CAC Membership
Here are the names of people appointed to the Citizens Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development by the Montgomery County Board of Education. For the "Individuals" section, I am reporting what little I could find on the Internet (thanks to Kay for doing a lot of the research!).
This looks like a fantastic group of people. I should point out that some of the organization representatives have very interesting vitas extending far beyond the charters of their sponsoring organizations. I really look forward to working with this group.
There's no need to ignore the elephant in the room. The question will be, how much influence can one person like Peter Sprigg have, in a group with actual experts like this. Sprigg is a former actor and Baptist minister who is obsessed with gay people and saying every bad thing he can think of about them. He's entitled to his opinion, I guess, and though his membership on the committee is illegitimate (since PFOX didn't follow the rules for applying), I think it's better to get moving than to quibble. After all, he's only got one vote.
Organizations
- Tracy Fox, representing Montgomery County Council of PTAs
- James Kennedy, PhD, representing TeachtheFacts.org
- Richelle Meer, representing NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland
- Emily Wurtz, representing Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG)
- Peter Sprigg, representing Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX)
- Eric Kay, representing Montgomery County Region of the Maryland Association of Student Councils
Individuals
- Carol Plotsky, MD is a pediatrician who is medical staff President at Shady Grove Adventist Hospital. She will chair the new committee
- Subash Duggirala, MD specializes in Preventative Medicine, with a practice in Silver Spring
- Victor Olano, M.P.H. is Public Health Advisor Office of Prevention, Education, and Control National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute at NIH
- Matthew Murguia is Director of the Office of Program Operations and Scientific Information in the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Division of AIDS, Office of Minority Health
- Maria Peña-Faustino was a delegate to the Republican National Convention, serves on the state Board of Liquor License Commissioners
- Esther G. Pinder, MD is a pediatrician practicing in Silver Spring
- Elinor Walker, PhD is at the Center for General Health Services Extramural Research Agency for Health Care Policy and Research
This looks like a fantastic group of people. I should point out that some of the organization representatives have very interesting vitas extending far beyond the charters of their sponsoring organizations. I really look forward to working with this group.
There's no need to ignore the elephant in the room. The question will be, how much influence can one person like Peter Sprigg have, in a group with actual experts like this. Sprigg is a former actor and Baptist minister who is obsessed with gay people and saying every bad thing he can think of about them. He's entitled to his opinion, I guess, and though his membership on the committee is illegitimate (since PFOX didn't follow the rules for applying), I think it's better to get moving than to quibble. After all, he's only got one vote.
posted by JimK at 3:39 PM
26 Comments:
I am impressed by the BOE's strategy of seating Sprigg as PFOX's representative, but refusing to seat the CRC's Henrietta Brown. The board is fully within its rights to refuse to seat Brown; they need to start this committee with a clean slate.
Strategically, they have divided the positions of PFOX and CRC for the first time since last December. One of those two groups will have to move to get them together again. Either PFOX withdraws Sprigg in protest (I don't see that happening) or CRC submits new nominations. If the CRC sues again, they go it alone.
People are reasonably asking why the CRC doesn't just submit new nominees. They may not have the people; their newsletter was begging for volunteers. They may not be willing to delegate responsibility outside of their tiny leadership core. Right now, the CRC position is being heard in the court of public opinion. The verdict seems to be that the
CRC doesn't want to participate in writing a new curriculum, but wishes, at any cost, to obstruct the teaching of the human sexuality classes.
By the way, I want to congradulate JimK on your appointment to the CAC. The committee will be well-served by your membership. Our Jewish friends have an expression that is richer in meaning than "good luck," and I think it applies here:
Mazel tov.
If the school board is allowed to change the rules after reaching a settlement, there would be no purpose in ever having a settlement of any kind. If they go to court, they'll lose again. And practically, what are they accomplishing by leaving out CRC?
Your mention of rights of the board reminds me of the comments of Weast after the last court loss. People keep misusing the term "rights" and will eventually strip it of meaning. The school board doesn't have rights, they have responsibilities- to their constituents.
L
L --
If people care to read the settlement agreement and the Board regulation it incorporates, they will see that the Board had an absolute right to set rules that applied to everyone and that its selection of a CRC and PFOX rep had to comply with any such rules. Jim laid that out perfectly in a previous blog. The rule stating that previous CAC members were not eligible this go-round applied equally to the members who supported the Nov. 2004 changes as it did to those who opposed those changes. Because the settlement stated that nominees from CRC and PFOX had to be qualified under the Board's rules, any non-discriminatory rule was enforceable, regardless of when it was put into place. The rule applied equally to us all. TTF certainly didn't need to rely on me or any other former CAC member to represent the views and perspectives of those who supported the Nov. 2004 changes. Is CRC so weak that it can only rely on Retta Brown? Or is it just looking for another lawsuit?
David S. Fishback
"L" said...
If the school board is allowed to change the rules after reaching a settlement, there would be no purpose in ever having a settlement of any kind
************************
Hmmmmm.... not aware the BMA Board Policy was ever changed as it relates to agreement. It is just that CRC/PFOX never bothered to read it in full word for word BEFORE SIGNING.
Policy History on BMA as it relates to Advisory Committees for BOE
"Board of Education Advisory Committees"
Policy History: Adopted by Resolution No. 387-01, July 2, 2001.
Note: This policy was formerly governed by the following three policies and their resolutions. Policy BMA, Adopted by Resolution
No. 150-64, March 10, 1964; amended by Resolution No. 328-81, April 7, 1981; rescinded by Resolution No. 430-85, September
10, 1985; adopted by Resolution No. 277-84, May 1, 1984; reformatted by Resolution No. 458-86, August 12, 1986, and accepted
by Resolution No. 550-88, October 24, 1988; rescinded by Resolution No. 387-01, July 2, 2001. Policy BMB, Adopted by
Resolution No. 480-77, July 19, 1977; amended by Resolution No. 492-78, July 11, 1978; rescinded by Resolution No. 277-84, May
1, 1984; adopted by Resolution No. 278-84, May 1, 1984; amended by Resolution No. 215-86, March 24, 1986; amended by
Resolution No. 403-88, July 25, 1988; reformatted in accordance with Resolution No. 458-86, August 12, 1986, and accepted by
Resolution No. 550-88, October 24, 1988; amended by Resolution No. 498-90, August 7, 1990; amended by Resolution No. 424-91,
May 14, 1991; amended by Resolution No. 540-92, July 8, 1992; amended by Resolution No. 375-94, May 23, 1994; rescinded by
Resolution No. 387-01, July 2, 2001. Policy BMG, Adopted by Resolution No. 280-84, May 1, 1984; reformatted in accordance
with Resolution No. 333-86, June 12, 1986 and Resolution No. 458-86, August 12, 1986, and accepted by Resolution No. 550-88,
October 24, 1988; rescinded by Resolution No. 387-01, July 2, 2001.
http://www.mcps.k12.md.us/departments/policy/sect-b.shtm
Now what agreeemnt says as posted on June 27, 2005 and signed by CRC/PFOX....
Excerpt:
6. MCPS agrees that the newly-constituted CAC, for the term during which the consultation on the Revisions contemplated by the Board’s May 23, 2005 resolution will occur, will include a maximum of 15 members and will include one representative of PFOX and one
representative of CRC, to be selected by the Board in accordance with Section C(2)(a)(3) of Board Policy BMA, provided such representatives are Montgomery County residents and are
otherwise qualified and able to serve on the committee. PFOX and CRC will inform the Board
of their nominees in writing by July 1, 2005.
Board Policy BMA was never changed before agreement or after.
Wrong argument "L"
"Because the settlement stated that nominees from CRC and PFOX had to be qualified under the Board's rules, any non-discriminatory rule was enforceable, regardless of when it was put into place."
Since there is clear evidence that the board is trying to manipulate what "advice" it gets, it had to be compelled to let these reps on. This rule was clearly an attempt to skew the committee to cheerlead for them. If not, what else could be a reasonable explanation? The judge will ask- let's hope they come up with something.
"The rule applied equally to us all. TTF certainly didn't need to rely on me or any other former CAC member to represent the views and perspectives of those who supported the Nov. 2004 changes."
Of course not. The board made sure Jim has lots of friends there. They might be in for some surprises though.
"Is CRC so weak that it can only rely on Retta Brown?"
Nah. They're just sticking to principle since the whole thing's a charade anyway.
"Or is it just looking for another lawsuit?"
That's the American way when the elected officials abuse their position.
Kay
I'd respond but everytime I address you, Jim deletes it. Let's just say you're not part of the conversation.
Anon said...I'd respond but everytime I address you, Jim deletes it.
**************
Three cheers for Jim for keeping a decent blog going and not allowing it to resemble the CRC/Recall's first hatefeast message board.
No one needs to address any individual...just the topics raised with valid arguments for or against what was said.
That is simple.
In fairness to L, it is correct that Board did not make the decision to eliminate from eligibility all former CAC members until after the settlement was signed.
However, the point I was making was that the settlement agreement specifically stated that CRC and PFOX designees would be subject to whatever qualifications for membership set by the Board. The settlement agreement did not say "qualifications as they existed as of the date of the settlement agreement." As long as such qualifications applied equally to everyone, there is no basis to challenge those qualifications. Again, the "no-prior-CAC member" qualification applied equally to everyone. Indeed, it applied to a lot more supporters of the Nov. 2004 changes than to those who opposed it.
Anonymous, since you use that name I don't know if you're the same Anon or a different one. A week or two ago, there was an evening when somebody's comments were sarcastic and personal, off the topic, not funny, and not conducive to interesting discussion, and I deleted several. There was also a comment, perhaps in this thread, that was without content and I didn't like the tone of it ... so I deleted that one. Maybe it was you both times, I don't know.
I don't have to delete very many comments here, because generally people have been civil. However, and I hate to start a sentence with the word "however" but I just did, if I see something I don't like, and I delete it, I have no twinge of conscience.
I am a benevolent dictator, and as long as my subjects behave themselves I let them play. But if they're not nice, ping, they disappear, no problem. So just watch what you say, and you'll be ok.
JimK
Jim
Get help.
Anon
If you need help, I'd suggest you avoid any drs or therapists the CRC has on their side. Ruth Jacobs tells her patients' stories in public comments to the BOE and Richard Cohen(duck related)was expelled for life from his counseling association.
...and of course one should also note the sick "hugging therapy" Cohen promotes.
Look at that list. The board tried to shove it full of doctors and health professionals. These were the kinds of people who were to write the curriculum. The advisory committee was supposed to be gauging the reaction of the average citizen. It should have blue collar, white collar, unemployed citizens- not just health professionals.
The whole idea is that science often gets ahead of ethics and there needs to be a check to make sure community standards aren't violated. I'm afraid this board has failed again.
"...and of course one should also note the sick "hugging therapy" Cohen promotes."
######## is a choice.
Yes promoting "father figure hugging" for a patient is a choice...for Cohen to promote.
Wonder if he hugs patients as father figure?
Anonymous wrote: The advisory committee was supposed to be gauging the reaction of the average citizen. It should have blue collar, white collar, unemployed citizens- not just health professionals.
*******************
Didn't CRC and PFOX want the old committee disbanded along with curriculum out the door? They should have been careful what they wished for.
"Didn't CRC and PFOX want the old committee disbanded along with curriculum out the door? They should have been careful what they wished for."
Their representation on the new committee is greater than on the old but that's irrelevant to why the board finds it so difficult to comply with state law.
Anonymous said...
Their representation on the new committee is greater than on the old but that's irrelevant to why the board finds it so difficult to comply with state law.
************
Well so far only Peter Sprigg is waiting to warm one seat until CRC complies to warm one other.
If you mean COMAR...go read it again.
http://www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/13a/13a.04.18.03.htm
System-Wide Citizen Advisory Committee. The curriculum shall be developed by professional educators within the local school system. A citizen advisory committee broadly representing the views of the community shall consult with these educators in developing, implementing, and evaluating the program. Membership may represent groups such as parents/ guardians, students, legislators, members of community organizations, clergy, physicians, and members of professional and civic organizations.
As a matter of fact go read Board Policy BMA again too.
"A citizen advisory committee broadly representing the views of the community"
They didn't even try this time.
"shall consult with these educators in developing, implementing, and evaluating the program."
Maybe you're right they should be more involved.
"Membership may represent groups such as parents/ guardians,"
Yeah, if they're doctors. By the way, the PTA in this county doesn't represent parents and the school system should stop giving them preferential treatment.
"students,"
They did alright here although I'd like to know if there's an ideological balance with the two students.
"legislators,"
zip
"members of community organizations,"
zip
"clergy,"
zip
"physicians,"
folks, we have a winner
"and members of professional and civic organizations."
only if the organizations are in the health field
Where does NARAL and TTF fit in?
This board is pathetic.
anonymous said
Where does NARAL and TTF fit in?
_______________________
They fit in quite nicely.
"anon free"
"They fit in quite nicely."
as school board yes-men
Anon-
I do not speak for all TTFers- but I know some of us marched on the BOE(in the rain) and wrote angry letters to the BOE and the County Council and legislators about the BOE. Some of us are involved in activities about other BOE policies that anger us. Two of my other issues are special education and inequitable treatment of high schools around the county(why are some of my daughter's textbooks old and from Wooten??). I would never get up like Garza and say to the BOE- WE LOVE YOU" cause Jerry Weast knows I don't(and he knows Garza doesn't either).
You think you are such an independent thinker- but you are ashamed to say who you are(Steve? Johnny G? Al?)
I am embarassed it has taken me so long to jump in here. But I was intrigued by the bios on the new committee. I guess with the exception of PFOX and the lady from the RNC/Liquor Control Board, it is a boffo group. And who knows, just because you have the classis political crony type job doesn't make you incompetent. That would have to be FEMA or the Supreme Court. In fact, it is so science top heavy that it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for junk science (read bigotry) to even be recommended. On the other hand, it will also be impossible for consensus. There will obviously have to be a monority report. But that is fine,too. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, not their own facts.
Weldoncam
You must be new to this site. They've got their own set of facts here. They won't admit AIDS entered this country because of rampant promiscuity and anonymous sex among the gay community in the 70s.
Where does TTF fit in you ask? We fit in that category you have as "zip." Teachthefacts.org is a Community Group.
Christine
Post a Comment
<< Home