No more masks at VA privates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the Catholic schools will do away with masks if they haven’t already.

I agree its in line with the Bishop's stance on masks a Church - optional.

Our school requires masks. If they get rid of the mask requirement, there will be many very unhappy families. Right now the screamers are the anti-maskers.

I know many at our school that would be happy with them getting rid of the requirement. Its a 50/50 split in most places.

At our school, I would guess 25% want no masks. 30% don’t really care, and the biggest %, including most of the teachers, want masks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does lifting the masking mandate only apply to public schools? I’m confused.

Privates can do whatever they want now.

The mandate covered all k-12 schools. The crazy thing is Youngkin is even trying to prohibit private schools from requiring masks, if you read the language of the order.

“A child whose parent has elected that he or she is not subject to a mask mandate should not be required to wear a mask under any policy implemented by a teacher, school, school district, the Department of Education, or any other state authority.”

What happened to letting private entities make their own decisions without government interference?

Privates that followed the Northam EO will need to follow the Youngkin EO.

Not sure why you think that. Northam’s EO was consistent with CDC recommendations, while Youngkin’s is contrary to it. Here is what VA Code says about it:


§ 2. Each school board shall offer in-person instruction to each student enrolled in the local school division in a public elementary and secondary school for at least the minimum number of required instructional hours and to each student enrolled in the local school division in a public school-based early childhood care and education program for the entirety of the instructional time provided pursuant to such program. For the purposes of this act, each school board shall (i) adopt, implement, and, when appropriate, update specific parameters for the provision of in-person instruction and (ii) provide such in-person instruction in a manner in which it adheres, to the maximum extent practicable, to any currently applicable mitigation strategies for early childhood care and education programs and elementary and secondary schools to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 that have been provided by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

1) “school boards” concern public, municipal schools and doesn’t cover privates and 2) I would like to see a definition of “practicable”. To me that’s the trigger word. What one school thinks is practicable and another will not.

I’m not sure around here but near Richmond I expect Hanover and New Kent to make masks discretionary after the 24th. I am from Richmond and have some contacts who teach in the big privates down there and they’re telling me many of their schools are on the fence. It’s not a done deal one way or the other. The big concern seems to be discipline against a student/family who won’t wear a mask after the 24th. As of now they are sent to the office and can be suspended. But after the 24th does the school still want to take this approach?

Re your point 1), that is the question. Does Youngkin’s EO2 apply to privates? Meaning a private cannot require masks after this week? The quoted statute applies to publics, but Yougkin’s EO seems to apply to any school, unless there is something implied in it that applies only to publics. If it does apply to privates, then we have an anomolous situation where he has more exerted more authority over private schools that he can over public ones.

As much as the right-wing seems to ridicule the left for virtue signaling, the irony is this is a symbolic act to signal to his base. ACPS, APS and FCPS have already indicate they will disregard it.

As I understand it, Youngkin's order cancelled Northam's previous order and in that previous order it seemed to apply to ALL school's and universities (including privates). I was on the board of a NOVA private when Covid hit in spring 2020 and a similar discussion was held re school's closures: Does the Governor have authority over privates and it was determined in some cases he does (at least for that school). So the easy part at the time was to say "We can go along with the order" and in 2020 that made sense. My term expired and I am no longer on the board so I do not know what current discussions are taking place.

However, to speculate, this new order is worded in an interesting way that seems to make it more difficult for a private school to go against because it gives the power to parents, literally in the wording. It also has a long list of educational categories (schools, school boards etc) and I don't see definitions in the order. So now you will have parents that will push back because of this wording. I am very interested to see how this plays out (my own personal masks position aside). I believe whoever wrote this order knew exactly what they were writing and it is all intentional. I think the pendulum leans more towards the parents here. One thing privates might have going for them is that contract renewals are coming up, and it's a seller's market for privates, so parents might not want to make waves until they sign their renewal contracts.

Private schools would be smart to include language in the contract about parents agreeing to abide by the schools universal mask requirement or risk expulsion.

I think our school has a contract provision about abiding by COVID/health and safety policies, which allows them to separately update and change those policies which are under the contract by reference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

Private schools operate by contract. I don’t see how the Governor can interfere with that contractual relationship. Talk about government over-reach!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

Private schools operate by contract. I don’t see how the Governor can interfere with that contractual relationship. Talk about government over-reach!

In certain circumstances, state laws and public policy can override private rights of contract. But an EO is not a state law. In terms of whether there is public policy merit to this “opt out” EO, I’m not so sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

It seems to me that the plan is really to turn energize a small and radicalized group of people to hound local school boards about why they are not following the Governor. I think he knows the extent of his legal authorities, so what he’s doing seems more like intentionally divisive politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

Yes, next step is for him to end quarantining of the exposed. I hope he does that.

Isolation of the sick will likely remain. Stay home if you are sick

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

It seems to me that the plan is really to turn energize a small and radicalized group of people to hound local school boards about why they are not following the Governor. I think he knows the extent of his legal authorities, so what he’s doing seems more like intentionally divisive politics.

Yep. Ironic, given that EO#1 was aimed at CRT and “inherently divisive content”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

It seems to me that the plan is really to turn energize a small and radicalized group of people to hound local school boards about why they are not following the Governor. I think he knows the extent of his legal authorities, so what he’s doing seems more like intentionally divisive politics.

This.

The masks themselves don’t matter. He just wants to drive chaos and division.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

It seems to me that the plan is really to turn energize a small and radicalized group of people to hound local school boards about why they are not following the Governor. I think he knows the extent of his legal authorities, so what he’s doing seems more like intentionally divisive politics.

Yep. Ironic, given that EO#1 was aimed at CRT and “inherently divisive content”

They are always projecting. Each accusation is a confession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

Yes, next step is for him to end quarantining of the exposed. I hope he does that.

Isolation of the sick will likely remain. Stay home if you are sick

My kid puked this morning. But he feels fine now. My kid is going to opt-out of staying home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

Yes, next step is for him to end quarantining of the exposed. I hope he does that.

Isolation of the sick will likely remain. Stay home if you are sick

My kid puked this morning. But he feels fine now. My kid is going to opt-out of staying home.

What is your point? You don’t think parents are sending their kid to school with covid now? They are. You can’t stop that. Punishing the heathy is not a good solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elite privates will most certainly add language to their contracts that patents and students must abide by their rules regarding the health and welfare of those on school grounds. Any parent who is a Trumplican or QAnon type can leave the decent privates and go to one of the crap ones, or home school, or suck it up at their designated public. This is actual an awesome opportunity to get those loonies out of the good private schools. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the EO is the law, the school MUST provide an opt out. Some people don’t seem to understand how the law works. Private schools are not above or independent of all laws. I’m not sure what people are missing about that concept. You can put that language in a contract and someone can claim they signed under duress or that it’s unenforceable because it’s not legal.

I think many privates (like ours) are in a panic not knowing what to do. This is a very good time to have an excellent in-house counsel.

By people not understanding do you mean yourselves? EO are not laws. Youngkin can sign a bunch of EO telling private schools what to and everyone will laugh at him.

An EO and revoke a prior EO, which is in part the case here except that this EO goes beyond that.

There is a case that if the Governor is invoking his police public health powers that an EO would have some legal force, such as enforcing a mask mandate or curfew. But it does not work both directions. There is no overriding public safety or health issue that to enforce preventing mask wearing.

It’s all a bit odd, honestly.

Exactly. This whole “parent rights” thing is not the other side of the coin when it comes to public health measures. Parents can’t just opt out.

Otherwise, next we’ll have a Youngkin telling parents they can opt out of quarantines if their kids test positive for COVID.

Yes, next step is for him to end quarantining of the exposed. I hope he does that.

Isolation of the sick will likely remain. Stay home if you are sick

My kid puked this morning. But he feels fine now. My kid is going to opt-out of staying home.

What is your point? You don’t think parents are sending their kid to school with covid now? They are. You can’t stop that. Punishing the heathy is not a good solution.

It means we don’t have to follow any rules we don’t like.