In another apparently new section, it reiterates parents right to receive records, but specifically excludes “unless the information concerns a parent and and would otherwise trigger the mandatory reporting…” State law protects disclosure of mandatory and non-mandatory child abuse reports, already. So what it appears to be saying is that all records that a school keeps that the school has decided might document bad parent behavior, they are going to refuse to provide the parent (and presumably the other parent too). We all want our schools staff to protect children, and we get that they don’t have to provide any DCF child abuse/neglect reports school or its personnel have made, or that the school has made one. But why is it appropriate to be able to withhold documents or information they know about the child or think about the parent, from that parent, or from the other parent? Why should a SD be able to withhold communications from one parent from the other parent — how does that treat parents as equals? SD should provide everything to any parent about their child (including communication from the other parent) and everything that the school thinks problematic about a parent’s actions, so that the parent can address and resolve real concerns, and challenge inappropriate school responses. Failing to do deprives the parent the SD has decided is problematic from due process (maybe defames them), and potentially damages the children’s relationship with the parent, simply because the school says so. If LCSB is thinking that this is appropriate when one parent wants to support a child in a gender transition, and the other parent wants to support a child without encouraging gender transition, LCSB would be wrong.

I did notice language I think was added a year or so ago after a statutory change that prohibits school personnel from intimidating parents “At the meeting’s conclusion, parents, student… and District personnel SHALL SIGN the anticoercion form…” which is astounding in its irony that the District wants to compel parents to sign AT a meeting in front of the people who would have coerced, interfered with them in the first place, and who hold lots of unsupervised/unknown power over their children. (I routinely tell parents to refuse to sign, but ask for a copy to take home with them — which they can then return when and if they choose.)

What the policy does NOT include but should is:

parent right to observe in their child’s classrooms, either remotely or in person

parent and student right to record any interaction with school personnel (while it hasn’t been said by a court, school personnel have just as much power as police officers do and the 11th circuit has held that the public has a constitutional right to record them in the course of their public duties. Further, the 1st DCA has held that the FL statute that requires two party consent to recording doesn’t apply when there are three people in the meeting. And FL state law gives parents the right to have someone beside themselves in every meeting with school personnel.)

(I’ve never understood why school personnel and administrators object to/fear this — it means no one can distort whatever happened. It mans that everyone can learn from the interaction and fix what should be fixed. It means that those involved can share what really happened with their spouse, the other parent or even the child who needs to know something, without any distortions. It protects everyone.)

student right to record classroom lectures and discussion— this is a common accommodation for those who have trouble listening and taking notes simultaneously. But students shouldn’t have to ask to use OTTER on their phone or a Livescribe. And they shouldn’t be refused that accommodation because a teacher doesn’ t want to be recorded. (I would put in the policy that students may be disciplined including expulsion if they use any recording to make fun of others, bully, or to make public what an individual student does or says without that student’s permission, unless the recording documents discrimination, a crime, or harassment/ bullying. I would include also a requirement that student or staff must provide a copy to the principal of the school at least 3 business days before making it public in any social media platform (because this is needed to protect any necessary investigation).

And, teachers should have the right to record any parent or student or sports/extracurricular fan who is recording them.

Please join me in asking LCSB to explicitly adopt the additional rights above, and asking for fuller explanation of what the proposed language is intended to address.

Rosemary N. Palmer

“The Children’s Services Council of Leon County signed off on Cecka Rose Green as their first executive director at a board meeting Thursday afternoon.”

Cecka Rose Green’s former positions were working with the Gillum campaign and a Gillum associate entrenched in corruption, scams, and illegal activity. Did Ms. Green question any of the Gillum corruption, did she denounce it, did she profit from it, did she participate in it? This is hardly a favorable past experience acceptable for a children’s services position. It should scream a resounding red flag…NO!

Being that the corruption was very serious, had devastating consequences for Tallahassee, and does not make for an appropriate pick for children services… you would think a judge and a hospital administrator would have more sense. This is an abomination and an abuse to the children and community that this pick – the mayor’s wife’s pick – would even make it as a contender on the list.

Again, this must be opposite day where they pick the most inappropriate rather than the best…

The committee should have put this out for a nationwide search and began the process all over again.

Just when you think it can’t get any worse… The Tallahassee Democrat’s “vile twerp” Bill Cotterell has gone off the deep end and over the cliff… Can’t even stomach reading the rest of his article. It is so awful, horrendous, unprofessional, and racist that he should be fired immediately! Read at your own risk.

That is an excellent title for a book!