On a 4-3 vote, the USD 469 School Board in Lansing rejected a resolution offered by a member to comply with the recent “Dear Colleague” letter from the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) reaffirming its opposition to racial discrimination and suggesting institutions that follow what it terms “discriminatory practices” risk the loss of federal funding.
The resolution offered by Board Member Amy Cawvey stated:
In accordance with the federal mandate and existing federal anti-discrimination laws, USD 469 Lansing will affirm and follow current Presidential executive orders regarding in relation to elimination of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs and those that promote or incorporate gender ideology as defined by the executive order in education.
This will include all professional development training, curriculum, policies, and programs. The district Title IX coordinator along with superintendent will ensure Title IX protections are in place and adhered to. This order, along with Kansas state law, will allow for the designation of separate facilities requiring privacy such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and travel accommodations according to biological sex.
The district will also adhere to existing civil right laws and anti-discrimination policies throughout our district.
The board of education will review by policy committee all board policies to ensure executive orders are followed along with assigning designees to review all curriculum and training as needed.
Final approval rests with the board on all policy and curriculum.
The DEI resolution was aimed at this section of the federal letter:
All educational institutions are advised to: (1) ensure that their policies and actions comply with existing civil rights law; (2) cease all efforts to circumvent prohibitions on the use of race by relying on proxies or other indirect means to accomplish such ends; and (3) cease all reliance on third-party contractors, clearinghouses, or aggregators that are being used by institutions in an effort to circumvent prohibited uses of race.
Superintendent Marty Kobza was asked if he had had any recommendations from the Kansas Association of School Boards (KASB), which provides legal guidance to school districts, on how the district should proceed in implementing the USDE letter. He referenced a conversation with an unnamed KASB attorney:
“What he said was KASB hasn’t started anything any right now around policy. Part of it was the executive order was in court right now being held up and then the second part is, as he sai,d they typically won’t write a policy until it goes through the agencies, and the agencies provide guidance and rules and those guidance and rules go down to the states and then they create policy based upon that.”
Cawvey received more guidance from KASB attorney Angie Stallbaumer, who advised her not to pursue her resolution on USDE compliance. She provided an email exchange to The Sentinel after being assured it was not a violation of attorney-client privilege:
Until we know more, I would not recommend making a splash with unnecessary resolutions that might put a target on your board and district for legal challenge. Therefore, I would not recommend passing this resolution. I would keep an eye on how this situation evolves, and I would ask your administration for updates on whether any present policies or practices could lead to more federal agency scrutiny with these Eos (Executive Orders) in mind. But I wouldn’t call attention to yourselves with policy, resolution, or public proclamation until it is required for legal compliance. At this point, I do not believe these EOs direct any action on a school district unless there are presently discriminatory practices or policies in place. I’d look into that piece locally and quietly, so you all can make adjustments and be ready for how this situation develops.
Kansas Policy Institute CEO Dave Trabert says KASB taking a wait-and-see position underscores their DEI political agenda.
“When the Biden administration told school districts to adopt policies that recognize gender as a Title IX protected class contrary to court rulings, KASB rushed to tell school districts to quickly adopt those policies. Now, they advise no action upon being notified districts could lose federal funding by continuing DEI practices.
“Improving student outcomes should be the purpose of school districts and state school board associations, not promoting a political agenda.”
As the sometimes-contentious board discussion neared a vote on the Cawvey Resolution, Board Member Peter Im appeared dismissive of the USDE letter:
“So why are we putting all this energy and effort into a policy, or excuse me, a recommendation, from a federal organization that may not exist a couple more months down the road? I think it needs to be something that we work with in conjunction with state and with experts who are actually looking at the law and looking at the policy.”
The resolution was ultimately defeated with Im joining Aaron Yoakam, Jeff Bollin, and Kerry Brungardt in agreeing USD 469’s Parents Bill of Rightspassed in 2022 showed the district’s compliance with anti-discrimination laws. Cawvey, Mary Wood, and Kirsten Workman voted in favor.
Afterward, Cawvey lamented the board’s action on the DEI resolution:
“I am saddened by the members on the board who voted in favor of Woke agendas and administration pressure over adhering to the president’s executive orders regarding education. It is obvious the majority of our country agree with these orders and our president; yet they chose the Woke agenda over their constituents, the law, and most importantly the students. They are the losers in all of this.”
Workman says about $2 million in federal funding, 14% of the district’s budget, is potentially at stake if USD 469 is found in non-compliance with the directive:
“There is no plan to recoup that potential loss. I personally cannot imagine any recovery plan for that sort of hit to our budget that wouldn’t involve a bond issue or massive cuts. And our community has ready voiced strong opposition to a bond.”
