Former Spanish River High Principal William Latson also said he didn’t confront some Holocaust-denying volunteers because he didn’t want them to feel unwelcome on campus.

Former Spanish River High Principal William Latson defended his refusal to call the Holocaust a historical fact, saying opinions on whether the genocide occurred are a "personal ideology" and that it was his job to be tolerant of people who didn’t believe.

While acknowledging the Holocaust was a real event, the ousted principal said Monday that some parents at his school did not agree, and that state law required him to show "tolerance" in dealing with them.

That tolerance, he said, was a main reason for his decision to tell a school parent in April 2018 that as an educator he had "the role to be politically neutral" and that he "can't say the Holocaust is a factual, historical event."

"That’s my personal ideology," he explained at an administrative hearing Monday. "Even though I believe the Holocaust existed, she didn’t have the right to ask me that information, and I had the right not to answer."

Latson’s testimony represented his first public remarks since his Holocaust comments ignited a firestorm when they were revealed last summer by The Palm Beach Post, drawing international media coverage and calls for his removal from prominent political leaders.

Appealing his termination in October, Latson’s legal team is seeking to convince an administrative judge that he was ousted on trumped-up charges after the publication of his comment caused a political uproar.

Officially, Latson’s firing was based on the grounds that he failed to communicate effectively with school district supervisors in the days after his comments were publicly revealed.

But much of the testimony in Monday’s hearing, at a county government building west of West Palm Beach, harkened back to the original emails.

Under questioning by attorneys, Latson said his reluctance to take a stance on whether the Holocaust occurred was due in part to the fact that some parent volunteers at the school refused to believe it.

"I am tolerant of those who did not believe the Holocaust happened at all," he said. "I express it through not being confrontational with them."

In fact, he said, at one point he declined a parent’s request to confront Holocaust-denying parents on campus because he didn’t want them to feel unwelcome.

"I’m not going to have any parent on my campus feel like they’re being attacked," he said.

Denying or minimizing the Holocaust is described by the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization that monitors hate groups, as "an essential manifestation of anti-Semitism."

When the mother complained about Latson’s remarks, his supervisors worked for months to assuage her concerns, even agreeing to make changes to the way the Holocaust was taught at Spanish River High.

But Latson said it was clear he had supervisors’ complete support even after the mother called for his removal from the school, and that he received little negative feedback from them regarding his actions.

"The only criticism was I could have worded a better email," he said.

District leaders’ attitudes changed once Latson’s comments were revealed in a Post article in July.

In testimony Monday, Deputy Schools Superintendent Keith Oswald said that the public reaction to Latson’s comments was "outrage" and "chaos."

Calls and messages poured in for days from residents and community leaders. District officials fielded calls from the governor’s office and the White House.

With Superintendent Donald Fennoy out of the country on a cruise, Oswald said he was in charge of handling the fallout.

As the situation deteriorated, Latson flew to Jamaica on a pre-planned vacation and failed to respond to Oswald’s request that he agree to voluntarily transfer out of the school, Oswald said.

Still, the decision to fire Latson did not occur until he sent an email to his staff from Jamaica July 8, blaming his removal from the school on "a false statement" from the mother who received his emails.

After that, prominent leaders who had been satisfied by his removal from the school began calling for him to be fired, including several state lawmakers and the Anti-Defamation League.

"Overnight it just started again," Oswald recalled. "Just the outrage of, why would he write what he wrote to the staff?

"The part about the parent just undermined his apology," Oswald said, "just undermined anything the district was doing on the reassignment."

Oswald admitted the decision to fire Latson was made before a personnel investigation had been conducted or Latson had an opportunity to explain himself.

"The decision was made to make a decision based on the information we had at that time," Oswald said.

Months later, a personnel investigation concluded Latson had committed "ethical misconduct" and "failure to carry out job responsibilities."

Testimony in the administrative hearing continues Tuesday.

amarra@pbpost.com

@AMarranara