Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

NILES CHARTER TOWNSHIP — Brandywine Board of Education members ended a year that has often been controversial by voting Monday to lift the suspension on the purchase of violent books and materials and also to formally accept a $5,000 “We Need Diverse Books” grant received over the summer. 

The board had initially suspended the purchase of both violent and sexually explicit books and materials earlier this year pending a deeper look into the issue. A sexually explicit book and materials committee was formed and met over the summer, resulting in the adoption of a new policy in September. 

That policy requires parents to review book excerpts before giving middle and high school students permission to access sexually explicit books. The policy also takes into consideration parents who want to give their students blanket access and allows them to do so if they read excerpts from all the books in question. 

Monday’s decision to lift the purchase suspension came after board members discussed their options at their November meeting. They had talked in November about putting a policy in place on violent books and materials similar to the one approved in September or just simply lifting the suspension. 

“What we decided was that the media center was going to establish a rating system based on what we use for sexually explicit books,” Board President Thomas Payne said Monday. “Otherwise the staff would rate the materials themselves if there were no resources. The consensus was that the board was okay with that.” 

Board members also voted to accept the “We Need Diverse Books” grant awarded over the summer after two teachers applied for the grant in the spring. Brandywine was one of five school districts around the country to receive a grant. The board had questioned the process of how the grant was applied for and received.  

Monday, retired teacher Jim Rose talked about the grant in public comments at the start of the meeting and teacher Debbie Carew, one of the teachers applying for the grant, addressed the issue at the end of the meeting. 

Rose asked board members to not reject the grant out of hand because they thought some of the books purchased might be objectionable, that the teachers applying for it made inappropriate comments or that the grant has the word “diverse” in it. “Don’t make a $5,000 mistake,” he said. 

“Should you punish the students or the teachers who got the books?” he asked. “Two teachers have already been publicly shamed and reviled, they have paid a considerable price and the board’s authority has been upheld. All that’s left for you to decide is whether the students pay a price. This is a case where good judgment should prevail over bad feelings.” 

Board member Michelanne McCombs said she appreciated Rose’s comments but found it sad that the grant was applied for “on the down low” and the board only found out after the fact. “It’s kind of sad to me because I feel it was done in that way because we weren’t trusted,” she said. 

“We came on the board to do what was right for the kids and for the community,” she added. “For this grant to be applied for in kind of an underhanded way, I felt that they didn’t trust us to have that discussion … I want to be able to say I trust teachers to pick out books, I want to be able to move forward trusting the staff.” 

Payne was the only board member to vote against accepting the grant. He noted that statements were made in the grant application that were untrue, such as the board was making changes without assessing current policies and procedures, that the board was banning books, overreaching its authority and not reflecting the views of the community. 

“We’re not banning books, our intention was never to ban books,” he said. “It was always our intention to do the right thing, it’s important to bring that to every meeting. We try to make sure we are listening to the community and do what they want. Sometimes we disagree, but we discuss and then vote.” 

In her comments, Carew thanked the board for approving the grant. 

“It was the right thing to do for our students despite the differing beliefs we may have about literature,” she said. “It has always been about the kids regardless of what you may think.” 

She defended the grant application she and another teacher had submitted last February. They said board members were going to ban books because Payne had said in interviews that he would prefer to have books removed.

 “That’s banning,” she said. “… We saw the grant as a way to get more diverse books on the shelves to make up for books that might be removed.” 

She also addressed McCombs’ comments about trust. 

“I appreciate you recognizing that we didn’t trust you, but I will say that’s because your words and actions didn’t demonstrate trust in us,” she said. “I’m looking forward to being able to trust my board of education to lift up the district instead of taking moral justification in embarrassing the district on fringe social media sites online.” 

Rose spoke again at the end of the meeting. 

“After watching a full year of school board meetings, I think everyone wants the school district to be the best it can be,” he said. “Clearly we don’t always agree and we express our disagreements. If only we could talk with each other and not at each other, it would be much better.”