Return to Intelligent Design stories index
© 2006 Dendrite Forest, Inc.

Families Sue: Injunction Filed to
Stop Intelligent Design Class at
Frazier Mountain High School

Jan. 13, 2006

By Patric Hedlund

Parents from Lebec, Pine Mountain and Frazier Park filed suit Tuesday, Jan. 10 at 4:00 p.m. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division, to seek a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and injunction that, if granted, will stop a class about “intelligent design” from proceeding at Frazier Mountain High School. Americans United for Separation of Church and State assisted the parents.

A hearing on the TRO has been scheduled for 1:30 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 17 in Fresno before Judge Oliver Wanger.

The plaintiff parents are Kenneth Hurst, Joan Balcome, Kirk Roger Tingblad, Philip Jones-Thomas, Barry S. Goldberg, Sophie Goldberg, Jeannie Parent, Ken and Jody Valmassy and Ann and Richard Howard.

Appearing for the parents will be constitutional expert Richard Katskee, key attorney in the Dover, Pennsylvania federal court case which resulted in a ruling that it is unconstitutional to teach “intelligent design” as a credible alternative to the theory of evolution in the biology curriculum of public schools.

Meanwhile, international news media from the New York Times, CNN and the Washington Post to a publication in Romania are reporting about the events here.

Some parents participating as plaintiffs indicated last week to The Mountain Enterprise, and in yesterday’s filing, that they are concerned the current elective philosophy course at FMHS is “the camel’s nose under the tent,” and would—if not challenged—be the first of an ongoing series of efforts “to undermine the science curriculum in our school.”

The Discovery Institute, an organization devoted to bringing Intelligent Design into public schools, publishes strategy proposals to assist those who share that objective.

Named as defendents in the suit are all members of the Board of Trustees, ETUSD Superintendent John Wight, FMHS principal Dan Penner, and FMHS instructor Sharon Lemburg.

Wight announced at the special New Year’s Day meeting of the Board of Trustees that “our legal counsel tells us there is no problem as long as we present this as a philosophy class...he [the district lawyer] said we don’t even need to provide balance about other viewpoints at all in a philosophy course....”

Longtime trustee Kitty Jo Nelson, who cast one of two votes to delete the course from the intersession curriculum at the Sunday, Jan. 1 meeting (along with Phyllis Throckmorton), said, “It didn’t need to come to this. I am very sorry to think that we would be spending district resources on this kind of thing.”

Questions regarding the Board’s policies for overseeing curriculum for intersession classes have been raised. Discussion at public meetings among board members and the Superintendent (who has been with the district for about 18 months) revealed confusion regarding past procedures. The FMHS principal, Dan Penner has held the position only since this summer. He and the Superintendent have been strong proponents of the Philosophy of Design class in public statements.

District personnel and Board of Trustees chairman Steve Newman refused to comment about the suit Wednesday, saying only “this is under litigation.”

Board Trustee Phyllis Throckmorton said in an interview Wednesday, Jan. 11, shortly after speaking with a reporter from the New York Times, “this has been a lesson for all of us. It makes us really aware that we are part of the world, not just some isolated place in the mountains. I am sure we have qualified instructors and that no one meant any harm with this, but we have to do our research going forward.

“As educators we are used to standards-based education. When you have a lot of vague things going on such as with the intersession curricula, it is best to do our research and be careful about how we approach [supervising class offerings].”

The lead plaintiff in the suit, Ken Hurst, (who is also Lead Mentor for the FMHS Robotics Team) gave early warning to the Principal and Superintendent regarding the problems he perceived in the initial syllabus. On December 5 he hand-delivered a letter to Penner, which is reproduced below. A copy was also sent to Wight.

The letter analyzes the educational merits of the course. Several elements of this document are mentioned in the complaint filed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Return to Intelligent Design story index