Article

D60: Are parents safe?

Quin Friberg

September 24, 2024

Are you a parent with a child in the D60 school district? If so, you NEED to be aware of the wedge D60 is driving between you and your child. There are LGBTQ activists in the community who sincerely believe that parents are not "safe" - specifically for children who may be experiencing gender dysphoria.


But first, let me set the stage with a little background.

This past legislative season (2024), the Colorado Legislature passed a law (which Gov. Polis signed) - HB24-1039 - that directs school districts to develop policies to accommodate a student’s request for a non-legal name change. These requests are made most typically to reflect the student’s preferred gender identity. Essentially, the law requires school districts to adopt policies that respect these requests and define non-compliance as discrimination and a civil rights violation. The current issue for D60 is whether or not parents are informed of these requests and included in the conversation. The law does not direct that parents be included or that they be excluded. It leaves the development of a policy to implement the requirements of the law up to the individual districts.
 
Locally, the D70 School Board (Pueblo county) recently implemented a policy that requires a parent/guardian to co-sign the student’s request. This ensures that parents are aware of the child’s preference and can have important conversations about this before implementation. If the parent/guardian consents, then the school can confidently implement the policy knowing parents are fully aware of and supportive of the change. This is the correct pro-parental involvement approach. However, the most recent draft of the D60 (city schools) policy apparently does NOT require parental consent. Which means they would honor the student’s request whether or not the parent/guardian agrees. It also appears there is no specific requirement that the parent be notified proactively.
This approach encroaches upon the parent’s rights and responsibilities. It deliberately places a wedge between the child and the parent. Recent in-person testimony to the D60 Board has suggested that it's not “safe” for the school to inform and involve parents.
 
At the first reading of the proposed D60 policy to implement the requirements of HB24-1039, Board Chairman Susan Pannunzio questioned why the draft included language that appeared to leave parents out of the conversation. She stressed the importance of parents being engaged and involved in these important conversations before the District acted on the child’s request. At a subsequent Board meeting, three “concerned citizens” - none of whom represented themselves as parents with children currently in D60 - chastised Susan for her remarks and concerns and stated explicitly that “notification to parents regarding a requested name change is not conducive to a student’s safety and well-being” (Tommy Farrell, former D60 Board chair, in remarks to the D60 Board Aug. 2024).
 
At that same meeting, Justina Carter, Vice President of the Pueblo teachers union, testified that parental notification would create “a barrier to the student’s right” to request a non-legal name change and that notifying parents should be optional. She clearly implied that “schools are safe” but a student’s parents may not be. News flash: Parents are not safe!
 
Yet this ideology flies in the face of long-established values regarding the rights and responsibilities of parents. Even the US Supreme Court has weighed in on this in a case regarding custody rights when Justice O’Connor wrote: “The liberty interest at issue in this case—the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children—is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court. In light of this extensive precedent, it cannot now be doubted that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children. - Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 at 65-66 (2000)”
 
HB24-1039 clearly allows local school boards to determine their own policies for implementing the requirements of the law for non-legal name changes for students. The issue before the D60 School Board is fundamental: Do parents have the right to “make decisions regarding the care, custody, and control of their children”? Or will we allow that right to be delegated to teachers and school administrators to decide if and when parents will be informed and involved?
 
What can you do?
 
Email the D60 Superintendent Dr. Barbara Kimzey and INSIST that parents be included - proactively - in ANY policies, guidance, or even conversations about a child’s transgender identity. NO WEDGE. NO SECRETS. Copy the D60 Board of Education. Attend upcoming D60 Board of Education meetings and provide public comment to defend your rights as parents to “protect your fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children”. Be assured the LGBTQ activists will continue to insist that parental involvement in this issue is “not safe”. If you still have questions about the law or the policy implementation, you are encouraged to contact John Zondlo at johnzondlo@gmail.com


share this

Related Articles

Related Articles

D70 Jericho Prayer Walk

By Quin Friberg • November 30, 2024
On Saturday, December 7th at 1:00 PM, the community of Pueblo, Colorado, is invited to participate in a unique and meaningful event organized by Forging Pueblo. The "Jericho Prayer Walk for D70 Schools" aims to gather community members in a spiritual reflection and prayer specifically targeted at the enhancement and protection of local educational institutions. Participants of the Jericho Prayer Walk are encouraged to select any of the schools within the District 70 jurisdiction and join others in encircling the selected school. The walk will commence at 1:00 PM, with each participant or group completing seven laps around their chosen school, mirroring the biblical account of Jericho. The final lap will culminate in a collective hymn and prayer session, symbolizing a united front of faith and support for the school's students, faculty, and administrative decisions. This event is designed to spiritually uplift and bring together the Pueblo community, focusing on seeking divine wisdom and safety for the schools. It encourages an environment where community members can express their support through prayer and unity. Participating in an event like the Jericho Prayer Walk aligns with Biblical teachings on the importance of prayer and seeking God’s guidance in all endeavors, especially those that impact our communities and children. Scripture emphasizes the power of prayer and the value of interceding on behalf of others. In Philippians 4:6, believers are instructed, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God.” This underscores the significance of turning to prayer in times of decision-making and communal gatherings. Additionally, 1 Timothy 2:1-2 urges, “I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people—for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.” This directive makes it clear that praying for those in authority, such as school board members, is not only appropriate but encouraged to ensure a peaceful and righteous community. Forging Pueblo warmly invites all members of the community to participate in this prayerful initiative. By choosing a local school to support, participants can directly engage in an act of faith that seeks to positively impact the educational and spiritual environment of that institution. This is an opportunity for the community to unite, reflect, and contribute to the welfare of the next generation through peaceful and respectful expression of faith. The Jericho Prayer Walk has drawn criticism from a segment of the community concerned with its perceived implications for public schools and the involvement of Dr. Aaron Wilson, a school board member. Critics argue that the event could blur the lines between public institutions and private religious activities. Additionally, they mistakenly believe that the Prayer Walk aims to influence educational policy, specifically targeting the TRAILS curriculum, which has been a recent cause of controversy in District 70. However, this is a misunderstanding, as Forging Pueblo has clearly stated that the event's focus is on prayer for wisdom and safety in school governance and student welfare, not on advocating for curriculum changes. Moreover, the event is organized independently, without utilizing any school resources or endorsement from the school district. It is held entirely in public spaces and outside of school hours, ensuring compliance with all applicable guidelines. In reaction to the Prayer Walk, a group of community members has arranged a counter-protest. They plan to monitor attendance and raise funds in opposition to the event, exercising their right to freely express differing viewpoints. For more information on the event, including details on how to participate and a list of District 70 schools, please visit forgingpueblo.org/events. Whether you are a parent, teacher, student, or simply a concerned citizen, your presence can make a significant difference in reinforcing the community's support for its schools and its youth. Let's come together on December 7th to show our support and commitment to the future of Pueblo's schools.

Pueblo Shifts Conservative

By Quin Friberg • November 7, 2024
Pueblo, CO – In a historic shift toward conservatism, Pueblo County has elected its first Republican majority in the County Commissioners' office, signaling a significant political shift at the local level. This election cycle was marked by fierce competition, particularly for two critical seats on the Board of County Commissioners and the highly contested role of District Attorney, following the departure of former District Attorney Jeff Chostner (D), who did not seek re-election.  In the first County Commissioner race, Miles Lucero (D) won with a significant margin over Steven Rodriguez (R) and Eppie Griego (U), securing his seat on the board. However, it was the second Commissioner seat that notably underscored Pueblo’s conservative tilt. Conservative candidate Paula McPheeters triumphed against Deneya Esgar, a Democrat who was appointed to fill the vacated seat of Garrison Ortiz a little over a year ago when he resigned. In November 2020, Esgar was elected by her colleagues to serve as majority leader of the Colorado House of Representatives for a two-year term starting in January 2021. She was sworn in as Pueblo County Commissioner, 2nd District, on June 1, 2023, following Ortiz’s resignation. Her term is set to expire in 2025. Esgar, known for her progressive stance, criticized McPheeters' strong connections to the local faith community—a strategy that did not resonate well with the electorate. McPheeters' victory alongside Commissioner Miles Lucero (D) and existing Commissioner Zach Swearingen (R), who was elected two years prior, has established a Republican majority on the board for the first time in Pueblo. Paula was also elected as the first female Republican commissioner in Pueblo history. The District Attorney race also reflected Pueblo's conservative swing, with Kala Beauvais (R) defeating Kyle Aber in a significant victory. Beauvais, who will be Pueblo's first female District Attorney and the first Republican to hold the position in over six decades, is known for her "tough on crime" stance. Her extensive experience as a prosecuting attorney at the District Attorney's office played a crucial role in showing the voters of Pueblo she has what it takes to make our city a safe place to live. Her opponent, Kyle Aber, advocated for a more progressive approach to criminal justice. These election results are particularly striking given the broader political context, where the state of Colorado leaned towards Vice President Kamala Harris’s party in the Presidential race, and historically Pueblo has leaned towards the Democratic candidate for president. However, this year Pueblo leaned conservative, and the majority of citizens voted for Donald Trump in Pueblo County. The efficient work of the Pueblo County Clerk and Recorder's office was also a highlight of this election cycle. The office was commended for its timely counting and release of results throughout the night, providing transparency and reassurance in the electoral process. Pueblo’s move towards conservative governance reflects a broader trend of reevaluating local and national political alignments, where community values and immediate issues take precedence over national party politics. As Pueblo positions itself with a new conservative majority, the impacts on local policies and community initiatives are awaited with keen interest by its constituents.

Split D60 Board Backs Parental Rights

October 27, 2024
And then God Showed Up . . . On Thursday, October 22, the D60 Board of Education narrowly passed (3-2) a new policy that will allow students to choose names (and pronouns) that reflect their gender identity with parental notification. The policy implements the requirements of a new state law (HB24-1039) that was passed by the Democrat super-majority in April. While the law requires school districts to support a non-legal name change, the law allows school districts to develop their own policies. The law is silent in regards to parental involvement (in fact, the law does not contain the word “parent” or “guardian”). The law simply requires schools to implement policies that comply with the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) - which interestingly guarantees that parents have the right to view all of their child’s educational records. In other words, schools cannot keep secrets from parents. The policy that the D60 Board approves fully complies with the requirements of HB24-1039. It ensures that children who want to be called something different at school will be acknowledged and respected. The only thing controversial about the policy - as now approved - is a requirement that parents be notified - in other words, no secrets. Why was this controversial? Because LGBT activists who testified insisted that including parents would not be safe. Why? Because parents may not always affirm the child’s decision regarding their gender identity, and that would be harmful to the child. Schools, on the other hand, are safe. Not involving parents would have set a dangerous precedent. There would be no end to the “rights” the child would be deemed to have to express their gender identity without involving parents in these extremely consequential decisions. So what happened on Tuesday? The meeting room was at capacity - literally standing room only. About two-thirds of those in attendance were LGBT activists (they wanted to be identified). And when the meeting began - God showed up! 1. One of the D60 Directors (Dr. Kathy DiNiro) had let Susan Pannunzio (Board Chair) know she might not be able to attend, due to a family emergency. She was potentially the swing vote. Five minutes before the meeting started, she took her seat! 2. The room was subdued. No sign waving. No chants. No catcalls. Ten people made public testimony. Three people spoke in favor of parental notification. Seven supported the child’s choice without involving parents. People listened respectfully, clapped if they supported the testimony (LGBT activists clearly charged up, but respectful). 3. After some presentations and first reading of two new - unrelated - policies, the discussion of ACA (the non-legal name change policy) begins. 4. Two Directors (Bill Thiebaut and Dennis Maes) passionately defend the child’s right to decide, without an automatic notification to parents. Argue a novel legal concept: the law extends rights to the child by bypassing parents' rights. 5. Board Chair Susan Pannunzio passionately defends the rights of parents to know before the district complies with the student’s request. 6. Director Thiebaut introduces an amendment to strike the language for parental notification. Dennis Maes seconds. 7. Motion fails! Directors Brian Cisneros, Dr. DiNiro, and Susan vote NO! 8. Vote on the proposed policy. This is a second reading, so this vote counts! Policy (as presented by Superintendent Dr. Barbara Kimzey) includes automatic parental notification. Motion passes! Directors Maes and Thiebaut vote NO. Directors Cisneros, Dr. DiNiro, and Pannunzio vote YES! So what’s next? Now with clarity on a policy that includes parental notification, Dr. Kimzey will come back to the Board with implementing regulations that will now have to include how parents will be notified and what happens if a parent declines to approve. Stay tuned! Author John Zondlo
ALL ARTICLES

STAY UP TO DATE

GET PATH'S LATEST

Receive bi-weekly updates from the church, and get a heads up on upcoming events.

Contact Us

Share by: