My Uniform Story

The impact of TEC 11.162 on my family

by Kirk Bates

This is my attempt to provide a detailed accounting of the bureaucratic nightmare my family has suffered at the hands of the Natalia Board of Trustees and Natalia Independent School District (“Natalia ISD”) as a result TEC 11.162.   Despite receiving a favorable proposed ruling from the Texas Education Agency, indicating that the Board’s denial regarding my exemption request was indeed arbitrary, capricious and without substantial evidence, my requested exemption has once again been denied and this time it was even stated that if I were sincere about my beliefs I would have sent my child to school out of uniform, after last year’s denial, and let my child continue to suffer the consequences.   My family is stuck in a legal loop.  Even if we were to go back to TEA and receive another favorable ruling it will take another year or more before even a proposed decision is entered and then it will be time to put in another request, as the school requires yearly request to be submitted.  All this effort, just so it can once again be arbitrarily denied.   This school board is abusing its authority with regard to TEC 11.162 and it will continue to do so until someone can financially afford to take this matter to district court or until TEC 11.162 is amended.  To date I have been able to act pro se, but the school has had the use of a well-paid attorney.  School funds are desperately needed in our district and I do not want to see any legal fees spent on the unethical actions of this Board, but I do not see any other alternative if legislative action is not taken to correct the short comings of TEC 11.162. 

 I was first confronted with the school uniform issue somewhere around late 1999 or early 2000, when the subject was brought up at a Natalia ISD board meeting. I was fairly new to the district and could not understand why this was even being brought up given the size of the district (total enrollment about 1000 students; pre-k - 12^th). I attended all of the meetings that were held concerning this issue and collected the data sheets that were passed out. I began doing my own research into the pros and cons of uniforms since the district seemed interested in pursuing this and some of the research they were quoting did not sound complete to me. I began checking out the various sources the district administration referred to and I discovered the references they were using had come from districts with enrollments of tens of thousands of students in major metropolitan areas. This was hardly a comparison for our small rural district. As my research progressed, I found several scientific studies that refuted the anecdotal information that the district administration was basing the need for this uniform policy on. The more I learned, the more I became convinced that this policy could do more damage than good. The claim made by the district’s administration, that this policy would improve the learning environment, seemed questionable at best.  Especially when the fact came out that over 95% of the dress code violations resulted from shirttails not being tucked in properly. By spring the push towards a mandatory uniform policy was in full swing by the district administration. As I spoke to members of the community, I kept hearing that many of them did not want uniforms in the schools, but they seemed reluctant to speak up because of the fact that the district is the largest employer in the area and many of these people are dependent on the district for part, if not all, of their income, or they have a family member who is.

The district administration had by this time sent out a survey to the parents, asking whether they were for or against uniforms in the school. The survey was worded in such a way that if you were opposed to uniforms then you were a bad parent. Out of the 617 surveys sent out only 55 were returned and only 44 of those were in favor of uniforms. The administration portrayed this as being a 69% approval rating from the parents, which I did not believe. I decided to have my own petition drive on a weekend and unfortunately worded my petition as being opposed to uniforms paid for with tax money. We still collected 79 signatures, which for a district with total enrollment on 950 – 1000 students we thought was pretty good. The board didn’t think so and told me my petition was written wrong and I was only protesting the tax issue not uniforms. This was my first lesson in school board politics. I immediately went out and set up another roadside petition drive this time with just ‘I am against the implementation of a mandatory school uniform policy in the Natalia School District‘ header. We got 91 signatures this time. But the board still seemed to have a problem with this civic-minded involvement and pushed forward and implemented the current mandatory uniform requirement that is in place in the Natalia ISD. Since very few, if any, community members were at the board meetings, I decided to start highlighting points of interest with letters to the editor of our local paper.

            School year 2000-2001 was the first year for the uniform policy. The school’s policy did allow for exemptions under Texas Education Code 11.162 if a parent had a bonafide philosophical or religious objection to the requirement.  That first year there were about 10 requests submitted, all of which the board denied with absolutely no discussion. Then as those parents started to ask the board to explain why they had been denied, the Superintendent called the police to have them removed for disrupting the meeting. It seemed obvious to me that the exemption policy had been provided only because TEC 11.162 required it and there is no doubt in my mind that it was, and will continue to be, a policy in print only and not one that the Board ever had any intention of acting upon. My son was only in 5^th grade that year and since the Board had not implemented a uniform policy for the elementary school, he was not yet subjected to the requirement and so I continued to do my research and post an occasional letter to the editor. All through this year parents told me stories about junior high and high school students receiving in-school suspensions for the first time in their school careers, due to the uniform policy.  These were straight “A,” well behaved, honor roll students and yet they were being subjected to continued suspensions.  And yet there were other students who, because of who they were, or their parents were, could violate the policy at will with no repercussions.

School year 2001-2002 was fast approaching and I filled out my Request For Waiver, and provided my letter thoroughly explaining my philosophical objection.  I also provided some of my research, which showed that their claims about the benefits of uniforms creating a better learning environment were unsupported and, in fact, were refuted by the empirical evidence that existed.  I thought surely this would be enough.  I had, after all, been opposed to the whole uniform issue since before the policy was put in place and I have vocalized that opposition in public places, in the board meetings and in the local media. Whether they agreed with me or not, everyone in the community, that had not been living under a rock, knew my feelings about mandatory school uniforms. I sat at the board meeting on August 13^th 2001 where that year’s exemption request were to be considered and listened as the board of trustees once again, without any open session discussion, denied my request and the request of another parent for her 3 sons. This was her second attempt at an exemption since she was one of the parents that had been unanimously denied the first year. The reason the District gave for denying my request was ‘lack of evidence justifying the philosophical beliefs’. I was not willing to give up my rights since I truly object to this requirement.  I felt then, as I do now, that they will never grant a requested exemption.  After doing some research into my options I decided to file an appeal with the TEA. Not being a lawyer this was tough, but I managed to put together an appeal and sent it in. That led to several conference calls with the Administrative Law Judge Maska, the District’s Attorney, and myself. I wrote an amended appeal, a brief and a reply to the District’s brief, all the while just trying to figure out what the next step was. This is a very difficult and time-consuming procedure for a parent to go through and not all of us can afford an attorney, even though the district can by using our tax money. I finally received a “Proposal for Decision” from the TEA Administrative Law Judge ruling in my favor stating that the board had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying my request for an exemption. The decision was issued August 2, 2002 almost a full-year after the Board had denied my request.

 This brings me to the school year 2002-2003 and my next request for exemption. You see the district policy requires an exemption request be turned in every year and so I had been working on mine for some time. The reason given for denying the previous request was insufficient evidence and I wanted to make sure I had everything in order this time. In an effort to explain my philosophy in a manner that the board might be able to understand, I expounded an abundance of information. Since much of my philosophy of life is based on my reading and understanding of the Bible, I decided to search for a greater understanding of my parental role within the Bible and to determine my own religious beliefs in this regard and as a result of my continued reading, after receiving this biblical guidance, I came to the understanding that this policy was indeed an infringement upon my religious beliefs as well and therefore I included this as part of my request this time. I included the scientific research results that upheld my beliefs that mandatory uniforms could be detrimental to a child. Being a proud American I included court cases dealing with parental rights, which allow me to determine what is and is not detrimental to my child.  I also quoted the constitution and attempted to explain how these things figured into my philosophy of life.  My final package consisted of: the district’s request for waiver; my letter, that had by this time grown to 10-pages; and about 100 pages more of scientific research, educational studies, Supreme Court decisions and more. How could they say no this year? After all, I had a proposal stating that I had indeed presented bona fide philosophical objections last year; I also had expanded on and expounded upon that same request I had submitted last year and provided a great deal, about a mountain’s worth, of additional research. So there I sat at the board meeting held August 26, 2002 listening in disbelief as the assistant superintendent, speaking in place of the Junior High school principal, gave their reasons for again recommending denial of my request.  Once again, the reason on the form this year was almost the same as last year ‘evidence presented does not support bona fide religious / philosophical beliefs’. At the hearing, this year however, at least the board did speak up. While some did voice their belief that since the proposal for decision indicated that they were wrong last time, they felt it should be granted this time, however, despite the vote being closer this time, they still voted, 4-3, to deny my request. One board member’s bias was very apparent as he continued to pursue some type of hidden agenda in a very obnoxious almost angry manner.  I have done nothing to warrant his anger except to request an exemption and attempt to show the board the error of their reasoning through the TEA appeal process.  And even that was done in a very respectable manner.

Other than to say evidence presented does not support bona fide religious / philosophical beliefs, there were no reasons even given by the Board.  The reason provided by the Assistant Superintendent speaking for the District’s Junior High Principal however was that I was not sincere in my beliefs since I had allowed my son to wear uniforms instead of sending him to school every day out of uniform to be placed in-school suspension after the denial the previous year! The fact that I was pursuing my TEA appeal this entire year was not even mentioned by them, even though they all knew it.  This same Assistant Superintendent went on to say that I did not have to send my son to this, the only school in the District, I was free to send him to Private School or Home School him instead if I objected to the uniforms. This is hard to do when it takes both parents working to make ends meet these days. My request has once again been denied and now the appeal process starts over again. I believe the board members that voted in my favor this time were basing that decision partly on the merits of my request and mostly on the fact the Judge had made a Proposal for Decision in my favor from the previous year. The other board members, I truly feel, will never allow a request to go through and have violated 11.162 as well as my family’s religious and constitutional freedoms in doing so. Once again I will appeal this decision and go through the whole process over.  And again, when I get another positive ruling next year from TEA it will be to late, and I will again be required to submit another request for the following year which will, based upon historical evidence, be once again denied and I will be forced to go through the entire process again and again. The only way I see of ever getting out of this loop the District has created is for my son to graduate. Since he just entered the 7^th grade that should happen in the spring of 2008, Good Lord Willing.