allow such a thing, which would be a betrayal of the trust we put in our teachers, whom we all love and appreciate. But there is a line that was crossed with this book which had no business in the classroom.
Response from SAA (by Mark Noble): I agree with you on the point of political indoctrination. As Christians we must look to the Bible for authority and salvation, not to a political party. Yet we are all individuals with personal preferences. In all of my years in Adventist education I can tell you of all my teachers which ones were conservative or which ones were liberal. They may have talked about their politics, but they never indoctrinated anyone. [So you apparently see nothing wrong with teachers bringing their personal politics into the classroom. And how can you know for sure that no one was indoctrinated? Did you do an exit interview of every classmate after each year of your education? Clearly you don't understand the serious problem with politics being injected into the classroom, and the harmful and divisive effect it can have on impressionable young minds.] We need to equip our students to be able to go out into the real world and have conversations with people of different perspectives and backgrounds. I don’t view that as indoctrination. We need to be able to have dialogue in a peaceful, meaningful way as Christians. [No one disagrees with the principle that students need to be prepared to deal with people of opposing viewpoints. The problem in this case was one of CRT toxicity and imbalance. Were there any non-CRT viewpoints given to fairly balance and counteract the hard CRT material forced upon the Freshmen? Was that question part of the Secret School Board investigation? A proper education balances any controversial or partisan material with opposing viewpoints being given equal time. Was that done by Mrs. Steinert in her class? If only (or mostly) one side of controversial material is presented, then it no longer is a balanced education. It leans toward indoctrination.]
Follow-up from Speaker 5: Paul Rivera (Non-Delegate). Yes, but was that book ever approved by any SDA curriculum committee anywhere for use in high school?
Response from SAA( by Mark Noble): I’m not aware of any book that was approved to talk about cultural diversity or race from any SDA group for education, because that doesn’t exist yet and it is being created. So the teacher went out and found the next best thing which was an NAD website where resource books were put out for our churches and pastors to be able to use. She chose excerpts from the book that was on there. That website is a work in progress. Our commitment is that we are moving away from that material and will be using something else going forward. [That means “no”, this book was never approved for use in the high school curriculum by any SDA committee anywhere. It apparently was one individual teacher’s selection, which just happened to be a book steeped in atheist, Marxist, racist, and divisive CRT. How’s that for political neutrality in the classroom?]
Speaker 6: Rose Melendez (Delegate): I apologize for playing Monday-morning quarterback, but I have a suggestion for the administration. I am hearing that there were multiple conversations with multiple sets of parents, but not at one time. My recommendation is that you have a meeting with all the concerned parents at once, instead of multiple meetings with individual parents. This way you can hear all of the concerns, and explain your rationale to everyone at once, and clarify any misperceptions. When you have so many conversations separately, it will lead to many different conflicting perceptions. You should have gotten everyone together in one meeting, or one Zoom. [A smart and reasonable suggestion. It should be obvious to SAA leadership to do this, but do they ever? Let’s see if they start to do this. If so, it would be one small step for SAA administration, but one giant leap for transparency and equal treatment of all concerned parents.]
Speaker 7: Bob Burrow (self-identified as School Board Member, automatic Delegate). Let’s be forward looking. I think we can agree that the book probably needed more examination and exclusion for Freshmen. I don’t disagree with the goals you have set forth, but the vehicle was and is flawed. Let’s look forward, not backward. Mistakes were made, let’s admit to it. [Wow, how refreshing to hear a simple and unqualified admission of a mistake by a power player within SAA. How unlike SAA and its endless game of corporate dodgeball.] On the political indoctrination point raised by Paul, instead of making quippy jabs and quotes about Trump that are popular in the culture, let’s teach our kids about what the Constitution says and what founding principles are, including how they were hypocrites in some ways. That’s just part of our history. I think we have missed the mark here, but we do have a plan for going forward. I hate the term “transparency” because it just doesn’t mean anything to me anymore. [Yes, thank you. We now have public validation of what we already knew, that transparency means nothing to SAA’s Secret School Board, or its administration either.] But people do need to understand what’s going to happen. We’ve heard parents tonight. There’s a lot of pain. I had no idea and I’m on the SAA Board. [What in the actual hell did this self-identified Secret School Board member just say? “I had no idea and I’m on the school board.” WHAT? It actually makes sense that rank-and-file Secret School Board members would have no idea about the harm CRT did at SAA because Delegate Faehner reported that she was BLOCKED from addressing CRT concerns at the Secret School Board's next meeting. As if that were not bad enough, it now appears that Secret School Board Chairperson Noble and his Vice-Chairperson German Rodriguez didn’t even share their form letter addressing the concerns of so many parents with their own Secret School Board members? And so Secret School Board members “have no idea” of how much pain parents and students were and still are in over this issue, despite the fact that the Secret School Board’s role is oversight of the school? And despite the "investigation" by Secret School Board leadership that met with 2 parents, teachers, and administrators in the school? Did they not even bother to report to the rest of the Secret School Board? What an unbelievable display of internal dysfunction and ineffectiveness of SAA’s Secret School Board.] Maybe it's because I don’t really talk to anybody. [Wait, what? You huh? Let me get this straight: SAA's Secret School Board's members are officially unidentified and undisclosed to school parents, and therefore school parents who don't know who they are then can’t talk to them either. But this particular board member doesn't even try to dialogue with anyone anyway? Not just failing to talk with parents, but also fellow board members? Oh this is rich! This is also the full cardiac arrest of democracy at SAA on display for all to see and hear. This is the dysfunctional board that exercises "oversight" for the school we are paying tens of thousands of dollars of tuition to, and then are instructed to trust for unexplained and illogical decisions - like the Judie Rosa one?] We need to be forward-looking and appreciative of what our teachers have done. Yes a mistake was made. But I’ve found that if we admit to our mistakes then most people of faith are forgiving. But we do have to stand up and say, “look we’re not going to do that, it doesn’t work.”
[Thank you Delegate and Secret School Board Member Burrow, that was really refreshing to hear. A simple and sincere mea culpa like yours would have sounded infinitely better coming from Secret School Board Chair Mark Noble or Principal Bowerman, but they have had many chances and opted to either pass or dissemble. We’ll still receive it from you and say “thank you” for validating parental concerns and telling the truth about how dysfunctional and disconnected the Secret School Board is even from itself, let alone from stakeholders.]
Speaker 8: Amanda Perry (Delegate). Will notice of the use of supplemental materials be given or specifically listed in advance to parents? Will notice be given for use of any sensitive materials being introduced to students that could be a touchpoint for people?
Response from SAA( by Mark Noble): The teacher very quickly realized that the best practice would have been to notify parents. [Mrs. Steinert is not a rookie. The fact that an experienced teacher did not follow this obvious and common-sense practice is itself highly suspicious and troubling.] There will not be notice given of short excerpts being used by teachers, however large excerpts shouldn’t be used again in this same way.
[Hold up again, STOP! If excerpts are NOT supposed to be used in the way Mrs. Steinert used "So You Want to Talk About Race?", then why did you go on record in Mark Noble on Literature Selection writing a completely contradictory statement?: "SAA has established processes for choosing both literature and excerpts that are used in the classroom. The teacher followed these processes in selecting this particular literature excerpt. In this case, the teacher went above and beyond the current process consulting other staff members at SAA regarding use of the excerpts. No single individual or group mandated or directed that this particular material was to be used." Mr. Secret School Board Chairperson, your pants are on fire.]
Response from SAA( by Tissiana Bowerman): The teacher had pure intentions and spent a lot of time working on this. It’s not easy for her to sit in this room and listen to all this. [Principal Bowerman is primarily concerned with Mrs. Steinert’s feelings here. Did Mrs. Bowerman express the least bit of concern for the feelings of the 14 and 15 year-old freshmen students in Mrs. Steinert's class who were reading material snuck past their parents that painted whites as inherently racist? Or blacks as inherently inadequate and needing of help and rescue? And brown, red, and yellow children? Well they don't even get mentioned. They're just invisible in the black-white CRT binary. Any tears for them, Tissiana?] We have heard you and are looking for ways to do better in matters of sensitivity and also defining better what is supplemental vs. curricular.
Speaker 9: Stephanie Roberts (Non-Delegate): The teacher needed to be supported and educated to be prepared to share this material with the students. My son was in the class and brought questions to me about the book, and it made me uncomfortable. But we had serious conversation about it. While I didn’t come here to talk about this topic, I’m glad we are talking about it today. It’s not easy for a child of color in a majority Caucasian school, but he loves his friends who are mostly Caucasian. I’m sure the teacher had good intentions, but I didn’t have time to read the book and so I didn’t. Hearing today from parents about the contents of the book, I can now understand why my son felt the way that he did about it. Teachers have to be properly trained to teach this kind of material alongside biblical principles. Both of my sons attended SAA, but Andrew my son had a negative racial experience in grade 6 which brought up a lot of questions for him. But he loves his friends and being here. I work at the University of Maryland and teaching about diversity is definitely the trend now. As a black woman, I almost wish that you wouldn’t talk about it and just stick to the principles of God’s love, because that’s why I send my son to a Christian school instead of a public school.
[Thank you profusely, Non-Delegate Roberts, that was so powerfully stated, and also unifying yet without ignoring some difficult truths. This illustrates the fundamental flaw of presumption by assuming that black or other racial and ethnic minority parents want CRT taught to their children in a SDA Christian school instead of basic Christian principles of education. This CRT book made students and parents uncomfortable across the spectrum of skin color. However, listening to Secret School Board Chair Noble’s apologia of “So You Want to Talk About Race?”, there was simply no reason for students to worry, be bothered or frightened about anything at all in this book. Thus students like Mrs. Roberts' son and those others referenced by Delegates Faehner and Toscano earlier in the evening who were in any way disturbed by CRT must just be too weak, fragile, and overly sensitive for Freshman English class at SAA. They need to just suck it up and take it like full grown men. If only Secret School Board Chairperson Noble had followed his own professorial standards from Mark Noble on Literature Selection : “The appropriateness of literature also varies depending on the age, maturity, and sensitivity of individual students.” This is exactly the opposite of what happened by imposing graduate-school level Critical Race Theory onto 9th Grade English, during one of the most contentious political and social moments in recent US history, and doing so underhandedly. Was that taking into account the “age, maturity, and sensitivity of individual students”? Like hell. What a joke.]
Speaker 10: Tony Touma (self-identified SAA Board Member, and automatic Delegate). We have to be very careful in the current age not just to adopt the culture and be like any other school. We have to be counter-cultural. That’s what Jesus was. There’s a cultural tsunami coming at our children and if we’re not prepared to stop it, we are going to lose them. [Very well said, Secret School Board Member and Automatic Delegate Touma. However in the case of CRT, SAA just followed the lead of the prevailing political-social culture rather than resisting it.]
Speaker 11: Bob Gamble (Delegate). – To prepare for tonight’s meeting I read lots of text messages and emails from all over the country from former members, friends, and also non-Adventists. There have been changes to our church and school in the past 6 years under Pastor Stuart. The discussion over this book amplifies the concern about whether or not our school is following the path that it is supposed to. We have an obligation to all the students to follow that path. We are in a survival mode at this point in the school’s history. The question I keep hearing from friends is “What is happening to your Taj Mahal school?” We’re under a huge cloud. Personnel decisions and curriculum decisions have led to this. This cloud won’t go away quickly. Let’s separate facts from innuendo about the things that have happened here in the past months, and adhere to the school’s principles. Satan is having a ball because we’re in a world of division. But he has underestimated us.
Point of order raised by Tom Wetmore: [In order to stop Delegate Gamble’s extended period of commentary]
Speaker 12: Samantha Young (Delegate): I have heard people say here that as parents they came to the administration with concerns, but were turned away because others parents had come first. Any time a parent or family member approaches with concerns they should have the opportunity to be heard. I had a son that graduated from SAA under a prior administration. There was a time when we had concerns, and we were turned away by that prior administration. That is a hurtful place to be. There should be an in-service during the pre-week for teachers about how to select materials, and how to communicate that to parents if the material might be considered controversial. That would be an easy solution.
[Reader, are you noticing the pattern here? Delegate Faehner shut out from addressing the Secret School Board, Delegate Toscano shut out from even talking to Principal Bowerman or Secret School Board Chairperson, Delegate Howell had no clue any of this CRT controversy was happening, Delegate Young reports that concerned parents getting shut out from being heard goes back years and multiple past administrations at SAA. Add to all this that there is no Parent-Teacher Association, no Town Hall Meetings, no public access to Secret School Board Meetings, no official identification of Secret School Board members, and you get the dysfunctional administrative mess that brings us things like the wrongful termination of Judie Rosa, the stealthy indoctrination of freshmen with CRT, certain teachers abusing their position to push partisan political rhetoric on our children, etc. All of this is the reason for Eyes On SAA: Shining Light. Breaking Silence. Holding Accountable.]
Speaker 13: Tom Wetmore (Delegate): Please respect everyone here by following the rule that was voted earlier to limit comments to 2 minutes. The chairperson has been gracious, but enough is enough. [Delegate Wetmore’s flustered and frustrated comment was technically correct, but it shows how inadequate the Constituency Meeting format is to address deep and serious concerns of delegates and other constituents. 2 minutes is simply not enough for complicated matters. Limiting delegates to just 2 minutes means they can only superficially race through their comments or questions, without the time for necessary follow-up and organic dialogue. If they exceed their time, meeting cops will shut them down. So how can they make their voices heard? The solution seems obvious: a Town Hall Meeting without the artificial, arbitrary time constraints. SAA does not do this. Another solution would be a Parent-Teacher Association, but SAA does not have one. Another solution could be for concerned parents to be permitted to address meetings of SAA’s Secret School Board. Again, SAA does not allow this. Parents seeking to have conversations with administration and/or the Secret School Board Chairperson are routinely turned away and ignored by SAA. All this is done to tithe and offering paying, and tuition-paying, time-volunteering stakeholders of the community. This is SAA - silence and hubris. Well there is at least one open forum where they can be heard: the Eyes On SAA blog. Send your comments, questions, observations, and grievances to us. This is why we exist. Shining Light. Breaking Silence. Holding Accountable.]
Parliamentary Motion: To accept the Principal’s Report. Motion – PASSED.
Parliamentary Motion by Tom Evans (Delegate): We need to take the necessary action to give voice to non-delegates who wish to be heard. [Thank you Delegate Evans for pointing out that non-delegates should also have a chance to be heard.]
Parliamentary Motion made by German Rodriguez (Secret School Board Vice-Chairperson and automatic Delegate): I make a motion to adopt a retroactive rule for this meeting to recognize all the comments of non-delegates made to this point as the non-delegate question session in the agenda, and cancel the non-delegate comment portion. [In other words, let’s just shut the comments down now so that no one else may be heard on the Principal’s Report, CRT and political bias at SAA, etc. So to review: No Town Hall Meeting, no permission to address the meetings of the Secret School Board, no Parent-Teacher Association, parents being turned away by SAA Administration, and parents being turned away by Secret School Board Chairperson. And now the request is made to remove the only chance for any patiently waiting non-delegates to be heard because, hell, it’s getting late here and this has not been the efficient and speedy state-run media show it was supposed to be. Please notice that the same one who shut down Delegate Cheryl Toscano earlier in the evening is the one who is here again attempting to shut down any further dialogue and comments: German Rodriguez, Secret School Board Vice-Chairperson, who clearly is well-trained and well-steeped in the SAA culture of silencing voices of constituents.]
Comment/Objection to Parliamentary Motion by Richard Reinhardt (Delegate): Let’s follow the rules and the agenda by keeping non-delegates’ time to be heard for those persons that were courteous enough to wait for their turn. [Thank you Delegate Reinhardt for defending the right of non-delegates to be heard at the Constituency Meeting.]
Response to Delegate Reinhardt’s Comment/Objection to German Rodriguez’s Parliamentary Motion (made by German Rodriguez): I understand the point, but time has been exceeded so I stand by my motion. [Translation: You’re a nice guy, Delegate Reinhardt, but no, it’s time to shut this thing down. Our administration and Secret School Board have collectively gotten 2 black eyes, a bloody nose, and a busted lip tonight. We don’t want to hear from anyone else. So don’t mess with my fancy parliamentary tricks to silence the non-delegates. ]
MOTION OF GERMAN RODRIGUEZ [To silence non-delegates] IS NOT CARRIED:[Thank you delegates for standing up for the right of non-delegates to be heard! And to Mr. Vice-Chairperson of SAA’s Secret School Board – your shot just got blocked into the back row of the arena.]
Parliamentary Motion: Lisa Burrow (Delegate) – To ask for a vote on the motion to allow voice to non-delegates, since Delegate Evans earlier motion was not voted. – PASSED RETROACTIVELY [Thank you Delegate Burrow for standing up for non-delegates to also have a chance to be heard.]
Non-Delegate Questions & Comments Period:
Speaker 14: Paul Rivera (Non-Delegate). We have the Home and School Association for fundraising and social events, and they do a fine job of that. However we do not have a Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) for parents to be able to express concerns in a forum where they can be heard, including those who do not feel comfortable or feel heard by SAA administration or the SAA School Board. We need a PTA, and for the PTA to have a seat at SAA School Board meetings. I propose that a PTA be studied and implemented in order to allow for presentation of concerns on a large scale and efficient manner, rather than parents presenting their concerns individually, one at a time in piecemeal fashion to SAA administration or Board. [Thank you again, Non-Delegate Rivera. This was the second most important proposal of the evening. If there were a PTA at SAA, then Eyes On SAA might never have been necessary. Let’s see if this idea is allowed to see the light of day at SAA, or if it is shot down as a threat to the monopoly and totalitarianism of the Secret School Board. Time will tell. Eyes on SAA will follow this.]
My breath was taken away by the on-screen celebration of Judie Rosa during the Principal’s Report, but she wasn’t even allowed to finish the school year. [That presentation was SAA’s version of state-run media propaganda. We covered this blatant half-truth, half-lie in our Principal’s Report, Part 2.] We have been told that SAA is not at liberty to talk about it, yet SAA has given lots of negative information about her being on administrative leave, being under investigation for months by multiple committees of the School Board. As a parent, I would like an explanation of how the decision not to allow her to finish the year was in best interests of the school and my child.
Response from SAA(by Mark Noble): Personnel decisions and HR concerns are something that you simply cannot open up and talk about in a public forum [at least not any more than Tissiana and I already did on 4/1/2021 and on 5/5/2021.] We always want to make decisions to best-position our school to move forward. [Decisions like firing the most experienced and respected administrator on staff on April 1 of the school year, leaving us with a band-aid interim replacement. Now that’s how you best-position a school, right?.] It’s not appropriate for me to dig into someone’s personnel chart and share those things publicly[at least not any more than Tissiana and I already did on 4/1/2021 and on 5/5/2021.].
Follow-up from Speaker 14: Paul Rivera (Non-Delegate): I’m not asking to see her personnel file. Just explain to me how it was best for this school and my child. And if you are seeking to have diversity at SAA, then Judie Rosa was a walking-talking billboard for diversity and an excellent role-model for our Hispanic students. It’s one thing that you decided not to renew her contract for the next school year, but how was it best for our school and students to get rid of her on April 1 and not allow her to finish this school year? [Preach! You speak for the 144,000 figurative signers of the Judie Rosa Petition.]
Response from SAA( by Mark Noble): To provide you the answer you’re looking for would be for me to provide inappropriate information. I simply cannot do that [at least not any more than Tissiana and I already did on 4/1/2021 and on 5/5/2021.]. [It's not that you "cannot" talk about the reasons behind Judie Rosa's termination, because you already did so on 4/1/2021 and on 5/5/2021. What you literally "cannot" do (because no one is capable) is to justify and explain how it was the best decision for the institution of SAA - BECAUSE IT OBVIOUSLY WAS NOT. And now you seek refuge behind the "no comment" rule because you cannot justify what was obviously a terrible move that damaged the school. We have all seen many times the U.S. President, the Commander-in-Chief, going on national TV to announce a military strike overseas. Will he give us all the military intelligence information from spy satellites, NSA drones, well-placed human asset informants, and the conflicting opinions of his closest advisors inside the Situation Room? No, he will not. But he will tell the country the big picture of why the action was needed to protect our national security, our allies, or our interests in that region including what those interests are. Why does he do this? So that the country can clearly hear and understand him, and hopefully develop trust in his judgment to make the very serious and somber decision to use the greatest arsenal of weapons in human history to kill dangerous human beings and risk retaliation and war for our country. Now let's zoom back in to 2502 Spencerville Road: SAA has NEVER explained the big picture of how its "act of nuclear aggression" to disappear and eliminate our children's and their teachers' Elementary Principal on April 1, 2021, the beginning of the 4th quarter of the school year, was necessary to advance the school's best interests. And they never will either, but not because they "cannot comment" on it (and already have). It is because there WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR IT. It was a political assassination in the middle of the night. This they will NEVER admit to. The bottom line is that SAA's Administration & Secret School Board sabotaged the end of the school year by causing devastating damage to the institution, lost trust and credibility with hundreds, and have since done nothing to repair it. So get used to more dysfunction coming down Spencerville Road so long as the same players continue to run the same tired script. But don't forget, SAA's Administration & Secret School Board had plenty of help and cover from their silent co-conspirator who was the very next person to speak at the CM.................]
Response from Janesta Walker (Superintendent of Education for Chesapeake Conference): Your personnel committee and board have followed process and procedure in all their personnel decisions, and I have been present for those decisions. We have collaborated with our officers in the Chesapeake Conference and the Columbia Union and have followed all educational codes in the decisions that were made. We recognize that sometimes personnel decisions are very confusing and hurtful, and people don’t always understand the background. But you can’t, and there isn’t anything we can share with you tonight to answer your question because the information you seek is not yours to have. But I will speak on behalf of your committees, they have acted with integrity and honor in their work and I support their decisions by policy. [Translation: Look dude, we trashed her as best we could by releasing plenty of negative personnel information about her which we shouldn’t have, but the info was favorable to us and our image of process and protocol. So after ignoring the "no comment" rule to favor ourselves, we then reversed course to again adopt the "no comment" rule to save ourselves from having to tell the truth. We let her reputation twist in the wind for 35 days while a dark cloud of suspicion surrounded her name and legacy of success at SAA. We’re never going to admit openly what everyone else already knows - that it was a political hit job orchestrated by Principal Bowerman and her heroes on the Secret School Board, with my blessing as Superintendent because Rosa sent out an unauthorized email that told the truth and made us look bad and stupid – which is just how we have acted. And yes, we are petty like that too. To see the effect of our stupidity just look at how there was an exodus of elementary teachers after we took out Rosa. It matters not that we have no replacement yet, and are unlikely to get one of her caliber. She gave us a black eye, and so we took her to the gallows on April 1 instead of June 30 like we all had expected. This is what we call "acting with honor and integrity." We know 144,000 have been asking ever since why and how this was good for your school, but "the information you seek is not yours to have." So all of you SAA tuition-paying drones need to just take our word for it and trust us: it was in the best interests of your children and their teachers and the entire school to lose your Elementary School Principal in the middle of the night and for the last 2 months of the year, to have near 100% turnover in the middle school teachers, and to plug in an interim replacement principal for this year. But pay no attention to the rubble, ashes, and smoke. We have the prerogative to sabotage your children's school year and even tear this school down if we choose, and there’s nothing you drones can do to stop it. More importantly, don’t ever again question or challenge our silence and hubris here at SAA and the Chesapeake Conference. End of Translation.]
[Now, if you want facts and truth, then read our Epilogue & Lessons Learned which includes the Autopsy Report on the termination of former Elementary Principal Judie Rosa.]
Speaker 15: Rich Reinhardt(Delegate). I want to take a moment to give my thanks to the administration and the board because it’s a lot to take on and I appreciate your work and all you do to try your best to make this the best school it can be. [It’s true you’re a nice guy, Delegate Reinhardt. Eyes On SAA joins you in saying thank you to SAA’s administration and Secret School Board for those good decisions made (just don't ask us which ones, because they don't ever tell us) and positive outcomes that have been accomplished for the school community. We can all recognize hard work by employees and volunteers alike. But we will still be keeping our “Eyes On SAA”.]
Speaker 16: Steve Tracey (Non-Delegate): I want to thank Hollie and Cheryl and everyone else that opened up a topic that needs to be talked about. It’s very difficult to talk about and not a lot of people have the courage to do that. Thank you. I also heard Paul talk about this, as well as these 2 ladies here. I heard that there is no set policy and therefore no accountability for a standard for SAA administrators and teachers, etc. staying neutral on political issues. Is that correct? Because that is saying that if I’m a teacher and I believe in the blue police flag, I can put that up in my classroom. Some will agree and others will not. Maybe another teacher can put up an NRA flag in their classroom. This will cause division and questions. If there is no accountability, then you’re saying that people can do whatever they want in the administration. I think there needs to be a policy, it needs to be reviewed, and it needs to have buy-in from the community. [Eyes On SAA joins Non-Delegate Tracey in applauding the courage of Delegates Faehner and Toscano who spoke out so boldly and passionately about something that was so important and necessary, but which SAA surely did not want to deal with publicly. There were others too whom we thank, including Delegate (and self-identified Secret School Board Member) Bob Burrow for his refreshing openness and candor. We also thank Non-Delegate Rivera for his proposals to codify classroom neutrality by teachers on controversial political and social issues, and for the establishment of a PTA.]
Response from SAA( by Mark Noble): Janesta, can you tell us if there is any policy on conference employees displaying political material?
Response from Janesta Walker (Chesapeake Conference Education Superintendent): I can’t quote policy on this. In my 30 years of SDA education we have always been encouraged to remain neutral on political matters, and I have encouraged the same principle to CC teachers on the job and even on their personal social media. Doing so could polarize and isolate half of the people they are working with. I will stand by that statement. If I see evidence of that and believe it is happening in our schools, then I will have a conversation about it. SDA teachers need to position themselves to be able to minister to every child that comes into our classroom.
[That sounds lovely, ma’am. But after sitting through over 1 hour of CM discussion over CRT and political bias in the classroom it seems that you still don’t “see the evidence” or “believe it is happening” at SAA in 2021. It already happened, and you didn’t say a word about it. Where were you in Spring 2021 Superintendent Walker? Too busy all Spring firing Judie Rosa and doing damage control? Did you ever have your “talk” with anyone at SAA like a certain teacher who taught CRT, and a certain HS Principal who admonished graduates to “stay active and stay woke”? In fact Delegate Toscano reported that this political bias at SAA has been happening for 7 years. How long have you been on the job, Mrs. Superintendent?]
Follow-up from Speaker 14: Paul Rivera (Non-Delegate): May I have an answer on my PTA question, please?
Response from SAA( by Mark Noble): We appreciate the information and we the school community will have a conversation going forward about it. [Whatever that answer means, Eyes On SAA will follow this issue on our blog.]
Remark from Bob Burrow: I don’t recall anything in the Columbia Union Education Code on prohibition of advocating political views. I don’t think there is such a prohibition. Whether there should be is a separate discussion. [Yes of course there should be such a policy of neutrality. Parents don’t send their kids to private, Christian, SDA schools to have their children listen as teachers or administrators pontificate on controversial political and social issues.]
Remark from Pastor Chad Stuart: There is not a specific statement on politics in the Code. But there is a general statement that all the views held and expressed should be consistent with positions of the SDA church. I have been guilty of messing up in this area at times, and some of you have called me out on it appropriately. [Good on you, Pastor Stuart. Just like we don’t send our children to school for political lessons and advice, neither do we go to church to hear it from the pulpit.] The lesson I learned was to get rid of my Facebook page. The position of the SDA church is to remain neutral on politics in open expression.
Remark from Bob Burrow: Having such a general policy is like saying nothing. The question is should there be a policy for our teachers to refrain from expressing political viewpoints? That’s the issue, and there is nothing in the code that I have seen. Maybe it is something we should look at. [Remove the “maybe” from your last sentence, Delegate and Secret School Board Member Burrow]
End of our Report on the Delegate and Non-delegate Comments & Questions Period.
Look out for our upcoming post "Lessons Learned at the 2021 SAA Constituency Meeting".
You may subscribe to this Blog (see bottom of homepage) to receive emails of each new post.
We hope you found this report informative and helpful, and that it raises enough interest for you to stay tuned for more reporting coming very soon. If you appreciated this post, please show your gratitude by subscribing to this blog, contacting us with news and information of concern to you about SAA’s programs and operations, and finally by sharing the link to this report on social media and directly with other members of the SAA Community so that they can know more about the product that they are purchasing at SAA, and take an active role in making it better with their observations and feedback.
Again, we thank our contributors that gathered and provided information, documents, and notes for us to prepare this series of reports. You are the lifeblood of Eyes On SAA and are contributing to the important work of bringing change and improvement to this school that we all care about. If the SAA of the future could speak today it would say "thank you" and that it is in your debt for your love and courage.
Shining Light. Breaking Silence. Holding Accountable.
We’ve got Eyes On SAA.
-Lillian Hepburn-Richmond
(A Cohort of Concerned Parents)
Make sure to subscribe to this Blog (see bottom of homepage) to receive emails of each new post. We welcome your news, information, and reports which you may send to us using the "Contact" form, also near the bottom of our homepage.