THE DALLES — The North Wasco County School District School Board will be moving its monthly board meetings to a virtual format until further notice, according to a Dec. 10 notice from the district.
“Recent board meetings have been over capacity with many attendees disregarding social distancing and masking requirements,” the notice stated. “These mitigation practices are critical in allowing us to continue to meet safely and in accordance with state requirements. Due to these factors, it has been determined that the safest course of action is to return to a virtual format, as was used during the spring and fall of 2020.”
Live streaming will continue to be available via the District’s YouTube and Facebook accounts, as allowed by state statute, the district noted. “The school board recognizes the value of public input on matters involving the school district and will continue to receive public comment during its regular meetings. As such, we will continue to open the floor to public comment as part of our agenda,” the notice stated.
Comments will follow district policy, with up to 3 minutes per person for comments. Interested parties can sign-up to speak by emailing Cindy Miller at millerc@nwasco.k12.or.us or by submitting a written comment to publiccomments@nwasco.k12.or.us.
The next meeting of the North Wasco County School District 21 school board is scheduled Thursday, Dec. 16. The meeting begins at 6 p.m., and will be preceded by an executive session.
Vaccine requirements
In a press release dated Nov. 22, and re-circulated Dec. 10, the District 21 superintendent noted in a press release the district will “like every school and district across the state” follow Oregon state health orders regarding vaccination of district staff as laid out in Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 333-019-1030.
The state requires “all school district staff to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and to show proof of vaccination,” the release explained. “The decision to adhere to, or violate, this ruling is one that no school or district can take lightly.”
Civil penalties for violation of the OAR are $500 per day per violation against the school or school-based program. For a single violation, fines can “climb to upwards of $15,000 per month. “Incurring such fines would take away funding opportunities from other areas within our schools and ultimately, our students,” the district stated. “Going beyond the daily cost of operations, such as ensuring our students are fed and our staff are paid, the list of needs is not a short one,” the release stated. From new lunch tables to band equipment to aging facilities, new needs are constantly added to the list.
In addition to monetary penalties, districts that knowingly violate the OAR could face other penalties such as the loss of a teachers and/or administrator’s licensure, school and/or district closures, and loss of district liability insurance, the District noted.
Exemptions honored
According to the district, medical and religious exemptions are available to those who qualify and the “district has honored these instances.” Such exemptions do come with the expectation that unvaccinated staff members take additional steps to protect themselves and others from contracting and spreading COVID-19, the release noted.
Additionally, the Oregon Educator’s Association and the district entered into a negotiated agreement in which any unvaccinated members will wear a KN95 mask at all times and be tested weekly to meet the section of the OAR where it states that schools that grant an exception to the vaccination requirement “must take reasonable steps to ensure that unvaccinated teachers, school staff and volunteers are protected from contracting and spreading COVID-19.”
A discussion about these requirements is had with each and every exempted staff member so that they may make an informed decision regarding their personal choice to comply with these terms of employment, the district stated.
Lawsuit explored
On Nov. 16, 2021, four parents in The Dalles filed a federal lawsuit in U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, Portland Division, alleging the North Wasco County School District 21 Board of Education violated their civil rights and those of their children by mandating student mask use while in school.
The complaint argues that requiring students to wear masks while engaged in district programs is a violation of parental rights, infective at protecting students from COVID-19, and detrimental to the student’s health to such a degree it amounts to child abuse and is akin to slavery or servitude, according to court documents.
Filing the 522 page complaint were Jennifer Gunter, Robert Schwartz, Holly Gove and Chelsea Parritt. The parents filed suit on their own behalf, or pro se, and are not represented by attorneys.
Named in the lawsuit are District Superintendent Carolyn Bernal and board members Rebecca Thistlethwaite, Dawn Rasmussen, David Jones, John Nelson, Brian Stevens, Jose Aparicio and Judy Richardson. All are named as individuals and in their official capacity with the District or school board.
When asked to comment on the lawsuit, district attorney Jason Corey said the school district cannot comment on pending litigation.
The lawsuit relies on documentation from a variety of sources. Among them is Stephen E. Petty, a Dublin, Ohio-based industrial hygienist, who is cited as an expert witness in the case against the district.
Petty was also cited as an expert witness in seven federal cases filed against local school boards this year by parents in Ohio. Four of those cases are pending, and three have been dismissed, according to The Columbus Dispatch, in a Nov. 2 report.
Petty claims masks do little to protect against the spread of COVID-19.
Petty’s claims contradicts the advice of public health officials, physicians, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that masks can help slow the spread of COVID-19.
The complaint also draws heavily from the website www.maskscience.org. According to the website, “MaskScience.org was created and is maintained by concerned volunteer citizens. We have no connection with and have received no funding or compensation from any third parties. We have no affiliation with any political or activist organizations, individuals, intermediaries, or proxies. We have no motive, ulterior or otherwise, other than aggregating and presenting authoritative, peer-reviewed information to help public and private sector decision-makers make evidence-based, data-driven choices.”
The website does not include “pro-mask studies that have emerged since April 2020” because those studies were published after masks were recommended, and are scientifically flawed, the website claims.
According to court documents, the plaintiffs ask the court to vacate and set aside mask requirements and provisions; declare mask policy void and without legal force; declare mask policy and implementation as arbitrary, capricious, based on ignorance due to failure to inquire into facts, otherwise not in accordance with law, and without observance of required procedures; declare mask policy in violation of parental rights, the constitution, and contrary to the laws of the U.S. and state of Oregon.
The plaintiffs also request the court preliminarily and permanently halt implementation of mask policies within the District, as well as award attorneys’ fees and costs to the plaintiffs.
Commented