Update: Board Approves First Reading of Pledge Policy

District 5 Board of Trustees unanimously approved first reading of a recommended board policy concerning the Pledge of Allegiance during its Monday night meeting.

On the agenda, the board was scheduled to vote on the first reading of replacing a school board policy concerning the "School Day" and "School Ceremonies and Observances" with a new policy on the "School Day."

That original agenda item and the policies it concerned had caused board member Kim Murphy to think the pledge would be removed from board policy.

The district has denied that it had ever considered removing the pledge from the policy.

Before those attending the meeting stood to recite the pledge, board chairman Robert Gantt said the pledge of allegiance has been an important part of the school day and will always remain so.

"Our flag is a symbol of freedom and unity, and it’s very sad and ironic at the same time that some would use misinformation about our eliminating the pledge, which we are not going to do," Gantt said. "We believe that the pledge of allegiance to the flag is so important that we begin ever school board meeting with the pledge."

Before the agenda was officially approved, board member Beth Watson made a motion to amend the agenda to include board policy IMD, which addresses school ceremonies and observances.

Under that section, the pledge is addressed.

The policy was going to be presented to the board at the next board meeting in November, but Watson introduced the policy at Monday night's meeting since there was discussion about the pledge.

Murphy said she appreciated Watson for moving the policy, IMD, forward so that there would have been no lapse in the policy.

Watson said she never felt that it would have been a lapse and that she was confused as to why anyone would think the district would remove the pledge from the policy.

“I really had no fear that we would have a lapse,” Watson said. “I know that our school district follows the law and it’s the law and there was never any intent."

Watson asked that in the future Murphy should contact the superintendent or board chair and speak with them directly instead of going to the media.

“What that does is give a perception that you’re trying to get publicity and incite trouble in the district when there is none," Watson said.

Helen Anderson, chief instructional services officer, said she also would've appreciated an e-mail or telephone call about the policy. 

"I have worked in this school district for 25 years and never has my character been questioned until this happened," Anderson said.

She said there was never going to be a lapse and that the policy would stay in effect until the new one was approved.

Murphy said the policy speaks for itself and referenced Lexington School District 1's policy that included language concerning the pledge in the same policy as the language on the School Day, policy ID.

Watson's motion for approval also including first reading of several policies including Service Learning, the School Year and Mathematics Education.

Update 9:14 p.m.: District 5 Board of Trustees unanimously approved first reading of a recommended board policy concerning the Pledge of Allegiance during its Monday night meeting.

On the agenda, the board was scheduled to vote on the first reading of replacing a school board policy concerning the "School Day" and "School Ceremonies and Observances" with a new policy on the "School Day."

That original agenda item and the policies it concerned had caused board member Kim Murphy to think the pledge would be removed from board policy.

The district has denied that it had ever considered removing the pledge from the policy.

Before the agenda was officially approved, board member Beth Watson made a motion to amend the agenda to include board policy IMD, which addresses school ceremonies and observances.

That policy is the recommended policy that included the language for the pledge.

Murphy said she appreciated Watson for moving the policy, IMD, forward so that there would have been no lapse in the policy.

Watson said she never felt that it would have been a lapse and that she was confused as to why anyone would think the district would remove the pledge from the policy.

Check back soon for a full report on the board meeting.

Original story: A vote on the first reading of replacing a school board policy concerning the "School Day" and "School Ceremonies and Observances" with a new policy on the "School Day" has caused one Lexington-Richland 5 board member to believe the pledge of allegiance is in jeopardy of being removed from school board policy completely.

The District 5 board of trustees will meet tonight at 7 at Chapin Middle School, 1130 Old Lexington Highway, for its regular meeting.

On the agenda, the board is scheduled to have "first reading approval of proposed additions and revisions" to several policies including a new policy, ID-School Day, which would replace current policies AF "School Day", AF-R "School Day" and IKD "School Ceremonies and Observances."

Board member Kim Murphy said during a telepone interview Monday morning the existing policy requires the pledge, but that doesn't carry over to the new policy.

"Once we vote on that, it’s not in the policy anymore," Murphy said. "There’s no other policy that we have that includes the pledge.

"This is a very legitimate concern."

Under the district's current policy, IKD "School Ceremonies and Observances," the pledge of allegiance is addressed, but the new recommended policy ID "School Day" does not mention the pledge.

The recommended policy addresses the length and use of the school day. It also mentions the moment of silence.

Both the current and recommended policies are available to the right of this article.

Buddy Price, District 5's director of community service, said the district is not removing the pledge from its policy and that the language adressing the pledge is simply being moved to a new policy.

"It is a very important part of our school day and it remains so," Price said during a telephone interview Monday. "There was never any intention to do it. There was never any thought to do it."

"The law doesn’t allow you not to do it. Even if we did drop it out of policy, the law supersedes policy."

According to Section 59-1-455 of the South Carolina Code of Laws, “Beginning with the 1991-92 school year, all public school students, commencing with grades kindergarten through and including high school, shall during the course of each school day's activities at a specific time which must be designated by the local school say the Pledge of Allegiance."

"Any person not wishing to say the 'Pledge of Allegiance' or otherwise participate in saying the 'Pledge of Allegiance' is exempt from participation and may not be penalized for failing to participate. A person who does not wish to participate may leave the classroom, may remain in his seat, or may express his nonparticipation in any form, which does not materially infringe upon the rights of other persons or disrupt school activities.”

Price said the district is in the process, and have been for the last three years, of reviewing and updating all of the school board policies. He said that process is in conjunction with the S.C. School Boards Association and is consistent with school boards across the state.

"Everybody else has gone through the same process that we’re going through now," he said.

Price said he was never asked by a board member about the policy prior to an article being published by FitsNews.com that said the district was removing the pledge.

Price said he would've addressed the concern about the policy and reassures that the district is not removing the pledge from any policy.

When asked if Murphy had contacted the district about her concerns, Murphy said she hasn't talked with the district, but has heard that there was another policy that the board would review.

Murphy said other members of the board recieved an e-mail concerning the policy and that she did not.

"If it’s coming in another policy, and that’s what I hear, then I won’t approve this new policy unless I can simultaneously approve another policy that has the pledge in it so there’s no lapse whatsoever," Murphy said.

Murphy said to Patch that Lexington School District 1 has the same policy, ID "School Day" as District 5, except Lexington 1 did not remove language concerning the pledge.

Patch obtained a copy of the policy, which is posted online on Lexington 1's web site, that does address both the moment of silence and the pledge.

Lexington 1 also addresses the pledge under policy IMD "School Ceremonies and Observations."

Murphy said she will be recommending at tonight's meeting that the board adopt a policy with the pledge in it.

Debbie Elmore, director of communications for the S.C. School Boards Association, said in a telephone interview there was never any intent on the association’s part, which makes policy recommendations to school districts in the state, to not say the pledge of allegiance or have it removed from board policy.

Elmore said that school districts are updating and reviewing board policies, and that the issue concerning the pledge is probably from a lack of communication.

The SCSBA recommends to boards that they address policies by sections, but because any section could take hours to complete, some boards ask that policies within sections be addressed over time.

In doing so, the policies were not addressed at the same time.

“What the board received was just the one on the moment of silence,” Elmore said. “If you were comparing it, you’d see that the pledge isn’t on there. What was not communicated, is that the pledge is on another policy. “

“The moment of silence was added to the policy concerning the length of the school day and the pledge is in the policy titled School Ceremonies and Observances.”

Elmore said if the board wants to combine the pledge of allegiance to the policy dealing with the length of a school day school boards can do that.

"This is just a draft form," Elmore said. "The main thing is there’s no intention to recommend removing the pledge of allegiance."

Board member Jim Turner, who will not be present at tonight's meeting because he said he is recovering from eye surgery, said in a telephone interview if you you look at the way the policy is being addressed on the agenda, it does look like the pledge would be removed from the policy.

But he said he doesn't believe that to be the case after reading e-mails from Price concerning the policy.

"If you look at it on its surface, it does appear that the new policy does replace the policy that has both the pledge as well as invocations included in it," Turner said. "There are about four to six pages of policy that are being reduced down to one page.

"On the surface, it does appear that we’re going to do away with the pledge but it’s my understanding that it’s a state law that the pledge be said daily in public schools. E-mails from Mr. (Buddy) Price indicate that that is not the intent. The district is not recommending that we have a policy that does not include the pledge of allegiance."

Turner said he thinks the concerns about the policy will be clarified tonight with discussion about it.

He also said the board policy is up for first reading and that it means that it wouldn't become policy until after the board has had a second and final reading.

When asked about Murphy's concerns about the policy, Turner said he could understand her point and suggest the recommended policy on tonight's agenda be addressed at the same time as the policy that would address the pledge.

"I don’t think there’s anything funny going on in the district, I have no reason to be suspicious," Turner said. "Since there are citizens that are concerned about that happening, why not wait."

"I think that if there is any confusion about this, we certainly ought to make sure we address that and don’t just do something that could create a problem down the road," he said. "Simply waiting certainly makes sense to me, if there’s a doubt in anybody’s mind about what’s about to happen."

What do you think about the board's current and recommended policy? Follow Irmo Patch on Twitter to read live updates from tonight's meeting.