ACPS and city council re: SROs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

You both have proven that you will resort to name calling when someone disagrees with you. I feel sorry for your children having you as role models.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

+2.

And a number of counselors, teachers, formers principals, and school board members also speaks out on this issue in favor of keeping the program under the new MOU approved by a majority our school board. That school board is the DULY ELECTED body charged with running our schools. Not city council. City council over road the decision of that duly elected body through a very back handed vote to strip police funding.

I am very progressive, and volunteered for National and local elections (including one of those who voted to cut the funding). City council made a mistake and if anything goes wrong, two of them are going to pay for this very rash decision. I just hope they can find folks to fill those mental health roles in time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

+2.

And a number of counselors, teachers, formers principals, and school board members also speaks out on this issue in favor of keeping the program under the new MOU approved by a majority our school board. That school board is the DULY ELECTED body charged with running our schools. Not city council. City council over road the decision of that duly elected body through a very back handed vote to strip police funding.

I am very progressive, and volunteered for National and local elections (including one of those who voted to cut the funding). City council made a mistake and if anything goes wrong, two of them are going to pay for this very rash decision. I just hope they can find folks to fill those mental health roles in time.

*overrode. Stupid phone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

+2.

And a number of counselors, teachers, formers principals, and school board members also speaks out on this issue in favor of keeping the program under the new MOU approved by a majority our school board. That school board is the DULY ELECTED body charged with running our schools. Not city council. City council over road the decision of that duly elected body through a very back handed vote to strip police funding.

I am very progressive, and volunteered for National and local elections (including one of those who voted to cut the funding). City council made a mistake and if anything goes wrong, two of them are going to pay for this very rash decision. I just hope they can find folks to fill those mental health roles in time.

*overrode. Stupid phone.

The City Council controls whether, and to what extent, ACPS gets funding. The City Council had full authority to not fund the SROs going forward, regardless of how 6 school board members voted in November 2020 (3 voted against continuing the program). How is the vote backhanded when the City Council has to authorize the continued funding in the first place. ACPS has an internal security department which no one seems to be questioning is sufficient for security purposes in the systems schools other than the high school and the middle schools. So to me, all these threats of retribution against the council members supporting the SROs removal based on the threat of something happening in the future seems to be uncalled for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

+2.

And a number of counselors, teachers, formers principals, and school board members also speaks out on this issue in favor of keeping the program under the new MOU approved by a majority our school board. That school board is the DULY ELECTED body charged with running our schools. Not city council. City council over road the decision of that duly elected body through a very back handed vote to strip police funding.

I am very progressive, and volunteered for National and local elections (including one of those who voted to cut the funding). City council made a mistake and if anything goes wrong, two of them are going to pay for this very rash decision. I just hope they can find folks to fill those mental health roles in time.

*overrode. Stupid phone.

The City Council controls whether, and to what extent, ACPS gets funding. The City Council had full authority to not fund the SROs going forward, regardless of how 6 school board members voted in November 2020 (3 voted against continuing the program). How is the vote backhanded when the City Council has to authorize the continued funding in the first place. ACPS has an internal security department which no one seems to be questioning is sufficient for security purposes in the systems schools other than the high school and the middle schools. So to me, all these threats of retribution against the council members supporting the SROs removal based on the threat of something happening in the future seems to be uncalled for.

Then why didn’t city council open a discussion about this issue with the school board before their vote? Why wasn’t in a major topic on the joint committee? Why didn’t city council speak out when ACPS went through a fairly intensive process to study , modify and renew the MOU?

This came about because Tenant and Workers United made it an issue leading up to the primaries. And convinced certain city council members, using national stats rather than local stats, to essentially overturn the school boards decision by withholding funding. And on council, it was spearheaded by a member who apparently doesn’t even understand the Hatch Act, so I am not putting a ton of faith in his ability to look critically at this issue.

You may like this decision but you should think long and hard about how council went about using their power of the purse to override a school board decision this did not like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

+2.

And a number of counselors, teachers, formers principals, and school board members also speaks out on this issue in favor of keeping the program under the new MOU approved by a majority our school board. That school board is the DULY ELECTED body charged with running our schools. Not city council. City council over road the decision of that duly elected body through a very back handed vote to strip police funding.

I am very progressive, and volunteered for National and local elections (including one of those who voted to cut the funding). City council made a mistake and if anything goes wrong, two of them are going to pay for this very rash decision. I just hope they can find folks to fill those mental health roles in time.

*overrode. Stupid phone.

The City Council controls whether, and to what extent, ACPS gets funding. The City Council had full authority to not fund the SROs going forward, regardless of how 6 school board members voted in November 2020 (3 voted against continuing the program). How is the vote backhanded when the City Council has to authorize the continued funding in the first place. ACPS has an internal security department which no one seems to be questioning is sufficient for security purposes in the systems schools other than the high school and the middle schools. So to me, all these threats of retribution against the council members supporting the SROs removal based on the threat of something happening in the future seems to be uncalled for.

Then why didn’t city council open a discussion about this issue with the school board before their vote? Why wasn’t in a major topic on the joint committee? Why didn’t city council speak out when ACPS went through a fairly intensive process to study , modify and renew the MOU?

This came about because Tenant and Workers United made it an issue leading up to the primaries. And convinced certain city council members, using national stats rather than local stats, to essentially overturn the school boards decision by withholding funding. And on council, it was spearheaded by a member who apparently doesn’t even understand the Hatch Act, so I am not putting a ton of faith in his ability to look critically at this issue.

You may like this decision but you should think long and hard about how council went about using their power of the purse to override a school board decision this did not like.

I do agree with some of your process observations and agree that it is a bit unbelievable that the council person in question has so little understanding of the Hatch Act. But, I do think the City Council needs to use (or threaten to use) its power of the purse over schools even more since the School Board would rather fawn over Hutchings rather than provide oversight. For so many students, virtual schooling was a disaster but rather than pushing ACPS / Hutchings to be creative (even if he was unwilling to move to in person more quickly), the Board just attacks parents or anyone else that criticizes the school system.

[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:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Whoooah, you're a nut.

+1

+2.

And a number of counselors, teachers, formers principals, and school board members also speaks out on this issue in favor of keeping the program under the new MOU approved by a majority our school board. That school board is the DULY ELECTED body charged with running our schools. Not city council. City council over road the decision of that duly elected body through a very back handed vote to strip police funding.

I am very progressive, and volunteered for National and local elections (including one of those who voted to cut the funding). City council made a mistake and if anything goes wrong, two of them are going to pay for this very rash decision. I just hope they can find folks to fill those mental health roles in time.

*overrode. Stupid phone.

The City Council controls whether, and to what extent, ACPS gets funding. The City Council had full authority to not fund the SROs going forward, regardless of how 6 school board members voted in November 2020 (3 voted against continuing the program). How is the vote backhanded when the City Council has to authorize the continued funding in the first place. ACPS has an internal security department which no one seems to be questioning is sufficient for security purposes in the systems schools other than the high school and the middle schools. So to me, all these threats of retribution against the council members supporting the SROs removal based on the threat of something happening in the future seems to be uncalled for.

Then why didn’t city council open a discussion about this issue with the school board before their vote? Why wasn’t in a major topic on the joint committee? Why didn’t city council speak out when ACPS went through a fairly intensive process to study , modify and renew the MOU?

This came about because Tenant and Workers United made it an issue leading up to the primaries. And convinced certain city council members, using national stats rather than local stats, to essentially overturn the school boards decision by withholding funding. And on council, it was spearheaded by a member who apparently doesn’t even understand the Hatch Act, so I am not putting a ton of faith in his ability to look critically at this issue.

You may like this decision but you should think long and hard about how council went about using their power of the purse to override a school board decision this did not like.

I do agree with some of your process observations and agree that it is a bit unbelievable that the council person in question has so little understanding of the Hatch Act. But, I do think the City Council needs to use (or threaten to use) its power of the purse over schools even more since the School Board would rather fawn over Hutchings rather than provide oversight. For so many students, virtual schooling was a disaster but rather than pushing ACPS / Hutchings to be creative (even if he was unwilling to move to in person more quickly), the Board just attacks parents or anyone else that criticizes the school system.

Well I 100% agree with you about Hutchings and the school board. I just don’t think this was an example of a case where ACPS did not do their due diligence. In fact, if they had handled virtual/hybrid schooling/the coronavirus with as much thoughtfulness as the SRO MOU, students would be a lot better off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Your never convince them just let it go.

My H is a cop. The SRO program is a mess. Yes they are not there to “serve and protect” they are there to get dirt on kids, they are built in narcs… and use it against them. Guess who they target more boys of color and white girls who date black boys. It’s pathetic. He’s long said that it should be illigal. This is not 22 jump street.

There are few nice ladies that become SRO because they should have never been cops they are good SROs but they are never stopping a gun man or even hreak up a fight.

A good number are just bad cops they needed to remove from the street “how much damage can they do at a school”.

Of course the majority are not affected, most don’t really know what goes on behind the scenes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really racist of me, as a POC, if I don't support a group somewhat also comprised of POC? I don't think so but good for you for trying.

Regardless the point is that the group does not represent a majority of the student and staff population.

What annoys me most about people like you and this group is that any difference of opinion is immediately discounted as "racist."

At some point you need to grow up and understand that just because you're black doesn't mean that anyone who isn't black is against you. Until you make that realization though you are even more racist than the people at which you lodge that supposed barb.

Did you or anyone else conduct a poll to assess whether the majority of both the student body and staff supported retaining the SROs? Thus, you assertion about what the majority thinks on this issue is unsupported, never mind that the majority’s view is not necessarily the right one.

Also, I was clear that I was commenting on the attacks on the organization (and it student supporters) who advocated for removing the SRO as being racist, not the general opposition to the removal of the SROs. Moreover, just because you are purportedly a POC, it does not mean your arguments cannot be racist.

LOL.

That was cute, wasn't it?

You're wrong and it's impossible for you to be right even if the majority agrees with you.

What a tantrum throwing child.

Your name calling is reflective on you and not on me. My comment highlighted above is not funny and you misconstrue it. As a general matter, the majority view of a group is not necessarily the “right” view. You are actually making that exact argument if the group in question is the City Council. A majority of the City Council voted to no longer fund the SRO program and you are saying that majority is wrong.

As I noted above, no one really knows what the majority of affected students and staff think on this issue. Finally, again, I have acknowledged that there are good faith reasons to keep the SROs but I just think the reasons for removing them prevail. I only objected to belittling the organization advocating for the removal of the SROs and the students that support it. Your response to personally attack me.

Your never convince them just let it go.

My H is a cop. The SRO program is a mess. Yes they are not there to “serve and protect” they are there to get dirt on kids, they are built in narcs… and use it against them. Guess who they target more boys of color and white girls who date black boys. It’s pathetic. He’s long said that it should be illigal. This is not 22 jump street.

There are few nice ladies that become SRO because they should have never been cops they are good SROs but they are never stopping a gun man or even hreak up a fight.

A good number are just bad cops they needed to remove from the street “how much damage can they do at a school”.

Of course the majority are not affected, most don’t really know what goes on behind the scenes.

So, you're saying my daughter is a liar? Because she says she feels incredibly unsafe in the halls of TC. She says there are kids with guns n the school, that kids opebly use drugs and that theres fights on a daily basis that require adults to break them up.

[Anonymous]

Teacher here. When this topic was discussed in my classroom on multiple occasions in June (hybrid, remember) every single student wanted the SRO program to stay in place.