The North Royalton Board of Education agreed to send a legislative platform to the Ohio School Board Association (OSBA) in the hopes to have the items integrated into their platform, which is amended each year. The North Royalton School District is a member of the state school board.
According to OSBA officials, “ OSBA represents the views of members with education policymakers in Columbus and Washington, D.C. Our advocacy efforts are directed by the membership through an annual resolutions process and at the Business Meeting of the OSBA Delegate Assembly, where each school district may appoint a school board member to be their delegate and vote on proposed changes to the OSBA Legislative Platform. Adopted resolutions become the positions that form OSBA’s Legislative Platform.”
Currently, “OSBA is composed of more than 700 school boards. Nearly 3,500 elected and appointed members represent Ohio’s local, city, exempted village, career center and educational service center districts” according to their website.
North Royalton School Board member Jeremiah Sawyer introduced a resolution at the Board’s May 4 Work Session that would recommend the following language be added to the legislative platform to this year’s OSBA platform: that the OSBA supports legislation that “Supports an academics first approach to education; Supports the rights of parents to be the decision maker for their child’s well-being and to inspect any instruction materials used as part of the educational curriculum for their students; Supports protecting children’s data collection and personal privacy; Supports protecting students from exposure to pornographic media (books and electronic) in our schools; Supports drug-free facilities and does not support the recreational use of marijuana for minors.”
The Board voted 3-2 against placing the resolution on the agenda for the May 8 regularly schedule Board meeting. At the May 8 meeting, Sawyer again brought up the resolution, explaining that after looking at the OSBA platform, “none of these are actually in the OSBA platforms, including the drug-free workplace, which is really surprising. . . so, basically, I want to present this slimmed-down version to the Board, since the due date is at the end of this month (May).” He went on to say that the OSBA has testified in front of the Ohio legislature on items that their platform represented for bills that were in front of the legislature. “It’s really important for us to present it to OSBA to get it on their vote list for their next capital conference.”
Board Member Anne Reinkober stated that “I just wanted to say that I do support these things, but I think, I wish you would have come to us in April. Yes, these are the slimmed-down things, but I think if we approach OSBA with them, we have these bullet points, but we show something besides this on what we believe. Not just the statement, but the support of what we’re saying. . . . I can’t support putting the platform positions in there without having a more thorough discussion.”
Sawyer pointed out that the previous year, when a similar discussion was taking place, it would have taken three months for a lawyer to draw up a document on parents’ rights and was then voted down by the Board because it was too thorough, and had references to the law. He said that he thought that simplicity would be a better option. He pointed out that “there is nothing legally binding here. It’s just a platform. I was trying to be accommodating from the feedback from last year.” Reinkober then said that in the current form, the resolution “leaves a lot to interpretation.” Sawyer noted that the North Royalton School District already has policies that have been approved that support the items on the platform.
Board Member Heidi Dolezal stated, “I wish you would have notified us ahead of time that this was coming up, so we’re not just bringing it up and voting on it so everyone has time to research it and look into it. I don’t think it’s bad stuff by any means, but it’s just the process that we’ve always had and I don’t feel it’s been followed.” Sawyer said that he had sent the information to the Board members a week ahead of the work session, which does not go against the process.
Board Member John Kelly noted, “All of these things are in our policy, so we have already approved them. . . I’m just trying to go through the logistics of how we create a Board resolution at the conclusion of this meeting. You’d almost have to have a special meeting to discuss a resolution and approve it and I don’t know if that’s feasible.” He pointed out that the OSBA platform positions came out in January. Kelly continued, “It’s a shame that here we are at the last possible meeting to do anything and we don’t have a resolution that we can discuss.” Sawyer then asked, “What’s wrong with just sending them these bullet-points? . . . I think that we sometimes over-complicate things and we waste too much money on getting lawyers involved.” Kelly said, “We’re also a government entity doing the public’s work and have an obligation to do it correctly. Discussion then took place about what would be considered correct, with Sawyer stressing the importance of getting the district’s platforms on the OSBA’s platform list, ”it’s getting lost in bureaucracy.”
Board Member Lisa Shuck discussed what the current OSBA platform contains and how it would look with the recommendations made by the North Royalton resolution’s platform. She stated examples, such as “it would read ‘OSBA supports legislation that supports drug-free school facilities. We do not support recreation use of marijuana for minors.” She also pointed out this is not legally binding. “If it’s guidelines and it’s best practices, then it should be there and it should be shared and there’s nothing in there that says anything about this . . . this is their platform and it’s not on there.” She also pointed out, “like John (Kelly) stated, it’s already been passed. It’s nothing new, it’s not being creating the wheel, it’s just not in their platform. . . . Saying that reaffirms our commitment.”
Dolezal then said that she would support the measure, but in the future, she would appreciate more lead time for the Board to study. The Board then voted on the measure, adopting the resolution with a 4-1 vote. Reinkober cast the only dissenting vote, stating, “I really wish we had more time to get into the meat of, granted, this is what is going to OSBA, but what it means to our Board and I don’t, I just can’t go along with this (at) this time.” Kelly added that “I don’t think it’s a format that is what OSBA is looking for, but I’m going to agree and let OSBA make that call.”

By GLORIA PLEVA KACIK
Contributing Writer