Emails reveal contempt by MoCo health dept for nonpublic schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s just speaking the truth. That’s why everyone on this thread is upset. Why not acknowledge your privilege and then have a conversation?!

You're an idiot. He was wrong in his prejudiced efforts to attempt to keep non-public schools closed and he was wrong in his inappropriate emails. Time to go, bye bye.

Fascinating glimpse into your mind here. The goal was for privates to be closed just like publics were, which is prejudiced against non-public schools because . . . it's not what you wanted?

Here in the DMV, many schools were able to open safely by following CDC guidance on distancing, mask-wearing, cohosting, etc. They opened in September and have been open all year without in-school transmission. Gayles didn’t care about the science or the CDC guidelines, he just wanted all the schools closed so the public schools wouldn’t look bad for closing too. This was absolutely a political decision, not a public health one.

The fact that the position "keep all schools closed" turned out to be overly cautious vis a vis what was necessary to mitigate community spread (something brought up in the emails people are so horrified by - "You mitigate risks by being overly cautious") doesn't in any way show that it was *prejudiced* against non-public schools. It wasn't. Trying to get all schools to behave in the same way, even if it's not the way you prefer, is not prejudice.

Except it’s clear from what he wrote that he had great disdain for the private school community.

It's clear from what he wrote that he was irritated by them, sure. But being irritated by a group of people and then insisting they be treated the same as everyone else is still not prejudice. Words have meanings.

But he wasn't treating them the same. Other organizations that were able to operate safely under CDC guidelines were allowed to open; schools that were able to operate under CDC guidelines were not; they were treated differently.

His attempts were to treat all schools the same. He did not demonstrate prejudiced efforts to attempt to keep non-public schools closed. He wanted all schools to be closed, not just non-public schools. And if you're now trying to move the goalposts to say that he was prejudiced against schools as opposed to other organizations, then the whole "he didn't like private school parents" argument is completely meaningless. There was no prejudiced effort against private schools. There was no prejudiced effort against schools writ large. There was an overly cautious approach that some people disagreed with for good reasons, some for bad reasons, and some supported for good or bad reasons, but still: not prejudiced.

You are really trying to twist things around there.

Actually, I re-quoted the exact same language I quoted the first time, which is the opposite of "trying to twist things." I'm insisting on sticking to the premise. PPs (I have to assume there were more than one because they're all over the place) have tried to move the argument from "he was prejudiced against private schools" to "he was prejudiced against private school parents if not the schools themselves" to "he was prejudiced against schools vs. camps," which is actually trying to twist the discussion.

I'm sorry that the facts don't fit your feeling of aggrievement. But there's no evidence of prejudice against private schools in the efforts to keep all schools closed.

Your premise is that all schools should be treated the same because they are schools, without regard to facts about the operation that are actually pertinent to COVID. That is what was wrong from the start. Treat them the same no matter how different they are. People wondered why? The emails give an answer that looks an awful lot like animus.

(Also, not in MOCO so not aggrieved).

No, my premise is that attempting to treat all schools the same is not a sign of prejudice against private schools. Not whether schools should have been opened or closed. But the government saying "all schools should be X" is not prejudice against a subset of schools. OP of this subthread said the emails demonstrated his prejudiced efforts to attempt to keep non-public schools closed (third time!) and I pointed out that that makes no sense. The attempt, all along, was to treat privates and publics the same way. It didn't work, and they got very irritated with private school re-opening advocates while it was being fought out. Being irritated with someone and then treating them the same way as people you're demonstrably not irritated with is not prejudice. The animus you're claiming did not lead to a different outcome than the people that are being held up here as a favored class (public schools). You can't say "failing to treat me in the exact way I prefer while also not liking me" is prejudice. Every time you are gainsaid is not prejudice.

I'm out of different ways to say it. It might have been overly cautious, it might have been insufficiently granular, it might not have even worked in the end, but a policy of "all schools should be treated the same because of Covid" is not prejudice against private schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact is that Gayles erred on the side of caution rather than let independent schools be the guinea pigs for the rest of the area. People seem to forget that even three months ago we did not have a full grasp or understanding of the virus, how it can be transmitted, whether or not children are super spreaders, whether or not high school students are. Sure, there was a vocal group of people demanding schools open, but that doesn't mean they had a clear understanding of what was going on. As someone mentioned earlier, hindsight tends to give you 20/20 vision.

no, he wanted “equity” in forcing private schools kids into DL just like public. l

[Anonymous]

No, my premise is that attempting to treat all schools the same is not a sign of prejudice against private schools. Not whether schools should have been opened or closed. But the government saying "all schools should be X" is not prejudice against a subset of schools. OP of this subthread said the emails demonstrated his prejudiced efforts to attempt to keep non-public schools closed (third time!) and I pointed out that that makes no sense. The attempt, all along, was to treat privates and publics the same way. It didn't work, and they got very irritated with private school re-opening advocates while it was being fought out. Being irritated with someone and then treating them the same way as people you're demonstrably not irritated with is not prejudice. The animus you're claiming did not lead to a different outcome than the people that are being held up here as a favored class (public schools). You can't say "failing to treat me in the exact way I prefer while also not liking me" is prejudice. Every time you are gainsaid is not prejudice.

I'm out of different ways to say it. It might have been overly cautious, it might have been insufficiently granular, it might not have even worked in the end, but a policy of "all schools should be treated the same because of Covid" is not prejudice against private schools.

Yes, the ability to close a private school for months at a time due to a potential threat vs. an actual threat found on the premises, is prejudice. It is a violation of separation of powers and went well beyond the legal authority of a public health officer (which is why he was forced to reverse his decision). Just because he thought his decision was fair did not make it legal.

[Anonymous]

Of note here is Gayles did not shut down public schools in the Fall (he did last Spring). It was MCPS BOE that voted to close. Now, he does have the authority to shut them down, but he didn't need to exercise that since MCPS already voted to do so.

[Anonymous]

Let's face it....Covid got politicized at every single level. Teacher's Unions support the gov't when it's liberal. Plain and simple. They have immense power.
Everything ! is politicized and this website is evidence.
I hope less extremism and common sense (and comedy, for that matter.) make a come back :/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of note here is Gayles did not shut down public schools in the Fall (he did last Spring). It was MCPS BOE that voted to close. Now, he does have the authority to shut them down, but he didn't need to exercise that since MCPS already voted to do so.

I really hope you are not this naive. He strongly recommended to them that they close and they listened to his advice. That's in a million public forums. He was absolutely largely behind and a driver of the continued closings that lasted into 2021. He was telling them to stay closed and delay opening as parents pushed harder as the year went on. He said he was skeptical of some of the studies and CDC statements as they came out. All public record. He has been one of the most conservative re in person school in the entire country (or world) and was way behind on embracing the growing scientific consensus on safety and harm to kids from long term remote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Gayles’ view was that if public schools could not open, private schools should not be allowed either, on equity grounds. There was never any scientific justification for it, and months of experience now show the private schools were entirely correct in believing they could reopen safely.

He was, however, very successful in delaying and making it hard for private schools to reopen. He will pay no political price because there is a critical mass of people in the county who agree with that decision — if they can’t have it, nobody should have it.

You've got to be prepared to give up some of your privilege in order to achieve equity. I think kids in private schools should be forced to learn nothing next year. That would be equitable.

What’s fascinating about the current moment is that this could either be someone trolling or someone completely dead serious; either one could post precisely the same thing. You really can’t tell anymore. It’s funny as hell.

I was thinking it was a joke. Let’s hope that is the case, otherwise really bitter and sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of note here is Gayles did not shut down public schools in the Fall (he did last Spring). It was MCPS BOE that voted to close. Now, he does have the authority to shut them down, but he didn't need to exercise that since MCPS already voted to do so.

This is false. Gayles did not shut down the schools last spring. He didn't have the authority. The Governor closed the schools in March. He left reopening to the county Boards of Education (which are elected) and expected there to be input from many stakeholders in the community. The whole point is that a decision of that magnitude needs to be made by elected officials that can be held accountable for their decision, not a single non-elected public health officer. Montgomery County Board of Education made the decision not to re-open in the fall. Gayles never thought he had the authority to make that decision and only suddenly claimed such authority when it became clear that private schools were intending to open. Prior to this whole debacle happening, the State had already made it clear in their Recovery Plan for schools how independent schools should reopen. The section below is taken verbatim from the State's plan (printed in June of 2020):


Nonpublic Schools under COMAR 13A.09.09 (private pay) and Registered Church Exempt Schools
Memos to nonpublic schools approved under COMAR 13A.09.09 and registered church-exempt schools, dated March 19, 2020,
indicated the recommendation for these schools to close. The memos stated that these schools are “governed and operated by
private organizations. The Legal Authority of each nonpublic school is responsible for making the determination regarding its school
closure as a result of COVID-19.” During the recovery phase from this pandemic, decisions regarding the operating status of each
nonpublic school (for both nonpublic schools approved under COMAR 13A.09.09 and registered church-exempt schools) will continue
to be made by the school’s Legal Authority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gayles should step down or be fired immediately! He was wrong in his actions and in the unintelligent and inappropriate emails. Private schools opened and educated their students just fine. Not public schools - and this is his problem. He has no idea how to do his job and these email revelations should be the nail in his coffin. He is terrible at his job, divisive, and prejudiced. Time to Go!

This needs to go to court. Gayles and Erich should be fired and barred from public service anywhere. They are too corrupt and have personal agendas not for the people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gayles should step down or be fired immediately! He was wrong in his actions and in the unintelligent and inappropriate emails. Private schools opened and educated their students just fine. Not public schools - and this is his problem. He has no idea how to do his job and these email revelations should be the nail in his coffin. He is terrible at his job, divisive, and prejudiced. Time to Go!

This needs to go to court. Gayles and Erich should be fired and barred from public service anywhere. They are too corrupt and have personal agendas not for the people.

I agree they should go, but waht's the court claim?

Elrich will run again for CoExec. He'll have a lot of competitino. I hope Blair wins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’s just speaking the truth. That’s why everyone on this thread is upset. Why not acknowledge your privilege and then have a conversation?!

We work very hard to send our children to an affordable private parochial school. Are we more privileged than some? of course. But our school is very diverse in terms of financial background- many on scholarship, parents on WIC, SNAP, etc... The council and Gayles are prejudiced against anyone whose beliefs differ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s just speaking the truth. That’s why everyone on this thread is upset. Why not acknowledge your privilege and then have a conversation?!

We work very hard to send our children to an affordable private parochial school. Are we more privileged than some? of course. But our school is very diverse in terms of financial background- many on scholarship, parents on WIC, SNAP, etc... The council and Gayles are prejudiced against anyone whose beliefs differ.

You do realize the “but not everyone at private schools is privileged” argument is like saying “but I have friends who are Black,” right?

You also realize that there are several private school parents who think Gayles was right....

Point is people with power are used to getting their way and don’t like when they’re told no And then make excuses like “not all of us have power” to justify it.

[Anonymous]

It is not a privilege question. It is an envy question. Hope this is career-ending but not enough will take notice. I did see the article get picked up by some other blogs at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is not a privilege question. It is an envy question. Hope this is career-ending but not enough will take notice. I did see the article get picked up by some other blogs at least.

Envy? Seriously?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s just speaking the truth. That’s why everyone on this thread is upset. Why not acknowledge your privilege and then have a conversation?!

We work very hard to send our children to an affordable private parochial school. Are we more privileged than some? of course. But our school is very diverse in terms of financial background- many on scholarship, parents on WIC, SNAP, etc... The council and Gayles are prejudiced against anyone whose beliefs differ.

You do realize the “but not everyone at private schools is privileged” argument is like saying “but I have friends who are Black,” right?

You also realize that there are several private school parents who think Gayles was right....

Point is people with power are used to getting their way and don’t like when they’re told no And then make excuses like “not all of us have power” to justify it.

Actually- no. PP here- our school breaks its neck fundraising so that it doesn't have to turn anyone away for financial reasons. There is no 1% at our private parochial We are also recipients of financial aid and we live on a very tight budget so we can afford the rest. Every medical "science based" organization - ie. AAP, CDC, WHO, CHOP was advocating for in person schooling for the metrics that we were at this summer. It was straight up hypocrisy that hubs could operate in public schools while privates were ordered to be closed. This was about saving face for unions. And in the end- the research panned out. Love how people only want to follow science when it follows the narrative they choose.