By Samuel Strait – Reporter at Large – February 25, 2022 It is not often in the world of Del Norte politics and especially in various Board meetings that there is any chance of differing opinions by board members. We have become used to 5-0 votes on most topics up for board approval, so it was with some amazement when witnessing the most recent School Board meeting that there were actual differences of opinion and something other than a zero on one side of the tally. It may be too early to tell that perhaps some elected officials are beginning to tumble to the fact that they represent a constituency rather than the bureaucracy that is supposed to do their bidding. A lesson that all Boards, Authorities, Councils, and Commissions need to have driven into their collective personalities. The Del Norte Unified School Board consisting of Don McArthur, Board President, Charlaine Mazzie, Vice Chair/Clerk, Jaime Forkner, Angela Greenough, and Frank Margarino entertained a lively crowd of mostly parents for over seven hours at the evening event. Beginning with opening ceremonies, a closed session, more ceremonies, a ceremonial proclamation on Self-Injury Awareness Month, and a special presentation, the Board moved quickly to various reports by Board Members, a Student Member report, the Teacher's Union Rep had things to say, as well as the California School Employees Association Representative. Nothing of any real note. The meeting moved on to a LCAP Midyear report which essentially indicated that LCAP funding needed to be spent at a slightly greater rate as only a little over 40% had been spent by midyear. Administrator Thomas Kissinger was asked why much of the funding appeared to be spent on social and mental issues rather than education. His response was that these issues had been assumed by the education community to facilitate student learning. Curious response that our school system has chosen to enter into student spaces that Health and Human Services normally would occupy. His response was, that those services were very limited in a County of this size which seemed to validate his claim that it was necessary for the school district to intervene for student educational welfare. Thus far 5-0 was the tone of the meeting. The consent agenda, with the removal of item "F", Personnel Changes, a District Audit, and even an Audit of the much publicized $25 million Bond operations received little comment by the Board, a tongue lashing by a member of the public, Linda Sutter, over malfeasance by Board conduct, and the 5-0 vote was intact. An hour and a half in and nothing exciting to report. Members of the public were beginning to regret missing the evening's preferred entertainment, an episode of "Jeopardy". And then the other shoe dropped. For the next five and a half hours the action for the Board liven up immeasurably. Item "C" on the Board's agenda included a discussion of mask mandates and a Board Resolution seeking to change school policy regarding those mandates for students within school interiors. The Board member comments were preceded by a lengthy description by District Superintendent Jeff Harris of the perils of lifting the California Department of Public Health's recommendations for masking in Public Schools. Discussion among Board members seemed to favor the resolution already passed by 20 other districts with in the State in one form or another to allow some form of a maskless environment in schools. Comments in the public comment session which had in excess of fifty commenters seem to split mostly along the lines of parents with children objecting to the mandate and school teachers, union reps and school employees wishing it to remain. Arguments were spirited and lively, often spoken with passion. The end of the comment period seemed to have left Board members undecided as to what the path forward for them resembled. Divided as to how to proceed, definitely a serious consideration of the alternatives, the fall out for parents and teachers ensued with no clear winners. Parents felt that teachers were misrepresenting mask effectiveness, and the negative effects of masking on their children. Teachers and their union representatives countered with safety concerns, compassion for others and the argument that children "did not mind wearing masks" in the classrooms. In fact according to two of the teachers, many students wore theirs outside, which is not a current requirement in school settings. Neither side seemed to be content with the other. This left the School Board continuing to seek answers that really didn't materialize. This left a compromise that seemed to allow students to unmask following a few steps at educational enforcement without penalty which would allow the unmasked student to remain in class for instruction beginning Monday, February 28th. This was voted on a 3-2 basis, Don McArthur and Charlaine Mazzie dissenting. While this seemed to resolve the item with regards to students, staff masking was briefly discussed resulting in an almost immediate reaction by employee unions and threats of filing grievances by those unions. Teachers and their unions did not appear to be receptive of the actions taken by the board. Masking by teachers was then removed from consideration and a special meeting was set for Monday February 28th at 4:30 to await the promised governor's announcement on mask disposition for schools. At that point the Board would take further action if necessary. Item "D" included the potential approval of a second school bond to be placed at the November 2022 election date. Apparently, last Fall's survey did not encourage the District's assessment of a 55% passage rate which appears to be the current path the School Board has taken after the fiasco produced by the previous Citizen's Oversight Committee's failure to perform properly. Having a bond COC allowed the previous bond to only require a 50% plus one. This has recently become a contentious issue and energized a considerable reaction to the recently proposed new bond. Citing hard economic times and the unlikely ability to "manufacture" enough support, the Board elected to pass on a bond for the November election. Shortly after the 11 o'clock hour, seven hours into the meeting, Chapter 1 funding plans were discussed. Hopefully more production out of those funds will occur within those plans. Historically there hasn't been much progress to report from the additional funding from Chapter 1. Student's receiving the attention from that source typically showed little if any improvement academically. Moving into the home stretch, a representative from the Board to visit the glorious urban paradise of San Diego for the biannual California School Board Association meetings fell to Angela Greenough. Plans for future board agendas, upcoming union bargaining meetings and a few other suggestions rounded out the meeting with only a very few of the fifty or more members of the public remaining. End results appear to be favoring a less draconian evolution to have Del Norte County and California leave the few remaining states that require masking in schools, eleven was the number reported. And the tax payer gets a break and will not have to wrestle with yet a new tax on their properties when the Board nixed a new school bond for the Fall.