School District Delays Decision on Controversial Pro-LGBTQ+ Plan

After school trustees voted to delay its implementation, parents in North Texas have an opportunity to stop a controversial action plan by a public school district that would create an LGBTQ+ student focus group and a system where students can accuse each other of “microaggressions” at a cost of nearly $1.5 million. Several students spoke to the school board demanding the plan be adopted, many ending their speeches with the phrase “black lives matter.”

At 9 p.m. on Monday, the elected board of trustees of the Carroll Independent School District in Southlake voted 5-2 to receive the drafted controversial “Cultural Competency Action Plan” (CCAP) but to take no action in implementing it until after a series of board workshops and events so the public could learn more about it.

Trustees Eric Lannen and Matt Bryant voted against, expressing concern that a vote may not be necessary if all the board was doing was receiving the plan and holding workshops.

This allows concerned citizens to stop the plan entirely and focus on enforcing the district’s student code of conduct.

“It’s notable the board was so confused, they changed course and refused to adopt this plan,” said Jonathan Covey, director of policy for Texas Values. “It would have been better if they directly voted it down. We will continue to fight for parents and students in Carroll ISD who oppose this forced radical LGBTQ agenda, because this issue is not over.”

As previously reported by Texas Scorecard, the plan states it is in response to a social media video in 2018, in which Carroll ISD students used racial slurs. A “District Diversity Council” was set up by the board to draft a CCAP, and Carroll ISD board trustees Michelle Moore and Sheri Mills were appointed to the council.

CCAP focuses on targeting “microaggressions,” which it defines as “everyday verbal or nonverbal, snubs or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized or underrepresented group membership.”

Diversity Council Co-Chair Dr. Janet McDade told the board Monday evening that microaggressions can be “as simple as making fun of someone’s hair.”

Board trustee Matt Bryant asked McDade how many microaggressions were recorded during her time working on CCAP. “I do not remember … the numbers aren’t large,” she replied.

“Microaggression” has become a new buzzword of the left to expand victimhood on more people, making them vulnerable to destructive policies that expand the left’s power while making the problem worse.

CCAP proposes a series of highly controversial actions such as:

“Create a systemic process for consistently tracking and reporting microaggressions and incidents of discrimination.”
Establish an LGBTQ+ student focus group (grades 9-12), an equity and inclusion grievance process system, and expand the school’s tip line to collect allegations of microaggressions.

Throughout the DDC’s presentation to trustees on Monday evening, nowhere was there an appeals process by which wrongfully accused students could have false reports made against them removed, nor was there any judicial process listed that guaranteed students would be innocent until proven guilty.

Representatives of the DDC claimed CCAP does not pose the threat many parents fear it does.

However, it was the publication of CCAP and the objective of the plan itself that sparked many parents’ concerns. The claims made by the DDC to the board do not match what is written within the action plan.

CCAP also requires a curriculum focused on “diversity” and more training for teachers on “diversity and inclusion.”

Many parents are not pleased.

“This is a pre-packaged plan with a political agenda targeting my children,” Mitchell Ryan said.

“I oppose the CCAP,” said Miss Bowman, whose career is in human resources. “I’ve seen firsthand how divisive these devices can be.” She also wanted to know how the investigative procedures and decision processes work.

“I’m also concerned about how microaggressions will be tracked,” Jenni Storey said. “[CCAP] will turn neighbor on neighbor, friend on friend.”

“I’m concerned about the broad overreach of the CCAP,” Mitch Stacey said. “We already have the student code of conduct to handle these issues.”

“We need more love and understanding, not more legislation.”

“I’m against the CCAP as it’s written. I believe it’s overreach and heavy-handed,” said Mike Pizzera. “We’ve had very little public input time.”

“We can’t enforce the policy we already have,” he added.

“I’m a person of color, and I totally disagree with the CCAP,” Mr. Tan said. “Who are you to tell me, a person of color, whether I’m competent towards cultural sensitivity.”

“Not all people are racist.”

There were also questions about how CCAP would affect students’ religious liberty. This prompted religious liberty defense law firm First Liberty to dispatch one of their own to speak to the trustees.

“We want to encourage the school district to respect religious liberty,” Mr. Butterfield of First Liberty said.

Several self-identified Carroll ISD students and graduates also spoke in favor of CCAP, with many of them ending their speeches with the phrase “black lives matter.”

These organized students and adults in favor of CCAP made it clear that this is just the beginning of political demands to be made of the school.

“The CCAP is the bare minimum,” said Paige Stephenson, who identified as a 2018 Carroll ISD graduate. “Black lives matter.”

In 2020, BLM has been associated with riots nationwide, burning cities to the ground and spreading violence while demanding the elimination of police departments and spending taxpayer dollars elsewhere.

“I’m angry. I’ve tried to be peaceful, but it simply doesn’t work,” Ethan Coe told board trustees Monday night. “It’s ridiculous to delay this plan.”

One person claimed these students were organized by their own parents to speak in favor of CCAP that night.