Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

In a 4-3 vote, the Suffolk School Board voted to suspend Board policy section 1-5.1:2 titled, “Education Equity Defined; Guiding Questions; Equity Goals; Equity Measurements; Key Terms” in order to comply with state and federal education department’s requests.

The policy defines “education equity” as “fair treatment, access, opportunity, and advancement for all while striving to identify and eliminate barriers.”

It also takes into account the following terms: anti-racism, cultural competency, culturally relevant/responsive teaching, cultural proficiency, diversity, education equity, equity, implicit bias, inclusive school communities, marginalized students, opportunity gap, and racial equity (racial justice). 

This discussion comes after Superintendent John B. Gordon III signed a letter from the Virginia Department of Education requesting all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in violation of Title VI must stop immediately in order to continue receiving federal funds.

Gordon signed the letter on April 23, so as not to risk losing nearly $10 million in federal funding.

Board Attorney Wendell Waller said DEI is “more than just discrimination,” it’s about providing resources and opportunities to students who may need them. But some of those services could be based on race, he said.

“What this does, is that it prevents local school divisions from offering services to students if any of those services are based on race,” he said. “So it’s not about discriminating, as it is about providing additional services to students that may need them for whatever reason.”

Suspending this policy will not stop any provided resources at this time, Gordon said, but it’s a “waiting game” to see how students will actually be affected. 

Gordon confirmed the work of the equity leads has been suspended until further direction from the Board.

He said both choices to sign or not sign the letter would have negative results, but in the end, “Suffolk always needs resources,” he said.

“I will say personally that I’m going to support the Superintendent and what he did to safeguard our schools,” said Board Chair Heather Howell. “Knowing the Superintendent was put in the difficult position of signing that letter, I know we would have put him in an even more difficult position by not supporting that.”

Chair Howell, Vice Chair McGee, and Board members Dawn Marie Brittingham, E.d. D., and Kimberly Slingluff voted in favor of the resolution, while Board members Tryon Riddick, Valerie Fields, and Karen Jenkins voted in opposition.

Riddick stated he is “not for this at all.”

“I don’t know how many members of the public had an opportunity to read what is encompassed in this portion that is being requested to be suspended,” he said. “I understand that our president has a chip on his shoulder, however, I’m not going to allow him to bully me into doing anything. I know that this equity policy is in place to achieve a greater good for all of our students, all 14,00 plus, and if it wasn’t necessary, we would have never put it into writing.”

He continued to say removing the policy would be like “opening Pandora’s Box,” and with a policy in place, there is a way to hold people accountable for their actions. 

Jenkins also disagreed with suspending the policy “because it strikes at the very heart of what it means to care for every student and staff member in our Suffolk Public School family.”

“I don’t care if you are Black, brown, white, male, female, those with disabilities and part of the transgender community, your heart beats just like mine and your life matters just as much as mine,” she continued. “This is not just policy, this is about people, and I will always stand on the side of humanity and justice.”

She acknowledged that Gordon has been put in a “terrible” position, but she can not support suspending this policy.

Fields shared similar remarks, saying it would be “disastrous” for SPS to suspend this policy. Speaking as a retired teacher, she’s personally seen how many students will be negatively affected by the suspension. 

McGee said he thinks there is a lot of fear about what will happen to special education students or students with disabilities with the policy being suspended. 

He highlighted there are still nine other SPS policies that protect against discrimination: section 1.1-3.3, 1-5.1, 1-5.3, 1-5.6, 1-5.7, 7-3.2, 2-2.1, 9-1.1, and 9-1.2. Additionally, he mentioned federal protections under Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act, Title IX of the Education Amendments, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Title II of the Americans with Disability Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Gordon ensured that no other policies need to be reviewed to comply with the VDOE letter.

“The work is going to still continue to support our kids,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that we’ve been put into a no win situation; Don’t sign the policy, lose $9.6 million … or do sign the policy and feel like you’re literally turning your back on what you believe in.”