Recently, progressives have been using FHSD board meeting public comments to try and disparage us and our mission. Now that we are less than 8 weeks away from having a conservative majority elected as board members (with your help!), their attacks on us are shifting from vague accusations to outright lies. Normally we avoid focusing on these attacks, since we prefer to let our actions speak for themselves. However, one speech from the February 9, 2023 board meeting was entirely made up of lies, and that demands a fact check response.


Lie #1) FHF has called for the removal of the elective Black Literature and Black History courses.

Truth #1) The Black Literature and Black History curriculum, as approved by the board back in 2021, were inspired by and contain elements of Critical Race Theory and obnoxious Social Justice concepts. Throughout the debate, we made it clear that we were objecting to the proposed content of the courses, rather than the courses themselves. That is still true today.

Lie #2) FHF has labeled parents groomers.

Truth #2)  FHF has never labeled parents as groomers.  Giving explicit sexualized material to middle school and some high school students is grooming behavior, whereby child predators sexualize young children and desensitize them to deviant sexual behavior. That fact is undisputed, and is mentioned in district endorsed training to prevent sexual harassment and exploitation of children in schools. FHF has never called any individual a groomer. However, we have and will continue to call out this grooming behavior, where such material is made available in classrooms and libraries to young students. Read some of the content that is being made available to kids as young as 11 and decide for yourself if it should be in schools paid for by taxpayers:

Lie #3) FHF has threatened the jobs of district staff.

Truth #3) We have called for the resignations of board members who failed to provide proper oversight on Prop S cost overruns and anyone who failed to inform the board in a timely manner (FHSD board votes Dec 16th to accept runaway Francis Howell North High School project).  But while many of us feel that a number of administration staff also need to be replaced, we have never officially called for anyone to be fired. We’re unsure what was interpreted as threatening jobs of staff members (unless it’s referring to our opposition to grooming behavior, see the previous lie/truth). But those who are incompetent at their jobs or bring their political activism to the classroom should feel that their jobs are at risk – they do not belong in public education. If that’s what the speaker was referring to, we’ll be happy to oblige. Still, the speaker’s implication was that we threatened specific staff members, which is entirely false.

Lie #4) FHF has drained the district of $70K in a lawsuit.

Truth #4)  Three individual members of FHF who were unconstitutionally censored by the board during public comments did file a lawsuit. A federal judge agreed with the plaintiffs and entered an injunction against the district, after which the district agreed to a settlement. As part of the settlement, the lawyers were awarded attorneys’ fees. The FHF members didn’t see a penny of the settlement. Those fees were paid by the district’s insurance company, and didn’t cost the district anything.  Not too many school district board members (including Doug Ziegemeier) can say they violated their oaths of office and their constituents’ constitutional rights, and were told so by a federal judge. We are glad that two of those board members (Mary Lange and Patrick Lane) chose not to run for re-election this year.

By the way – the core issue of the lawsuit was whether or not websites and PACs could be mentioned in public comments. Because of our victory, the speaker making this false claim could reference both her website and her PAC’s name. That means not only was she lying about the settlement, but she was also being ungrateful as well.

Lie #5) A member of FHF proclaimed that teachers were preparing students straight for hell.

Truth #5) That was not a member of FHF, or anyone associated with FHF. Shame on last week’s speaker for making assumptions and not doing her due diligence. She could have found that out just by asking someone, but chose not do to so because it fit her agenda.

Lie #6) The president of FHF said that concepts taught in the Black History and Black Literature courses would result in increased criminality, and hinted at a connection between blackness and crime (in Nov 2022 public comments).

Truth #6) We’re amazed that the speaker tracked down that particular speech and yet seems to have deliberately misunderstood what was being said (here’s the video, watch for yourself – “FHSD BOE Meeting – 11/17/22 – Ken Gontarz”).  The FHF president was making a point about the social justice standards (used to write the Black History and Black Literature curriculum) and how they were from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a far-left organization that smears conservatives. He referenced the BLM organization as well as how social justice progressives were advocating for policies that increase crime. Examples were given of how progressive prosecutors treated suspects differently based on race to make the point that social justice is not actual justice. We’re not sure how last week’s speaker could have misunderstood the speech so badly, unless it was intentionally done.

Lie #7) This is what bullying looks like [the actions of FHF].

Truth #7) Since the speaker wouldn’t elaborate, we’re not quite sure what actions of FHF she thought were bullying behavior. When the board and administration failed to listen to our concerns about various issues, we took our concerns to the public by forming a PAC and participating in the local political process – raising money, endorsing candidates, and making passionate board speeches. That’s not bullying behavior. Indeed, we have refrained from specifically insulting or lying about individuals in an attempt to discredit or remove them from the conversation. We have used harsh words about the district and board members losing public money by not doing their jobs – but complaining about poor performance is not bullying. It is pretty telling that this speaker’s PAC has spent most of its website articles attacking FHF with lies and innuendo, and that their supported candidates seem more interested in attacking us and our endorsed candidates rather than debating issues and ideas. It is regrettable that these individuals think that the way to persuade is to lie and attack their political opponents.

Lie #8) The speaker’s PAC endorsed a bipartisan slate of candidates.

Truth #8) Three candidates are endorsed by this new PAC (incumbent Doug Ziegemeier, activist Harry Harris, and Democrat volunteer Amy Easterling). Of those, two are progressive left Democrats (Harry and Amy). Doug has claimed to be a Republican, but did not ask for nor receive the endorsement of the St Charles County Republican Party. Additionally, his positions on everything from CRT to fiscal irresponsibility and taxes are on the progressive Democrat side of the aisle. If he calls himself a Republican, it is in name only, as his positions have nothing in common with the GOP. We’re also not sure why last week’s speaker was concerned with “bipartisanship”, as the school board positions are “nonpartisan” – which means they are supposed to be concerned with ideas and policies, not political party affiliation. We believe that our three endorsed candidates have the best ideas to help get the district on the right track – by focusing on the basics of academics.

Here’s what you can do: