Running Head: School Board Meeting

School Board Meeting on March 9, 2017

Olivia M. Norman

College of Southern Nevada

School Board Meeting 2

The school board meeting that took place on March 9, 2017 opened first with the Pledge

of Allegiance led by 4 different armed and uniformed people. They were followed by a prayer

led by a pastor. Listening to him open with Almighty God and close with Amen caught me

off guard. Having recently finished reading about religion and in which situations it is allowed in

schools, I was not expecting such a religious tone to the opening of the school board meeting.

Next, they voted to officially open the meeting. This was the first time I have seen a light

up voting board like the one they use. In a situation where it is at times difficult to hear and

understand each person, it was very helpful to be able to see each members vote.

Agenda item 3.11 created a rather lengthy back and forth discussion. The board members

were conserved that the wording of the proposal would relinquish some of their control in

signing documents for construction. They were assured that there would not actually be any

changes in procedure, but that because NV Energy was recently sold, they had encountered

issues with determining what fell under the category of construction. When I read the agenda

item, I was glad it was them, not me, trying to determine the meaning.

Nicole Rourke, in charge of government relations with CCSD, called in with some very

interesting updates. When I was looking through the CCSD website to try to find videos of

meetings, I came across information on naming new schools. I viewed the process and

application, so it was interesting to me when Ms. Rourke nominated someone for one of the new

schools. She then proceeded to update the board on each of the Senate Bills and Assembly Bills.

I had no idea that there was a position whose primary job is to be a liaison between the Board

and legislature.

Throughout the meeting, members of the public were allowed to the podium to speak. A

mother a 6th grader spoke of her concerns regarding comments made by his English teacher.
School Board Meeting 3

Allegedly, this teacher openly expressed her support of President Trumps plans for deportation.

She agreed with the deportation because illegals bring in drugs. The student was extremely

upset by this statement as the mother was originally in the United States illegally, so this was

extremely personal for their family. The mother ended by asking what the board was going to do

about this. They explained that normally meetings do not provide back and forth dialog, but

invited her to the hall because they did in fact want to address her concerns. While, I obviously

have no idea what was said in private, I immediately thought about a resolution the Board passed

in January. I followed closely an article that the Board passed 6-1 regarding CCSD schools being

a sanctuary for immigrants that are here illegally. While Trump avowed that he would withhold

funds to cities declaring themselves as sanctuary cities, schools found themselves to be the

loophole. It is official now that CCSD schools will not provide the federal government records

on the immigration status of students or their families. I wondered if this was the topic of

discussion in the hall.

At the end of the meeting, it was time for open forum. The line seemed to be never-

ending with all speakers opposed to a measure regarding Student Achievement Compacts. I was

unfamiliar with what they were talking about so I later looked into the matter some more. From

what I can ascertain, they were all referring to AB448 which was passed in 2015 and is now

being revisited. Turn-around schools, which are extremely low achieving, are at-risk of being

turned in charter schools if they are not able to improve their scores within a certain time frame.

It was clear that teachers, principals, and parents all agreed that they did not want this to happen

and were pleased with the measures already being taken, especially those under the supervision

and advise of Dr Geihs. Deanna Wright stated that she would never support this and the article

was unanimously denied. This concluded the meeting.