SOMETHING SMELLS IN SPARTA: It's the School Board.

Let me preface this account with an indication that it is my opinion and depiction of what I heard and saw at the February 23rd meeting of the Sparta Board of Education. You may draw your own conclusion or opinions. Watch the replay. Further, this article does not reflect the actions of members of the Sparta BOE, Selander and Serrano, who acted in accordance with their oaths of office, board policy and school board ethics.

Earlier this week, I was alerted that a book challenge was being made by an individual parent in the Sparta school district. The book in question is "The Upside of Unrequited," a multiple award winning piece of young adult fiction. I was asked to speak at the Board meeting on Thursday night by members of the Sparta community and in my capacity as the founder of the New Jersey Public Education Coalition (NJPEC), a grassroots, non-partisan organization dedicated to protecting diversity and inclusion in public education.

It appears that the parent who objected to the book used the illegitimate website, BookLooks.org for support of her objection. BookLooks.org is a creation of the right-wing LGBTQIA+ hate group, Moms for Liberty. They hide this fact so that their supporters can try and pass off a totally biased review of a book as true "authority." The website "cherry picks" out of context passages from books that it deems objectionable and actually counts and publishes the number of times that "key" words are used in a book, thereby taking everything out of context. We know that this was the source of the parent’s objection because she read the same exact passages and word counts during her public comments.

I came to the meeting to remind the BOE members of the legal obligations under their oath of office, sworn under God, their ethical obligations under the School Board Code of Ethics and their obligation to follow their own policies and regulations. To my surprise, the report of the Curriculum Committee indicated that they had followed procedures and the recommendation of the Review Committee was to leave the book "as is." So I fully expected the Board to accept the recommendation and instead, congratulated them on following their duty. But evidently, unknown to me at the time, Board attorney Marc Zitomer guided certain Board members to go through the motions of the procedure they needed to then be able to remove the book, just as they had planned from the beginning. The entire evening was a charade.

Dozens of parents spoke to the Board. Pleading with them to reject the request for removal. I should have realized what was going on when certain Board members snickered and giggled like children while they totally ignored those speaking during the first public opinion session.

It was not until the item came to a vote that I realized that I had been "sucker punched." While the Review Committee made up of education and literature professionals had recommended that the book remain by a 5 to 2 vote, Board members, Walter Knapp, Kurt Morris, LeeAnn Pitzer. Leigh McMichael and Christina Kieling rolled out their "orchestrated" play. The fix was in before the vote even came down.

Initially, a motion to reject the request for removal was put forth by other members of the Board. It was voted down. McMichael then put forward a motion to remove the book to the high school, which would remove it from the eighth grade and become an effective ban and barrier of the book to the eighth graders. Of course, the "backroom" deal went through as planned and this motion was passed.

When trying to explain why they voted as they did, the "tag team" of McMichael & Pitzer opined their viewpoint which in the opinion of this writer can be summed up as "we just don't like the book." So in effect, they substituted their opinions over the recommendation of trusted professionals.

And this really should be no surprise after an election where it appears that some candidates were aligned with Moms for Liberty, Chaos & Control and the New Jersey Project. Google these organizations and decide for yourself whether their "agenda of hate" is representative of the Sparta community

So what is the harm, you may say?

First, the five members of the Board basically told the teachers and literature professionals who were on the Review Committee that their opinion is worthless. "Et tu, Brute?" This was truly like shoving a knife in the back of these professional. And it should be noted that the first half-hour of the meeting was spend presenting awards to teachers and specialists for excellence in education. Sorry guys, but you can't have it both ways.

You ask why teachers in the district are retiring and leaving, and why they can't fill the vacancies. Frankly, what teacher would want to teach in this district when the Board itself, dismisses their experience and professionalism.

Second, this board effectively ignored the "Parental Rights" of the vast majority of parents in the room, and those who spoke, to determine what books their children can access. And this because of the one parent who objected. And this Board, as I said, rejected the professionals and substituted their personal opinions of the book to make their decision.

Third, do the actions of certain board member rise to the level of "ethics violations"? That remains to be seen. Attorney Zitomer assured us that it does not, and rhetorically asked this writer, "Would you have claimed it was an ethics violation if they voted to not remove the book." Of course not, Mr. Zitomer, because then they would have done their legal and ethical duty.

From the perspective of this writer, their own Policy 9130 states that "no challenged material may be removed solely because it presents ideas that may be unpopular or offensive to some." That policy applies to the Board members as well. McMichael & Pitzer obviously found the book offensive and effectively said so.

Additionally, Policy 2530 indicates that " although the Sparta Board of Education is legally responsible for the operation of the schools, the responsibility for the selection of instructional materials is delegated to the certified library/media personnel." Yes, that means the "professionals" they ignored.

Many members of the audience expressed their intent to file ethics complaints. And despite the Board attorney indicating that no violation existed, the filing of ethics complaint against certain board members will no doubt happen and will require a legal defense. A defense that will take money from the School budget designed to educate kids and divert it to pay attorneys instead. That's your taxes taken from your hard earned money.

Fourth, is this just the first salvo of what will become the "Banned Book of the Month?" Is this merely the tip of the iceberg in what certain members of the Board intend to accomplish?

Finally, I asked the Board a simple question, "What has changed"? This book has been on the shelf for a number of years. It went through a process to become part of the district resources. Since that time, have the schools changed? Has Sparta changed that dramatically? Have the levels of development of the student in this district gone down? I think not.

The only thing that has changed are the faces on the Board of Education. But remember, if you are as disgusted and repulsed by the action of the Board as the 75 plus member of the public in attendance were, you can fix this.

Engage more members of your community to step forward and speak at every meeting.

Educate those members of your community who have no idea what is going on and provide them with the knowledge they need to see through the "smoke screen."

Collaborate with like-minded members of you community to build a power-base that you can use to make yourself heard come November!

Michael "Mike" Gottesman, Retired Attorney
Founder of the New Jersey Public Education Coalition
www.njpecoalition.org
www.facebook.com/groups/njpec
info@njpecoaltion.org