Catawba School Board Moves Closer to Changing Book Policy

Three changes were voted on at Monday’s Education Committee meeting, but the revised policy is not yet final.

After nearly an hour of debate and a barrage of motions to reach a majority agreement, the board voted to limit the number of people who can raise objections to parents and guardians of students enrolled in the district. Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction Lee Miller’s role on the district’s reading committee was changed to that of a decision-maker and the policy was changed so that objected material cannot be re-challenged for four years.

Board Counsel Crystal Davis will consider the Board’s majority opinion and rewrite the policy.

Davis will present a revised version of the policy at the regular meeting on August 28.

Davis wrote in the submitted document that anyone who lives in Catawba County could challenge material. This was due to a misunderstanding between Davis and board member Tim Settlemyre, who wanted to narrow the scope rather than expand it. The board voted 5-2 to limit the challenge to parents and guardians of students enrolled in the district. The two dissenting votes were cast by board members Michelle Teague and Don Sigmon.

The county reading committee is made up of 12 people. Several committee members were concerned that a decision could result in a tie. After some discussion, the committee agreed to change Assistant Superintendent Miller’s role on the committee to that of a non-voting member who would only vote in the event of a tie.

Under the original rule, material could be challenged again after one year. Davis recommended extending the time limit to four years to avoid a vicious cycle, since the challenge process could take up to a year to complete depending on the number of appeals. The board voted 5-2 to extend it to four years. Teague and Sigmon opposed it.

Amid the dispute over the motions were failed motions to remove controversial material from media centers while it is under review and to allow district staff and board members to challenge material, both made by Teague, who was elected to the board in November 2022.

Before the election, Teague, as a concerned grandfather, had challenged more than 20 books in the district. Teague’s mass action lawsuit sparked the ongoing debate.

Teague said she wants objectionable material removed from media centers until the district committee or board makes a decision, something she has said at previous meetings.

“Removing the book from the shelf is a de facto decision,” said board member Jeff Taylor. “They decided it was not appropriate to leave it on the shelf … without due process.”

Davis added that in her legal opinion, “it would be unconstitutional to remove (material) before a decision has been made.”

Teague said other school districts remove objectionable material while it is under review. Chairman Ronn Abernathy, board member Leslie Barnette and Davis asked which districts Teague was referring to and said they were not aware of any district that had that policy. Teague declined to publicly name the districts, saying she did not want to draw attention to them.

At the July 7 meeting, Teague said something similar. Barnette then asked Teague to send an email with the names of the districts. Barnette said Monday she never received an email from Teague. Teague apologized and said she forgot.

Teague also reiterated that she disapproved of the presence of a student on the reading committee.

“I think this is a decision that adults have to make, not students,” Teague said, adding that she welcomes students’ opinions on other issues as well.

Several board members said a student on the reading committee must be a senior and have parental permission. Parents will be told the title of the book and the reason for the objection, Miller and Davis said.

Taylor said that students are the real stakeholders and that he did not think it was right to exclude them from the process.

Teague also said Monday that she wants district staff and board members to be able to challenge material. She said if she finds objectionable material in the future, she wants the ability to challenge it.

Barnette said a board member who challenges material would automatically be disqualified from voting on the matter.

“You can do it, but then you’re the litigant,” Taylor said. “So you basically can’t participate in the decision-making process if you file the lawsuit.”

Teague’s motion to allow district staff and board members to challenge materials was defeated 1-6. Teague was the only one to second the motion.

Kevin Sparks, a frequent public commentator and member of Freedom Readers, said during the public hearing that Vladimir Nabokov’s controversial book “Lolita” has only been checked out about once a year since it was added to the district’s media centers.