Clark County Council approves “parents’ rights” proclamation

Concerns over connection to activist group keeps one councilor from signing on

Posted

The majority of Clark County Council has signed on to a proclamation supporting parental say in public education, though one councilor in opposition says the connections to a group associated with school board meeting disruptions is not something she would support.

The proclamation designates November as Parents’ Rights in Education Month in the county. The text of the proclamation stresses the need for collaboration and cooperation between school districts and the families they serve. It states “(t)he parent-child relationship shall be honored and supported by teachers, counselors, administrators and school board members.”

During their Nov. 2 meeting, Clark County Council Chair Eileen Quiring O’Brien read the proclamation, which was signed by her and councilors Karen Bowerman and Gary Medvigy. Councilors Temple Lentz and Julie Olson did not sign it.

Lentz announced her intention to not sign the proclamation weeks earlier when she brought up concerns over the proclamation’s connection to recent disruptions at local school board meetings.

During an Oct. 13 “council time” meeting, Lentz said the organization proposing the proclamation, also called Parents’ Rights in Education, has been involved with “antagonism” at board meetings. She said they had caused “disruptions (and) some threats of violence.”

Lentz said on the organization’s website there appeared to be support of local activists she said have disrupted meetings in Camas and Washougal. In May, Washougal’s board of directors called a meeting short after attendees refused to wear masks and vandalized district property, the Camas-Washougal Post-Record reported.

“I am not comfortable supporting a proclamation that is coming from an organization that supports that sort of behavior,” Lentz said.

Quiring O’Brien said the organization has existed for years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and noted the changes in education it brought.

“They are not promoting violence or antagonism or anything else,” Quiring O’Brien said, adding she supported the proclamation’s statements “100%.”

Initially receiving the proclamation from the organization more themed to be signed by members of a school board, Bowerman directed staff to frame the proclamation in support of general parental power in education and to keep it distinct from the group that brought it forth.



“It is not an organization’s month, it is a topical month,” Bowerman said.

One week later at another council time meeting, Lentz reiterated her stance against the proclamation.

“I have a hard time with this council signing a proclamation for an organization that is actively promoting organizations that are harassing public officials and public servants,” Lentz said. Regardless of the distancing from the organization in the proclamation, she said it still showed implicit support of the group.

“If (Lentz) wants to know who’s promoting (the proclamation), I am,” Medvigy said. “I like the words here. I like the thoughts.”

“I think these are important thoughts, especially during the pandemic and all it’s brought, and the burden and impact on parents who are really simply concerned about their children and their rights as parents to raise their children as they see fit,” Medvigy said. 

He said he was unaware of any harassment toward local school boards.

“Where in our community are parents’ rights being infringed?” Lentz asked.

She took issue with Medvigy’s claim that he was unaware of board members being harassed.

“I do not agree that any parents are harassing. What they are doing is they are speaking to the school board who represent them,” Quiring O’Brien said. “If that’s what you’re talking about as harassment, well, it just isn’t. That’s part of the public process.”

Lentz responded by saying, “If that public process was visited on you, you would have a different opinion.”