Three years ago today, notable Harry Potter author JK Rowling penned an essay titled “J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues.” Reading the piece today, the concepts she covered are not only more prevalent today, but also the subject of raging debates in our own backyard here in Bucks County. These debates will no doubt continue as election day nears, and Rowling’s words are an exemplar of the courage it is going to take for current and prospective board members to protect children in Bucks County.

Rowling has had a profound impact on my generation (Gen Z), and the generations that came after. This is why her willingness to be vocal on topics of grave importance is of the utmost importance. The activists Rowling describes in the piece, that have been trying to silence her and countless other gender critical authors, are the same group of people that now rabidly fight against age-appropriate school library standards on the basis of “protecting free speech,” and classroom neutrality policies that prohibit political advocacy on the taxpayer dime. Little doubt exists that if candidates that support this activism are elected to create a board majority, there will be no sex-separation in sports, bathrooms, or locker rooms. If their public displeasure with policy is any indication, children will also be supported to hide their mental health struggles and desire to transition from those most equipped to help them– their families.

One salient point made in Rowling’s piece is that the climate of fear of speaking out on this topic that exists worldwide is one that “serves nobody – least of all trans youth.” The fear is not unfounded, as many have lost their livelihoods, faced online and in person abuse or assault, or been entirely ostracized by friends and family for expressing views that were completely uncontroversial just a few years ago. Rowling outlines five compelling reasons that she had begun to speak out on these issues despite the backlash she knew she may receive. Many of them will be relatable to Bucks County parents and taxpayers that harbor no ill will towards gender dysphoric kids, but rather seek to protect kids from irreversible damage and preserve the safety of students in school.

The trans activism of 2020, and certainly now in 2023, has invariably attempted to “erode the legal definition of sex and replace it with gender,” as she describes, which has an impact on several causes Rowling supports involving female prisoners, and sexual and domestic abuse.

The trans activism of 2020, and certainly now in 2023, has invariably attempted to “erode the legal definition of sex and replace it with gender,” as she describes, which has an impact on several causes Rowling supports involving female prisoners, and sexual and domestic abuse.

The Biden administration has tried this same extreme tactic, despite his pitch as a moderate in the 2020 election. The effect in Bucks County is palpable, as it has directly impacted the debate on sex-separated bathrooms and locker rooms in Pennridge. The concerns of legal ramifications because of the Biden admin’s redefinition of sex and gender identity was central to the controversy as that policy was being debated, even among a board that is an 8-1 Republican majority. As she points out later in the piece though, policies that open the door to eliminating protection in women’s spaces is “playing fast and loose with women’s and girls’ safety.”

Another main reason Rowling spoke out will resonate with many Bucks County parents and women generally. There has been in the past several years a “huge explosion,” of young women transitioning. She explained that her detailed research into this subject, which led her to the work of U.S. physician Lisa Littman. Her research describes the unusual pattern that has cropped up, in which “entire friend groups became transgender-identified at the same time,” and the complete reversal of the category of children identifying as trans. Where males were typically the overwhelming majority of teens that wished to transition, in recent years the decades old pattern has entirely reversed. To not see the potentiality of a social contagion element in this trend is irresponsible to most of us advocating for hesitancy in permanent methods of treatment, such as puberty blockers and surgery. The anniversary of this piece coincides wonderfully with the announcement by NHS England that they will no longer prescribe puberty blockers for children experiencing gender dysphoria.

One of the most important moments in Rowling’s piece comes when she describes how easily she could have been influenced to transition had she only been born 30 years later. I have felt this way myself, as I’m sure many others have.

One of the most important moments in Rowling’s piece comes when she describes how easily she could have been influenced to transition had she only been born 30 years later. I have felt this way myself, as I’m sure many others have.

Like Rowling, I struggled with severe OCD as a teenager, and had difficulty living in an all-male household as a teen growing into womanhood. As a tomboy that loved sports, hated dresses, and grew up roughhousing and doing traditionally male things, I can see how tempting it would have been to escape all of my anxiety and self-hatred with such a seemingly simple solution, especially when trans activists attempt to teach young girls that defying sex-based stereotypes is an indication that you are actually transgender. Rowling goes on to explain that somewhere from 60-90% of trans youth end up growing out of their gender dysphoria. This will come as no surprise to most adults that experienced anxiety in their teen years. I have a similar experience. Although my OCD and anxiety disorders are still around, they are most certainly less severe in adulthood.

Rowling also explores the “women, sit down and shut up, or else,” element of today’s trans movement, that is deeply misogynistic. If we don’t give up our protected spaces, our accolades in sport, our own biologically female experiences of menstruation and pregnancy, we are the bad guys and we will face consequences. “It isn’t enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves,” Rowling explains.

“It isn’t enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves,” Rowling explains.

This is reflected in institutions like University of Pennsylvania, which offered counseling to re-educate girls who engaged in wrongthink when expressing discontent with a male swimmer being brought onto the women’s team and into the women’s locker rooms. The brave women and girls speaking up on these topics need our support now more than ever.

I encourage everyone to give an anniversary read to Rowling’s piece. You will find her words really hit the nail on the head in describing what so many of us are frustrated by, and why we choose to speak out in defense of the children of Bucks County. There is no lack of sympathy or understanding for those struggling with gender dysphoria, only a desire to protect kids in Bucks County, and everywhere.

The post Opinion: 3 Years Later, J.K. Rowling Was Right appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

In recent times, Central Bucks School District has witnessed the deterioration of nuance, coinciding with the arrival of pandemic related policy debates, and the transition away from non-partisan school board elections. This has had profound consequences for the district, leading to deep divisions and strife within the community. One notable example of this is the debate surrounding book banning, or the hypocritical reaction to the district’s library policy.

During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021, Republican and independent voters in Central Bucks advocated for parental choice in relation to strict COVID mitigation measures. Counter to that, extremist factions within the Bucks Democrats resorted to inflammatory labels like “domestic terrorists” and “grandma killers” to discredit those advocating for choice. The tension escalated further when issues such as masks and quarantines took center stage.

Parents who recognized the adverse effects of remote learning and the need for a return to normalcy were met with hostility and rage from major voices in our local Democrat party. Interestingly, those who vehemently opposed choice back then, now claim to champion the cause of “parental choice,” when it comes to policies passed by the Republican majority concerning library materials and classroom neutrality.

In the lead-up to the adoption of Policy 109.2, which addressed library materials, local Democrats adopted a rhetorical strategy. The same pattern of hostility overtaking reasoned discourse from the days of COVID policy debates was re-ignited. Rather than engaging in a meaningful discussion regarding appropriate age-based standards, they chose to label the very idea of having any standards at all as fascistic book banning, drawing comparisons to Nazi tactics. This approach was exemplified by director Karen Smith (D) who intimated the same in an email to Superintendent Dr. Lucabaugh.

As a resident and taxpayer within the district, I have no desire to determine which books are suitable for specific age groups. However, I firmly believe in the need for standards. Some standards are self-evident, such as the notion that middle schoolers should not have access to explicit adult content like “Fifty Shades of Grey” in our school libraries. It is challenging to fathom how anyone could disagree with such a basic standard. Yet, some Democrats may still call you a book banner if you believe the same.

As an avid reader, I recognize the profound impact books can have on a child’s life. I empathize with students who seek relatable characters in the novels they consume, providing an escape from the stresses of their daily lives. When the topic of a book removal policy was first introduced, I felt I was a bit further to the left than most of my Republican friends. Some people identifying as Republicans had very extreme views about what is appropriate for children, even high schoolers, that I could not get behind. I remember feeling like I had ended a pay-it-forward line at a meeting where Republicans were reading explicit excerpts of books, and I spoke about an entirely different topic.

While their intentions may have been noble, I cringed and shook my head both at home and in person as those small minority of Republicans made misrepresentations about Supreme Court rulings and laws, and hurled accusations at the board minority about giving porn to minors. Thankfully, as I talked with more and more Republicans, I found that those people were actually few and far between, a fringe minority. The same seemed to be true of the Democrats crying “book ban.” The Democrats I spoke to do believe in age-appropriate standards. It required presenting them with the actual policy and asking direct questions to tease that out. The term “book ban,” was easily unwound once I stopped playing a game of semantics, and simply asked how they feel about age appropriateness in school libraries. Once again, the loudest most extreme views we hear are actually those of the fringe minority.

In a public comment, I quoted Milton Friedman, who famously said, “One of the greatest mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” As numerous frivolous challenges, which I deemed excessive, were presented by this small minority, I initially viewed the policy as a failure. However, over the past few months, I have been pleasantly surprised by the outcomes. The policy includes safeguards to prevent abuse by the public.

Despite some misuse of the policy, such as challenges to books that are generally considered appropriate by the average person, the actual removal of books has been limited to those with explicit and graphic sexual content. These books featured illustrated depictions of sexual acts and provided instructions on how to sign up for apps intended for hookups and sexual encounters. The decision to remove these books was entrusted to the very experts whose judgment the Democrats had urged the public to trust during the policy development process — our knowledgeable librarians and teachers. If this group of professionals has determined that only two books in our district libraries are unsuitable for minors, one must question why Democrats no longer have faith in their judgment. Is it possible that perpetuating the narrative simply serves their political interests?

Traditional book bans, historically speaking, were a means of suppressing ideas deemed subversive by those in power. For instance, during the reign of Hitler in Nazi Germany, works authored by Jews, Communists, and even famed founder of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud, were burned. The purpose was to eradicate viewpoints that ran counter to the regime’s ideology. To equate age-appropriate standards in Central Bucks with such book burnings is to dilute the true meaning and significance of the term “book ban.” Karen Smith’s comparison between the two, for one, is an affront to the memory of those who suffered and died under Nazi rule.

Ironically, it is worth noting that some Democrats do support a different form of book banning—the kind that involves suppressing ideas and removing them from the public sphere altogether. In 2020, an ACLU attorney named Chase Strangio infamously advocated for stopping the circulation of Abigail Shrier’s book and her ideas, stating that it was a hill he was “willing to die on.”

Moreover, the Democrat party as a whole has shown great hostility towards free speech. They have cultivated a culture in which a generation of children believes that speech is synonymous with violence, that using preferred pronouns is a form of harassment, and that openly expressing Christian beliefs on a school board violates the principle of separation of church and state. They even argue that “hate speech” should be illegal, disregarding the Supreme Court’s ruling in Matal v. Tam. These fringe extremists within the Democrat party, who claim to champion free speech, should take a moment to reflect on the fact that the real threat to free expression is emerging from within their own ranks. The call is coming from inside the house. When speakers on college campuses are shouted down, assaulted, or forced to take refuge in barricaded rooms simply because their views differ from the extreme left, it becomes clear that the Democrat party’s commitment to freedom of speech is questionable at best.

While it is true that the Central Bucks library materials policy has its own shortcomings, it is crucial to acknowledge that these could have been addressed through productive and respectful dialogue. However, engaging in meaningful discussions about the nuances of the policy becomes impossible when accusations of bigotry, Nazism, and fascism are constantly invoked as a means to shut down any attempt to create library standards. A culture of free speech—one that fosters genuine debates with a mutual respect for diverse perspectives—is essential for crafting sound policies that can be embraced by all. Policy should not be treated as a zero-sum game with winners and losers.

As we approach the upcoming elections in 2023, Democrat candidates may hope that voters remain uninformed or disengaged, swayed solely by sensational headlines. But I believe that by initiating meaningful conversations with our neighbors, friends, and family, and engaging in good faith discussions, we can foster understanding and bridge the divides that currently plague our community. In the wise words of Mark Twain, “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re misinformed.” It is time to move past the divisive narratives and seek the truth through open and respectful dialogue. Only then can we hope to lead the way in Central Bucks.

The post Opinion: The Erosion of Nuance in Central Bucks and the Book Ban Lie appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

Mail in ballots continued to trickle in up to the deadline, with results from received ballots somewhat lagging. As of the 8pm deadline on Tuesday, county information showed that of the 42,813 mail in ballots received at the time, approximately 75% came from registered Democrats. To the shock of none, most Republicans elected to utilize in person voting, on Election Day. 

Notable Results

The Democrat primaries included very few contested races. Most notably, incumbent County Coroner Meredith Buck (D) lost her bid for re-election to the endorsed candidate, Patti Campi (D). Buck is involved in ongoing litigation against the County for cutting funding for her office dramatically amidst the pandemic, which was likely a central factor in the Democrat party’s decision not to endorse her.

Republicans, by contrast, had numerous competitive primaries facing challengers from within the party. The end result, ultimately, showed that Republican voters overwhelmingly chose party unity over primary challengers. 

In Central Bucks – Region 3, former Board President Glenn Schloeffel (R) defeated unendorsed Trish Carmen (R). The Doylestown Township Supervisor race resulted in a win for endorsed candidates Trish Murphy (R) and Rob Carosseli (R) over the efforts of Joe Van Houten (R). In Pennridge, all five endorsed Republican candidates for school board defeated David Reiss (R), whose six year tenure on the board will expire in January.

One notable exception in school board races occurred in Palisades school district, where unendorsed candidate Kathy Gentner (R) managed to secure a ballot spot for the November general election in region 2. All three Republican candidates had cross-filed, appearing on both primary tickets, and not running against any endorsed Democrats. 

The two endorsed Republican candidates won spots on the Democrat ballot for November. This means that Ramos and Beerer will both appear on the November ballot with a (D), while Beerer will also have an (R) designation, and Gentner will appear with only an (R). Ultimately, all three Republicans will appear on the ballot contest seeking one of the two available seats in that region. It remains to be seen whether the local GOP will endorse Gentner, as she won over a majority of Republican voters, or stick with their endorsed candidates, one of which will not appear as a Republican on the November ballot. 

Countywide, former Commissioner Andy Warren (R) was handily defeated by current County Controller Pamela Van Blunk (R) and sitting incumbent Commissioner Gene DiGirolamo (R).

Early Speculation About November

As results have poured in, both parties have begun speculating about what the numbers may mean for the November general election. Here are a few key factors to consider—

1. Pennsylvania is a closed primary state, which means that only Republicans and Democrats can vote in primary elections. Bucks County has nearly 80,000 registered voters who are not registered with either political party. That number is enough to sway almost any election, so all speculation about the total vote numbers must keep that in mind.
2. Turnout in the 2021 municipal primary was exceptionally high, largely due to constitutional amendments on the primary ballot that aimed to limit the emergency powers of the Governor. The primary therefore became a de facto referendum on the COVID emergency powers wielded by the Wolf Administration, which drove massive Republican turnout. This year, the overall turnout was nearly identical. If this pattern holds true, we can expect approximately 40-42% turnout in the November general election. That is quite a significant jump in total voters compared to primary totals, so it’s anyone’s guess as to how those votes may fall.
3. Voters from the party currently in the minority are typically the most highly motivated voters in any given election. This pattern has always existed. Even in nationwide elections, it is typical to see the President’s party defeated at the next election, leading to split power among the branches of government.

As election season heats up post-primary, Bucks Bulletin remains committed to bringing you the most up-to-date insight and analysis as we progress towards the November 7th election.

 Sources:

2023 Results:

https://www.livevoterturnout.com/ENR/buckspaenr/12/en/yVHhd_Index_12.html

Historical Bucks Turnout Statistics:

https://www.buckscounty.gov/186/Voter-Statistics

Current Voter Registration Statistics (As of May 15, 2023)

https://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/OtherServicesEvents/VotingElectionStatistics/Pages/VotingElectionStatistics.aspx?fbclid=IwAR3VMv1lh9mxpfRZ–7yGMyAAVvx2cZ2y9g-wxaO_DmCsTvwlpmj6Rhd8Gw

The post Bucks Primary Recap: Dems Celebrate Turnout, Republicans Show Unity Heading Into Summer appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

It was an unusual scene at the Pennridge School Board meeting on Wednesday, May 10th, where participants in a rally held outside of the high school organized by activists from national political organization Red Wine & Blue, and supporters of the teacher’s union in contract negotiations, filled the auditorium. In an atmosphere that one attendee called “chaotic and hostile,” Pennridge’s new bathroom policy requiring sex-based use of multi-user bathroom and locker room facilities was passed 7-1, with lone Democrat Ron Wurz dissenting and long-time board director Joan Cullen absent from the meeting.

Public Comment Goes Awry

Pennridge holds two public comment periods on their agenda. The first public comment period is designated to discuss items listed on the agenda, while the second public comment period exists to allow commenters to speak on other topics.

When a family member of a Democrat board candidate attempted to speak on non-agenda items during the initial comment period, the substitute solicitor, Kevin Skjoldal, interrupted and attempted to explain the difference between comment periods, and asked that comments not related to the agenda be held for the second public comment period. Members of the audience began shouting at the board as the commenter argued with Skjoldal. A recess was called when the commenter refused to comply with the request to speak on agenda items only, and a productive method to continue public comment became unreachable.

The board returned approximately 45 minutes later, along with a police presence. Ultimately, no individual was removed by police, and the public commenters that argued with Skjoldal were able to give their comments on their preferred topics at the end of the meeting, as Skjoldal had originally directed.

These ongoing disruptions from the audience seemed to reflect contention across party lines on the board itself, as later in the meeting, Ron Wurz demanded that Megan Banis-Clemens (R) not interrupt him. Only moments later, Wurz himself proceeded to disrupt the comments of Director Jordan Blomgren (R). Wurz, who ran as a republican with Blomgren and others, and sought Republican endorsement this year before deciding to run as a Democrat, attempted to talk over Blomgren as she addressed the audience. Blomgren explained that the board’s votes are democracy in action, in which the board, which a majority of residents voted for, carries out their campaign promises. Wurz, she said, made those same promises.

The disruptions and chaos also seem to align with attempts all over the county by activist groups to obstruct Republican majority boards from implementing the campaign promises that got them elected. In this instance, the Pennridge board did not cave, and passed a crucial policy their constituents have been asking for.

Pennridge Passes the First Sex-Based Bathroom Policy in Bucks County

Despite the contentiousness surrounding items not on the agenda, one hotly debated policy did pass at the May 10th meeting. Policy 720, which dictates that students and staff use restroom and locker room facilities on the basis of their sex, led to a rare showing of board unity, passing 7-1. Wurz, again the lone dissenter, expressed concern over the legal implications of passing the policy, saying, “the most likely outcome from passing this will be legal action against the district.” He suggested solving this concern by simply creating one “gender bathroom,” at the high school, as he read prepared remarks from the dais. Wurz did not explain what gender he was suggesting a bathroom be created for, nor did he outline how this would solve the problem he identified.

Legal Considerations for Policy 720

Ultimately, the only court ruling with any bearing on the topic in the 3rd Circuit, where Pennridge is located, would be the infamous Boyertown case. However, the representation that this case prevents a sex-based policy is simply not accurate. The decision in this case was narrowly focused on whether the trial court erred in denying a preliminary injunction in the case – not on determining the merits of the case itself. Nothing in the opinion sets precedent that sex-based bathrooms and locker rooms would violate the law. In fact, Boyertown’s policy implemented gender-based bathrooms, not sex-based. Title IX itself includes carve outs for living facilities, bathrooms, and locker rooms, which was cited in a January 2023 11th Circuit case. This opinion held that sex-based bathrooms are constitutional and comport with Title IX.

The 11th Circuit court’s ruling, which holds persuasive authority for courts in Pennridge’s jurisdiction, is more recent than the 3rd Circuit or the oft-cited 4th Circuit Grimm case. Most importantly, it is the only decision to occur after the Supreme Court’s landmark Bostock case regarding employment discrimination, which the Biden administration’s DOJ and DOE has attempted to use to extend Title IX protections to gender identity. The administration’s guidance saying as much has been blocked in 20 states by a federal court in Tennessee, and litigation is ongoing.

The concerns raised by Wurz are also reminiscent of similar comments made by directors in another Pennsylvania district. Eastern Lancaster County School District passed a sex-based bathroom policy in 2019, and the dissenting Director stated, “The minute we vote on this, we open ourselves up to a lawsuit. The absolute minute.” No such lawsuit has ever materialized in that district, despite public outcry in local media involving comments from the Pennsylvania ACLU.

While the landscape of Title IX case law is still uncertain, any policy which is narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest (such as the right to privacy in vulnerable situations), is a sufficient protection against discrimination claims that Wurz seems to fear, allowing the policy to survive both strict scrutiny as the Boyertown policy did and intermediate scrutiny that typically is applied in discrimination cases.

Should the district face litigation, they will likely look to the 11th Circuit opinion for guidance on how to respond. The policy itself appears to have been in some way informed by the court’s opinion, as the definition of “sex” used in the policy repeats word for word the description the 11th Circuit provided. Perhaps if the discussions at Policy and Board meetings are not enough to say this much, the use of this language may be seen as evidence that the board carefully considered the legal pitfalls and nuances when drafting Policy 720. Board members Blomgren and Ricki Chaikin, who motioned to approve the policy for first read at the previous board meeting, can consider tonight a huge victory for their constituents, and for the students of Pennridge that wanted protection and privacy in their bathrooms and locker rooms.

Also of note, the board passed a budget with an 8-0 vote that will once again keep Pennridge taxes the same. This is the seventh year in a row that the Pennridge board has voted not to increase taxes, ensuring the attraction of new residents looking for a fiscally responsible school board.

The post Pennridge Follows Through: Passes Sex-Based Bathroom Policy, First in Bucks County appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

Following the recent court ruling in a case brought by the Bucks County Commissioners against local resident Megan Brock, Bucks County Republicans have issued statements expressing their support for the decision.  

The court ruled that Bucks County, led by Democrat Majority Chair Commissioner Bob Harvie and Vice Chair Commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia, violated Pennsylvania’s open records law by refusing to release emails related to COVID-19 guidance for schools. The county, it held, acted in bad faith, and was therefore ordered to release particular emails, and to make a payment to Brock’s attorneys.  

In one statement, Chair of the Bucks County Republican Committee, Pat Poprik said, “This past Friday was a clear victory for transparency and the right of citizens to seek answers from those who should be representing them.”  

Pamela Van Blunk, Republican candidate for Commissioner, also commented on the ruling. In the Committee’s statement, Van Blunk said that the litigation was a “waste of taxpayer dollars. (Democrat Commissioners) Harvie and Ellis-Marseglia are irresponsibly spending taxpayers’ money to hide communications that the public – including Brock – have a right to see.”

In a post on Facebook, Van Blunk wrote, “I call on Commissioners Harvie and Marseglia to end the wasteful spending and release the documents to (Brock) and to also release the documents sought by Jamie Walker in a similar but separate litigation.” Van Blunk’s statements echo the sentiments expressed by the Bucks County GOP and highlight the need for elected officials to act in the best interests of their constituents.

As a candidate for Bucks County Commissioner, Van Blunk has made transparency and accountability a central part of her campaign. Van Blunk is a former litigator, and currently serves as Bucks County Controller.

“I call on Commissioners Harvie and Marseglia to end the wasteful spending and release the documents to (Brock) and to also release the documents sought by Jamie Walker in a similar but separate litigation.”

Pam Van Blunk for Commissioner

The ruling has been seen as a victory for transparency advocates. On April 20^th, following an oral argument hearing, Brock spoke at a press conference along with fellow defendant in similar Bucks County records cases, Walker, and Pennsylvania State Senator Jarrett Coleman (R) of the 16th District. Brock stated, “It is the right of every citizen to be able to know what is going on behind closed doors.”  Coleman noted that, as Chairman of the Intergovernmental Operations Committee, he will be paying “close attention to the information that comes out,” and stated that he plans to encourage colleagues “to revisit current laws so the Commonwealth can approach any further emergencies with a clearer understanding of how we can do better.”

Walker expressed appreciation for Van Blunk and others amplifying the message.

“During the pandemic we were desperate for any politician to hear our story and join our call for transparency. Here in Bucks County we are fortunate to have a candidate for Commissioner, Pam Van Blunk, join us in our efforts,” Walker told the Bulletin. “We are also fortunate to have a sitting State Senator, Jarrett Coleman, who has joined our call as well. We hope to uncover the truth about COVID guidance that impacted 80,000 kids in Bucks County schools.” 

All signs indicate that government transparency will be a key issue to Bucks County voters this election, particularly in the wake of anticipated further rulings like this one.

While Brock, Walker, and others continue to work towards answers regarding COVID school guidance, it remains to be seen whether the county will abide by the court’s ruling and release the emails, or appeal in an attempt to further withhold them. Should the county appeal, they would in effect be requesting the appeals court to overturn prior rulings to create precedent that would weaken transparency protections statewide.  

The post Commissioner Candidate Van Blunk and Bucks GOP Amplify Calls for Transparency in Wake of Court Ruling appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

This week’s candidate spotlight is Dr. Stephen Mass, the endorsed Republican candidate who is cross-filed on both sides of the primary ballot for the Central Bucks school board race in region one. This area comprises of one precinct in Buckingham, two in New Britain, and two in Plumstead. Should Mass defeat his cross-filed opponent, current school board director Karen Smith (D), on either side of the primary ballot on May 16th, the pair will again face off in the general election on November 7th.

Mass was born and raised in Florida, where he attended Catholic school. His academic resume includes his time at Vanderbilt as a pre-med and English literature student, Duke medical school where he met his wife, and 5 years of residency at Northwestern. As a practicing Otolaryngologist in the Doylestown area for over two decades now, Mass is no stranger to keeping calm under pressure, as may be required to be involved in Central Bucks School Board politics. He noted that in his practice, he has spent much of his career “seeing people when they are not at their best.” Dealing with patients that may have cancer or other serious ailments requires a measured, calm demeanor that does not waver. 

Mass has performed surgeries or been called into the hospital many times over the years, whether it be during family holidays or at 3 a.m. on a given day. He underscored the importance of maintaining his professional bearing in all situations. “Not only is the patient being seen when they’re not at their best, sometimes I’m being seen when I’m not at my best either.” The job requires him to maintain his composure no matter how tired or overworked he may be. “In my line of work, I always have to stay calm.” These attributes, he believes, can help him as a school board director when navigating the dynamic of the culture wars the board is embroiled in.

Having seen all three of his children through Central Bucks schools K-12, his experience with his own children, the children he has helped coach in sports, and the children he sees at his practice have led him to an important conclusion: “There isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. Different kids learn in different ways.” 

“There isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. Different kids learn in different ways.” 

Dr. Stephen Mass for CBSD Region 1

He speaks to many teachers in his practice, and referred to some of the common problems teachers experience that are difficult to address and often outside of their control, such as altered attention spans with phones and social media. He acknowledged that from his conversations with teachers, it seems Central Bucks does a good job of teaching kids math and science, but “the biggest area for improvement would be in literature and writing.” He pointed out that his own reading list as a high school sophomore was “way beyond what they teach on an AP level here for seniors in high school.” He believes students need to be challenged, perhaps reading works that require they open a dictionary.

This brought the subject of academic excellence to the forefront of the conversation. Mass states that beyond standardized testing, which is useful to some degree, we can measure academic excellence by examining what students are able to do after graduation. “Are they going to the college of their choice, do they feel prepared for what they learned?” He suggested it might be a good idea to get a “customer review,” by getting in touch with former students, “asking them what Central Bucks did well, what they felt prepared for compared to other kids and what they felt they were lacking.” 

Later on, he discussed the paths for students who do not want to go the traditional route of a 4 year college. There are a wide variety of students this may apply to, and removing the stigma in Central Bucks with regard to not attending a college is important. He mentioned that this is personal to him, as he does some woodworking and has taken some small engine repair classes at MBIT. “We should really encourage that for kids who are called in that direction.”

Mass noted that when it comes to making adjustments if goals are not met, we can find answers that don’t require raising taxes or spending more money. “The challenges aren’t really related to anything you can throw money at.” He explained that we are still playing catch up from the learning losses caused by locking down for far too long. The more vulnerable students suffered even more, he said. However, the policy and curriculum issues can be addressed in ways that are not costly. He thinks turning down the temperature and putting aside some of the culture wars will put kids in a better environment to learn. 

When asked about some of the current culture wars, such as Policy 321 and Policy 109.2, he noted that any policy is not going to be perfect. “Perfection just isn’t for this world. What we’re looking for with a policy is a framework to give the teachers and administrators some sort of guidance, and to make the parents feel that they have some sort of recourse.” Mass said about Policy 321, for example, that every taxpayer he has spoken to has agreed that they do not want their kids preached to by teachers, on either side of the political aisle. “The vast majority of teachers already abide by the policy,” and stated that the policy was created to have a guardrail for the very few who may have crossed the line.

When it comes to policies Mass would support in the future, he agreed that biological sex based separation of sports would be a policy under the purview of the school board. In reference to the role a school board should play in making that decision, Mass said “100% it should be a local issue. Ultimately the bosses are really the parents and they speak through the school board, who are their elected representatives.” He is the father of a daughter with tremendously positive experiences in athletics at CB West, he feels heartbroken at the thought of any of her successes being taken away by being in an unfair competition. 

“Ultimately the bosses are really the parents and they speak through the school board, who are their elected representatives.”

dr. stephen mass for cbsd region 1

He gave an example of a female Central Bucks athlete at West that was a state champion in the 800 meter run. A biological male competing against her could have “robbed her of one of the greatest memories of her life.” He doesn’t feel it is necessary to promote any specific policy right now, as it doesn’t seem to be a problem in Central Bucks at the moment, but showed a willingness to implement a policy should that problem come up.

Another topic that came up was school safety. He does believe we need to have SROs in the high schools, as one prong of making students safer. He also posited that mental health concerns have spiked because of lockdowns, particularly among young girls. He believes teachers should be trained to identify that a child may need help, to give parents the ability to address it.

Finally, when asked why people should vote for him over his opponent, he stated that elections are always about choices and what direction the schools will go. He stated that the board member he is running against has been reckless in her actions, harming the school district in the process. His disposition is to not act in the same fashion. In medicine, he said, “the rule is first: do no harm.” 

Mass believes there is much common ground to be found among the community if we could have calm conversations and discuss these issues using facts, rather than innuendo. He hopes to earn the vote of his constituents both for the primary and general election through his active door knocking and discussion with the community about the issues that matter to them.

To read his official campaign platform, visit https://centralbucksforward.com/mass/.

The post Candidate Spotlight: Dr. Stephen Mass for Central Bucks Region 1 appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

The Pennridge bathroom debate – should our district policy designate only sex-based bathrooms, or should we establish new, gender-based bathrooms – is the intersection of issues that I happen to care very deeply about. 

Why I Care 

When I was a 13-year-old freshman in high school, I earned the first singles position on my high school’s varsity girls’ tennis team, which represented a culmination of years of tireless dedication to my sport and “perfect practice makes perfect” commitment. I regularly competed with high school seniors. Some were much stronger than me, virtually all of them were bigger, and because of my skill I was almost always one of the youngest on the court. I went on to earn a position on a Division I women’s tennis team in college; no small victory for a kid from humble beginnings, in a sport that is largely seen as elitist. I spent a lot of time in locker rooms as a girl.  

In college, I earned a minor in Gender and Women’s Studies. I completed a heavy course load of interdisciplinary studies, blending my major in English with my minor in Philosophy, with my interest in studying, and furthering, the advancement of women. I went on to earn my Juris Doctor, becoming the first person in my family to earn a professional degree, and I received an award for my commitment to the achievement of equality of opportunity of women upon graduation. 

Now I am the mother of four children, three of whom are girls, and I am a proud Pennridge resident. However, the bathroom policy debate in our district has me scratching my head as a former student athlete, as a lawyer, and as a mother. My family chose to live in this district in part for the shared values the community holds, which we saw reflected in decisions made by its school board.

Cashman’s Not-a-Policy Directive  

Last fall, district parents became aware from reports from their students, that biological male students who present as male, were using the girls’ bathrooms at Pennridge High School. As the result of right-to-know requests by one concerned resident, e-mails were released that demonstrated that HS principal Stephen Cashman gave a directive to his staff on this issue on October 21, 2022. It read, “Students may use the bathroom of their choice,” and directed staff to report any observed incidents of students using facilities that do match their biological sex to the student’s house principal and guidance counselor. 

In another e-mail dated October 25, a staff member explains that they observed a male and female student walk into the girls’ bathroom together, noting “I know I am not allowed to deny them access to the restroom of their choice.”  

A Tale of Two Policies 

At the April 11^th Policy Committee meeting, two versions of the Use of Restroom and Locker Room Facilities policy were presented for discussion and possible advancement. The first version, labeled “version 1,” is a gender-based policy. It notes that “a variety of options” are necessary to “meet the needs of all students and staff.” Version 1 outlines a framework wherein the presence of a transgender or gender non-conforming student in a particular school triggers the creation of gender-based bathrooms, as distinct from sex-based bathrooms.  

However, under a section labeled Student Restroom Access, it states, “No person shall enter a restroom, locker room, or shower that is designated for the use of the opposite sex.” The policy later contradicts itself, stating, “In buildings where a parent or emancipated minor has informed the District of a gender identity that is different from their sex, students shall also have access to the locker rooms corresponding to their gender identity.” (Emphasis added). The policy also states that any other student who desires more privacy “should be provided with an alternative changing area.” Although the policy mentions the use of showers at the outset, accommodations specific to the showers are not delineated. It seems to say that, once the district is informed of a gender identity that does not align with a student’s biological sex, locker room access, including changing areas and shower rooms, will be granted to that student.  

The second, labeled “version 3”  is a sex-based policy. It states that the policy’s primary purpose is “to respect the rights of students and staff.” Single-user bathrooms are the chief accommodation available to students with a gender identity that does not align with their biological sex, or to students who desire additional privacy, “regardless of the underlying reason.”  

After a lengthy debate on these policies, the board agreed there was no consensus on which policy to advance, and superintendent Dr. Bolton stated that he would reach out to solicitor Mike Miller to schedule an additional conversation about the policy prior to the April school board meeting.  

Tonight is that scheduled meeting, and an edited version 1, the gender-based policy, is on the agenda. There is no version of the sex-based policy up for discussion, so it stands to reason that a meeting with the solicitor did occur, and it resulted in a consensus in support of the gender-based policy. 

How did we get here?  While I understand the desire to be inclusive and respectful of all students, the proposed policy on tonight’s agenda – a gender-based policy – fundamentally disregards the privacy and safety concerns of biological girls in Pennridge.  

Likely Legal Arguments 

One frequent argument against a sex-based policy is the Boyertown third circuit case, which some believe prohibits such a policy. However, this is simply not the case. The ruling in Boyertown only applies to the specific facts of that case, which involved a school’s policy allowing transgender students to use the bathroom of their choice. It does not prohibit a sex-based policy or require a gender-based policy, it simply held that a gender-based policy, in the particular facts of that case, was not unconstitutional. In fact, the court specifically stated that it was not addressing the issue of sex-based policies. 

Guess what? A sex-based policy isn’t unconstitutional either.  

In an Eleventh Circuit decision from December 2022, Adams v. Johns County, the court upheld a school district’s policy that required students to use the bathroom and locker room facilities that corresponded with their biological sex. That decision holds persuasive authority in the third circuit, which has never ruled on this issue directly, itself.  

PSBA Gets it Right 

The Pennsylvania School Boards Association (PSBA) has also weighed in on this important issue. Citing the Boyertown case in its discussion of issues related to transgender students, PSBA states, “Title IX regulations permit but do not require designation of sex-segregated facilities (bathrooms and locker rooms).”

For PSBA to take this straightforward position, despite its advocacy against conservative principles like school choice, and its outspoken advocacy in favor of liberal positions, is a strong condemnation on Pennridge’s seeming inability to reach this obvious conclusion.

Policy 321 Got it Right 

A sex-based policy not only protects the privacy and safety of biological girls, but it also respects the biological reality of sex. Gender identity is akin to a personal belief system, according to Pennridge’s own Policy 321, which prohibits “areas of advocacy regarding… personal beliefs including but not limited to religion, sexual orientation and gender identity, social, political and geopolitical matters.” To take a stance that requires defining gender identity and sex as distinct characteristics, is hypocritical on its face.  

Furthermore, the gender ideology personal belief system is all too often tied to a prescribed set of political ideologies. According to a 2022 poll by Pew Research, belief in the distinction between gender and sex varies widely along party lines. “Democrats and those who lean to the Democratic Party are more than four times as likely as Republicans and Republican leaners to say that a person’s gender can be different from the sex they were assigned at birth (61% vs. 13%).” 

Final Thoughts

So it’s no wonder that Republican constituents in Pennridge are left feeling confused by our Republican majority’s consideration of a policy that is antithetical to their own purported party’s view of this issue.  

As a mother, and a former female athlete and locker room-user, I cannot make sense of this potential decision by a board who has otherwise remained steadfast in the obvious conclusion that biological sex matters, and gender ideology cannot discount that. As an attorney, I can’t make sense of it from a legal perspective, either.

It is my hope that the board comes to the realization that the proposed gender-based policy cannot pass first read tonight. Not only does it contradict itself and open the district to the liability of discrimination lawsuits, it also fails to protect young girls in particular. I expect Pennridge to be a district where the realities of biological sex are respected and women and girls are protected.

After much talk of precedent, Pennridge should be more mindful of the potential harm in setting a district precedent that enshrines gender ideology into education policy, and the effect that such an action could have on surrounding districts that look to our school board for conservative leadership.  

Author’s Disclosure:

I am the spouse of a current Republican candidate for school board in Pennridge. As always, my views are my own.

Sources:

https://www.psba.org/member-services/legal/psba-lgbtqia-legal-update/section-1-notice-brief-overview-legal-basis/

https://pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/

https://www.pennridge.org/Page/1796

https://aboutblaw.com/6fe?fbclid=IwAR13m5SddDrHsyqGPldD-c89p7UHWzJ2tQ4P8y0KP0c_SYJurMmAPRq0SKY

https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/17-3113/17-3113-2018-07-26.pdf?

ts=1532624408&fbclid=IwAR0OW1dzNA0FMLC3yZGKyjwLMqvvsR8vGYukIbTDnk_hlMSsDkn9KPetke0

The post Opinion: Pennridge Board Set to Decide: Protect the Privacy of Girls or Enshrine Gender Ideology into Policy appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

• Upper Bucks Government Service Center – 261 California Road, Quakertown, PA 18951 (M-F 8:00 AM – 4:30 PM through 5/12; Sat 5/6 & 5/13 12:00 PM – 5:00 PM)
• County Administration Building – 55 E. Court Street, Doylestown, PA 18901 (M-F 8:00 AM – 5:00 PM through 5/12; Sat 5/6 & 5/13 12:00 PM – 5:00 PM)
• Lower Bucks Government Service Center – 7321 New Falls Road, Levittown, PA 19055 (M-F 8:00 AM – 5:00 PM through 5/12; Sat 5/6 & 5/13 12:00 PM – 5:00 PM)

On-demand ballots are also available at these locations during the listed times, beginning today. To vote via on-demand ballot, voters can visit one of the government service centers and complete a mail-in ballot application, have their ballot printed on the spot, and submit it to the drop box on site.

Eight additional additional drop boxes will open at Bucks County Library Branches starting next week. Hours of operation and location details are listed on the county’s website.

All completed ballots must be returned by mail or by drop box by 8:00 PM on Primary Election Day, May 16th, with the exception of overseas or military ballots; the three County Government Service Center drop box locations will stay open until 8:00 PM on May 16th.

A completed mail-in ballot must be placed inside its yellow inner secrecy envelope, and there cannot be any marks made on that envelope. The yellow envelope is to be placed inside the outer envelope, which is marked by a green band, and the outer envelope’s declaration must be signed by the voter of their agent. Postage is not necessary.

Voters are only permitted to submit their own ballot, unless a ballot is accompanied by an Authorized Designated Agent Form, which can be found here. Each ballot box is staffed by county employees while open, and locked when not in use. All drop boxes are under 24/7 video surveillance.

The county set out to hire an additional temporary workers to help staff ballot boxes this election, according to their posts on social media, and it is unclear if those positions have all been filled. The ballot box clerk position pays $15 per hour, and additional details can be found on the county’s jobs website, where the opening is still posted as of Monday.

According to a report generated by the Board of Elections on April 21, 2023, there have been 50,087 mail-in ballots sent out this election. 37,369 of those ballots were requested by Democrat voters, with Republicans requesting only 12,621.

Sources

https://buckscounty.gov/1417/Drop-Box-Locations

https://buckscounty.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3986/Authorize-Designated-Agent-Ballot?bidId=

https://buckscounty.gov/Jobs.aspx?UniqueId=101&From=All&CommunityJobs=False&JobID=Ballot-Box-Clerk-PD-86

https://buckscounty.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=718&fbclid=IwAR01_fJz8tabYyKQDiggQvsnwrG1KZVYUGTX9cxeYn8leGvff50NukJMKBk

The post Ballot Drop Boxes Open in Bucks Co. Starting Monday appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

Bombshell evidence of involvement by sitting Board Director, Karen Smith, who is currently seeking re-election, was presented as a part of the summary. Sparks flew during public comment, when embattled former Board President Tracy Suits, who did not to seek re-election in 2021, seemed to shout an expletive to parents in the audience as she returned to her seat. Marlene Pray, an interviewee in the investigation, also spoke at public comment. Gavel to gavel time for the meeting was approximately 3 hours and 30 minutes.

Background

On October 7, 2022, the PA ACLU published a redacted version of an Administrative Complaint it had filed on behalf of seven Central Bucks Students with the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) at the Department of Education (DOE), and the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice. The DOE responded to the Complaint, stating that, “OCR will open the complaint for investigation because OCR has jurisdiction over this allegation and it was timely filed. Please note that opening allegations for investigation in no way implies that OCR has made a determination on their merits.” 

The Complaint

It was revealed at the meeting that the District had received four separate Complaint letters from the Office of Civil Rights in the fall and winter months of 2022. The investigation later revealed that another Complaint had been filed earlier with the OCR in about April of 2022, by a Central Bucks teacher, but was ultimately rejected by the OCR, and the district never received a letter from the OCR on this Complaint. The Complaint that was filed by the PA ACLU on October 6, 2022, commonly referred to erroneously as a lawsuit, alleged that Central Bucks School District’s teachers, administration, and school board majority, had created a hostile learning environment for LGBTQ+ and gender non-conforming students by way of acting with indifference towards complaints of harassment and bullying, and by passing policies that the PA ACLU believes are “overtly hostile,” towards these students.  

Some in the CB community have speculated that this Complaint is political in nature, meant to disrupt the duly elected board majority and prevent them from implementing policies they disagree with. The remedies sought in the Complaint seem to lend credibility to that suggestion. They ask the DOE to assert its jurisdiction to “order CBSD to rescind its discriminatory policies and directives.” In essence, the ACLU is asking the DOE to undo the effects of the 2021 school board election.  

The Findings

The presentation by Rinaldi touched on the idea that these policies on their own are not discriminatory, and no evidence found in their investigation suggests that they created a hostile environment for students, as alleged in the Complaint. It also examined the allegations that the school does not properly address bullying and harassment of LGBTQ+ students, finding heaps of evidence to the contrary. The report also revealed a shocking piece of information; much of the same or similar language used in the PA ACLU’s report can be found in an e-mail, sent months prior to its filing, from sitting board director Karen Smith to the head of the US Department of Education, Secretary Cardona, and Head of the Office of Civil Rights, Catherine Lhamon. This raised eyebrows among board members and the investigation team.

A clip of Smith’s comments at a prior board meeting were played by Rinaldi, in which Smith stated that she could not support the investigation to defend the district against claims that “so easily could have been avoided,” leading to the suggestion that Smith may have had personal motivation to avoid an investigation.

The e-mail sent to the DOE contained an important contention by Smith, in which she suggested the district erred in “suspending an exemplary teacher for protecting a transgender student,” in reference to Andrew Burgess, a social studies teacher in the district. 

Andrew Burgess

Much of the investigation centered on the actions Burgess took over several months in 2022 to conceal reports of harassment, assault, and bullying that were made to him by LGBTQ+ students. It details a timeline through e-mail communications and interviews with staff and Burgess himself.

The evidence revealed the following:

• Burgess kept a “dossier,” on incidents that several LGBTQ+ students reported to him, which he did not report to any other staff member or agency as a mandated reporter.
• These incidents included allegations of crimes, such as assault and battery, and threats of rape made against a student.
• Burgess dissuaded the student and their parents from reporting these incidents to other school staff.
• Burgess was aware of his duty to report these incidents.
• Burgess acknowledged in private communications with other teachers, and his interview with investigators, that school staff was very responsive to all reports of bullying, contrary to what he told the 14 year old student and their parents.
• Burgess reported other incidents of much lesser offenses per the proper protocols.
• Burgess violated school board policies. 

Duane Morris LLP has recommended that the district suspend Burgess, without pay. Burgess was originally suspended in May of 2022, prompting protests by students and local activists. These protests led to a dangerous situation at Lenape middle school when outside actors brought food to entice children to come join the protest outside. The investigation revealed that this led to a special education student requiring hospitalization, and the injury of four staff members. A vehicle jumped a curb at some point during the protest, and police presence was required. Following the protests, the Lenape Middle School principal Geanine Saullo was subject to threatening messages on social media written by students. The allegation in the ACLU complaint that students were locked out of the school building for protesting were also revealed to be false. 

Burgess was later reinstated and moved to Unami, where he still teaches. 

The summary of the investigation also revealed that when Title IX complaints were directed to the proper school administrator, rather than the OCR, they were handled promptly by administration. This was true of all the bullying and harassment claims Rinaldi’s team dug into in the 123,000 pages of documents they received and the 45 interviews they have conducted. Policies and Procedures were followed, and discipline ensued when appropriate. The summary report includes 147 pages of information to digest for CBSD community members, and is available on the district’s website. The investigation by the OCR has not been completed as far as the district is aware. This independent investigation was commissioned by vote at the November 15th, 2022 school board meeting, and has cost the district a lot of money thus far. Should the OCR conclude that the allegations are unfounded, the district cannot recover that money from those who filed the complaint. 

The ACLU, for their part, reacted on Twitter on a few hours after the 147 page report was published, saying in part “ACLU-PA fully expects that the U.S. Dept. Of Education will conclude, after reviewing the evidence fairly and honestly, that CB is systematically and intentionally violating students’ civil rights.” 

However, initial reactions from Democrat school board candidates and their supporters on social media signal concern for potential political ramifications of the findings.

The results of the OCR investigation may not be known until after the 2023 election, so the prompt investigation by Central Bucks would seem to have prevented any delay in response to claims of severe harassment and bullying, as well as revealed important information for parents about a teacher in their district not following proper protocols, and regarding Smith’s report.

Bucks Bulletin will update the story should any action be taken against Burgess, who has already filed a lawsuit against the district with the help of PA-ACLU.

Sources

CBSD Internal Investigation Report:

https://www.cbsd.org/Page/66459

CBSD Meeting Stream Archive for April 20, 2023 Special Meeting

https://vimeo.com/819827393

Central Bucks Neighbors United Post:

https://www.facebook.com/NeighborsUnited4CBSD/posts/pfbid06dgAoyrxY1TDfh2jbs5gqCi5kbmXLf8kLPaRDNEuu7kJRC6ByUcjqKQoMKHUmeRLl

The post Investigation Reveals CBSD Director Karen Smith Reported District to Feds appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.

Today’s presser comes after the first hearing in one of Brock’s consolidated cases, in which Judge Denise Bowman will decide whether the county will be compelled to release 2021 e-mails that Brock requested in February of 2022. The request sought the e-mails of several public officials in the county: Director of Policy & Communications Eric Nagy, Commissioner Diane Marseglia, Commissioner Bob Harvie, former Public Information Director Larry King, Chief Clerk Gail Humphrey, and Bucks County Health Director Dr. David Damsker. The request specified a span of nineteen days in August 2021. Brock later sought a particular e-mail to County Chief Operating Officer Margaret McKevitt, containing the final copy of the Amended COVID-19 Guidance for Bucks County schools on August 23, 2021, which the county released that day. The county has yet to release any of these records.

“Instead of giving those records, Bucks County has sued me five times, and sued Jamie Walker twice to withhold public records,” Brock said. “This is a huge issue for every citizen in Bucks County, regardless of political affiliation. Transparency is not a political issue. It is an issue that protects the foundations of our constitutional republic.”

Brock is represented by Judicial Watch in her Bucks County actions, with assistance from local Pennsylvania Attorney Chadwick Schnee.

Walker’s statement focused on the impact that a ruling in this case could have on future right-to-know requests. “It is crucial to understand what the commissioners are trying to accomplish by filing these frivolous lawsuits,” Walker said. “They are asking a judge to make the entire state of Pennsylvania less transparent.”

There was a notable change from the last press conference from the pair; this time State Senator Jarrett Coleman (R) delivered remarks. Coleman represents the 16th Senatorial District, which includes part of Bucks and Lehigh Counties. Prior to his election as Senator, Coleman served as board director in Parkland School District in Allentown. The Senate Intergovernmental Operations Committee, which Coleman chairs, is made up of seven Republican Senators and 4 Democrats. Its purpose is to review proposals to restructure and streamline state government.

Coleman’s full remarks were as follows —

Sen. Coleman: The public deserves to know how local, county, and state government made decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic. As Chairman of the Senate Intergovernmental Operations Committee, my primary concern is understanding the decision-making process and how much independence the County Health Director had. Did the Pennsylvania Department of Health intervene when they didn’t like local decisions? Were all the decisions based on medical opinion, or were some of them overridden for political reasons? And how did these decisions impact the education of children, in all of the districts? I’ll be paying close attention to the information that comes out, and I’ll encourage my colleagues to revisit current laws so the Commonwealth can approach any further emergencies with a clearer understanding of how we can do better. From what I’ve seen, there is no e-mail from the County Health Director to other officials outlining the guidance from his office. And I think we all deserve, especially in Bucks County, to know what actually happened, and why does this need to remain secret?

Bucks County did not respond to our request for comment this morning.

Sources

https://www.judicialwatch.org/mother-being-sued-by-county/?
source=46&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=press%20release

https://www.facebook.com/Parentshavetherighttoknow

https://intergovernmental.pasenategop.com/

The post Sen. Jarrett Coleman Joins Bucks County Moms in Call for Transparency appeared first on Bucks Bulletin.