Lodi Unified to follow state masking guidelines

Jul. 29—Despite being bombarded with a round of boos and jeers from angry parents, the Lodi Unified School District Board of Education on Tuesday night directed staff to follow masking guidelines mandated by the California Department of Public Health.

Those guidelines will require all students, staff and visitors to both public and private school sites wear masks indoors, regardless of vaccination status.

"I would like to see all our students without masks," board vice chair Sue Macfarlane said. "I think most of our board members would agree with that. But we don't get that luxury. When (CDPH) says 'you will do,' then we will do. It doesn't mean we're happy about it, it doesn't mean we agree with it. We have a bigger task at hand, and that is how to keep our students educated and safe, our staff happy and safe, our administration, all personnel happy and safe. And that's in a mask on a school site."

Parents opposed to the masking mandate asked the district why it couldn't simply not follow the guidelines like other agencies across the state have chosen to do, and let children have the option to wear a mask.

Paul Gant, an attorney for the district, said violating the mandate opens the district and trustees to costly litigation.

"If you violate a mandate, there are a lot of legal consequences that can flow from that," he said. "It's very possible that someone could get hurt and sue. That's a possibility and if they can prove they got hurt from a violation of the mandate, that can subject the school district to substantial risk of liability, legal fees, defense fees, all of that stuff."

Gant added that a member of the community could also file a lawsuit against the district for not doing enough to comply with the mandate, or for not following the mandate at all.

He said in the event of a lawsuit, the district must be able to prove it is taking reasonable steps to comply to have the case dropped. However, if there is no reasonable action moving forward — such as the board and district saying they'll follow guidelines but ultimately failing to do so — then a lawsuit would prevail.

If the board refuses to follow the mandate and lost a lawsuit, legal fees would not be covered under the district's insurance policy, according to chief business officer Leonard Kahn.

However, the board cannot be sued over an infection or viral transmission claim, as those injuries are excluded under insurance coverage in the State of California, he said.

If the board loses a lawsuit, Kahn said legal fees would have to be paid by the district.

"If the board fails to comply with the mandate, it has $360 million in general revenue," he said. "About $60 million of that is special education grants, title monies ... in those grants, the board agreed in acceptance to follow language, executive orders and things of that nature, that are directed by the state. Failing to comply or directing the superintendent to draft measures not to comply with a mandate could affect that money."

Washer said because the CDPH has left it up to districts to determine how to enforce the mandate, she suggested the board adopt a "tiered approach" that would leave disciplinary options open and allow the district to focus on educating students.

"We know that we do have to follow this mandate, so we do recommend the district take the stance that it is a requirement, and we put procedures in place that would allow school site folks to have that mandate followed," she said. "We absolutely will give masks to students that don't have them. We also have the option of shields and drapes. We could have site administration meet with students, or support staff meet with parent and students, can have parent meetings, or letters explaining the mandate. This will be a series, or tiered approach to enforcement."

Parents opposed to masks took the board to task during public comment, accusing members of caring more about money than the well-being of their children.

Many threatened to remove their students from the district if the mask mandate was followed.

"I understand the concern for health and safety," parent Ashley Flick said. "But why do you continue to insist on masking healthy individuals? Why can't you mandate it for the immuno-compromised? As a parent of elementary students, I can confidently say masks are an unsanitary distraction. Requiring students and staff to wear masks in class impedes social and verbal academic development. If we don't have choice, I will be removing kids from the district."

Cordy Beerman said he had approached the district about a health exemption for his son, a middle school student who suffers from asthma, and was told he needed a doctor's note. He took his son to two doctors, both of which agreed masks were detrimental to students' well-being, he said.

Prior to the pandemic, Beerman said his son had one inhaler for his condition, but now has two and must use them about five times a day, due to the retardation of his lungs from wearing a cloth mask in school.

"I can't understand why we're here talking about this when other districts, local districts in our area, have decided not to enforce the mandate," he said. "If you want to wear a mask, wear a mask. If you don't want to wear a mask, don't wear a mask."

According to the American Lung Association, wearing masks for long periods of time does not cause low oxygen levels. However, the ALA said there is some evidence to show that prolonged use of masks by those with pre-existing lung diseases could cause build-up of carbon dioxide in the body.

The ALA said masks are not 100% effective, but wearing them does decrease the risk of viral infection.

Gant noted that a mandate constitutes a law, and any suggestion of setting a policy to get around the law would subject the board and district to court action, liability, attorney fees and costs.

Parent Jennifer Krengel said she did not want to wear a mask on campus, and didn't want her children to wear them either. However, she said wearing them was an act of responsible citizenship.

"Masks suck. I hate wearing a mask, and yet I wear it," she said. "To me, a mask demonstrates care for other people. It is an act of personal protection, and it also is a signal that I care for you. Let's encourage our kids to think about other people."

Marielle Petricevich is an elementary music teacher at three schools in the district. She said she interacts with about 623 students a day, then goes home in the evening to care for two immuno-compromised relatives. Following masking guidelines was the least the board, district and parents could do to support students returning to the classroom for in-person instruction, she said.

"It's not just your health where you just have your family members or you just have your close friend whom you trust, or you're not concerned about it," she said.

"I am. I have my grandfather I take care of. I have my mother who is immuno-compromised. My own colleague, who works next-door to me, can't be vaccinated because of outstanding health problems. Masking is the littlest thing for my world that I need. It makes me confident that I can come to work, that I can do my job, and bring your kids joy."

Board members said while they do not agree with the masking mandate, they would follow the guidelines to ensure students are able to come to school.

While many parents argued masks do not work or cause physical and mental health issues, board members said that was not the issue with which they had to deal. The issue, the board said, was how to enforce the mandate.

"I personally believe that if you've been vaccinated, then you're protected and masks do very little to help," board member Gary Knackstedt said. "On the other hand, I don't think they do a lot of harm either. Essentially, what's happened tonight is a whole lot of people asking us to break the mandate. So I would recommend that we do in fact follow CDPH guidelines and ask our administrative staff to determine how we'd enforce it and post it on our school website before school starts."

President Ron Freitas told parents that the district had come a long way from one year ago, where students were confined to their homes and taking classes virtually. Now that they were allowed back on campus, Freitas told parents to trust the board's judgment.

"This tiered approach is going to be reasonable, it's going to be a work in progress and we're going to get to the end of this together," he said. "Because as you can see, there's more data coming out every single day, and more information coming out and new policies are changing every day. This district cares as much as you care."

The district will post details about how it will follow the CDPH guidelines on its website before the first day of school on Aug. 2, Washer said.