Chap Petersen mask letter from 2/8 to FCPS

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:“Also, state law requires districts comply with CDC guidance to the maximum extent practicable. CDC still recommends universal masks in schools. Why does he want schools to break the law?”

No one has a response to this?



He wrote an op-ed back in August when Northam's VDH put out the school mask mandate saying SB 1303 didn't require masking. WaPo refused to publish it, but that's been his stance all year. He, in his lawyerly opinion I guess, thinks SB 1303 is not a mask mandate. The Supreme Court of Virginia agreed yesterday in the decision throwing out the Chesapeake parent lawsuit (but didn't say the EO Youngkin put out was legal either). The judge clearly said school boards can forgo recommended CDC strategies.

By allowing school boards to follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommended COVID-19 mitigation strategies “to the maximum extent practicable,” SB 1303 necessarily gives the boards a degree of discretion to modify or even forgo those strategies as they deem appropriate for their individual circumstances.

(https://www.oag.state.va.us/files/MIYARES2022/ORD02-07-2022Castillo,M.pdf)

Chap's also saying he'll get the law changed if he has to, and as the Joe Manchin of Virginia he probably can do that. The General Assembly can overrule school boards - the judge in Arlington was pretty clear about that.

So - no law breaking. Law making to make is so school boards cannot do mask mandates if required.


Thanks for this response! Since masks are easily practicable and way easier than things like distancing, it’s hard to understand that masks aren’t required by SB1303 as long as the CDC continues to recommend universal masking in schools.

Yes, I agree that the GA can change the law but it seems this is what Chap should do — his job — instead of sending insulting and political letters out to a superintendent.

Also I have a little question about whether the GA can even delve into this level of managing schools given the state constitution. I don’t think anyone challenged SB1303 because all the districts wanted to go in person anyway.
Anonymous
This push to get kids injected with this brand new concoction with no long term safety record for something that doesn’t threaten them is beyond strange. I know lots of our news programs are “brought to you by Pfizer” but it’s shocking how many people think this is a good idea.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am a constituent and this is outrageous. He has no right to give covid to my unvaccinated 2 year old, which is what will certainly happen if my elementary schooler is around unmasked children. I will actively support any primary challenger he faces. Masks protect people and are just not a big deal!


Hey idiot - your kids could wear masks if you want them to. You could also home school your kids. Stop trying to keep our kids in face cages when kids are the least likely to contract and spread Covid. You are spewing typical wokie Dem propaganda. A lingering symptom of TDS.


You could also homeschool your kids if you don’t want to follow public health regulations.


ids are NOT the least likely to catch and spread covid. They are the least likely to die from it.
Anonymous
I really don't see why the Forever Maskers aren't content with just their own children wearing masks. The science shows that people wearing medical quality masks are well-protected from Covid. Other kids and teachers not wearing masks doesn't alter the effectiveness of your own child's mask.

So what's the issue?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I really don't see why the Forever Maskers aren't content with just their own children wearing masks. The science shows that people wearing medical quality masks are well-protected from Covid. Other kids and teachers not wearing masks doesn't alter the effectiveness of your own child's mask.

So what's the issue?


They want kids to wear masks and they don't want their kids to see other kids' faces and want to unmask also.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:“Also, state law requires districts comply with CDC guidance to the maximum extent practicable. CDC still recommends universal masks in schools. Why does he want schools to break the law?”

No one has a response to this?



He wrote an op-ed back in August when Northam's VDH put out the school mask mandate saying SB 1303 didn't require masking. WaPo refused to publish it, but that's been his stance all year. He, in his lawyerly opinion I guess, thinks SB 1303 is not a mask mandate. The Supreme Court of Virginia agreed yesterday in the decision throwing out the Chesapeake parent lawsuit (but didn't say the EO Youngkin put out was legal either). The judge clearly said school boards can forgo recommended CDC strategies.

By allowing school boards to follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommended COVID-19 mitigation strategies “to the maximum extent practicable,” SB 1303 necessarily gives the boards a degree of discretion to modify or even forgo those strategies as they deem appropriate for their individual circumstances.

(https://www.oag.state.va.us/files/MIYARES2022/ORD02-07-2022Castillo,M.pdf)

Chap's also saying he'll get the law changed if he has to, and as the Joe Manchin of Virginia he probably can do that. The General Assembly can overrule school boards - the judge in Arlington was pretty clear about that.

So - no law breaking. Law making to make is so school boards cannot do mask mandates if required.


Thanks for this response! Since masks are easily practicable and way easier than things like distancing, it’s hard to understand that masks aren’t required by SB1303 as long as the CDC continues to recommend universal masking in schools.

Yes, I agree that the GA can change the law but it seems this is what Chap should do — his job — instead of sending insulting and political letters out to a superintendent.

Also I have a little question about whether the GA can even delve into this level of managing schools given the state constitution. I don’t think anyone challenged SB1303 because all the districts wanted to go in person anyway.


Based on what part of the constitution? Because the judge in Arlington said that the General Assembly makes the laws that control the school boards. See the temporary restraining order against the EO issued by the Arlington Judge here: https://twitter.com/KarlFrischFCPS/status/1489698865079066624/photo/1
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I am a constituent and this is outrageous. He has no right to give covid to my unvaccinated 2 year old, which is what will certainly happen if my elementary schooler is around unmasked children. I will actively support any primary challenger he faces. Masks protect people and are just not a big deal!


Are you saying that your elementary schooler has never been around an unmasked child this whole time? Somehow I doubt that he/she is masked ALL THE TIME. If you had been having unmasked playdates, dining indoors with unmasked people (with or without your kids) you are a hypocrite, because your child is exposed anyway. Now you want this little power trip over other kids to be obliged to protect you when you hadn't lived in a bunker this entire time either.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am a constituent and this is outrageous. He has no right to give covid to my unvaccinated 2 year old, which is what will certainly happen if my elementary schooler is around unmasked children. I will actively support any primary challenger he faces. Masks protect people and are just not a big deal!


Vax and mask your kids if you want to. No one is trying to stop you.


Unfortunately, I cannot vaccinate my two year old. That is the issue. Until everyone who wants a vaccine can have one, we must wear masks. Once there is a vaccine for those under 5, we may be able to reevaluate.


No one agrees with you. There are some kids that will never be able to get vaccinated due to other health issues. Should we stay masked forever then?


So everyone has to where a mask until your two year old can get a vaccine? Meanwhile, Sweden just announced they won't recommend that vaccine even for kids age 5-11 because the benefits don't outweigh the risks.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/sweden-decides-against-recommending-covid-vaccines-kids-aged-5-12-2022-01-27/

Turn off MSNBC and go for a walk.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am a constituent and this is outrageous. He has no right to give covid to my unvaccinated 2 year old, which is what will certainly happen if my elementary schooler is around unmasked children. I will actively support any primary challenger he faces. Masks protect people and are just not a big deal!


Hey idiot - your kids could wear masks if you want them to. You could also home school your kids. Stop trying to keep our kids in face cages when kids are the least likely to contract and spread Covid. You are spewing typical wokie Dem propaganda. A lingering symptom of TDS.


You could also homeschool your kids if you don’t want to follow public health regulations.


ids are NOT the least likely to catch and spread covid. They are the least likely to die from it.


Schools might be different than households, but a study in Spain specifically in school where masking didn't begin until age 6 (but the study started at age 3) showed a linear gradient of likelihood of spread by age. Little kids spread the least. So in school, at least, kids ARE the least likely to spread.

Anonymous
Stop with all political phrasing and capitalization like “Forced Masking” and “Forever Maskers.” It’s such political BS and is tearing apart our community. No one wants to mask forever. Some people want science-based end to masking instead of “parent’s rights” political strategy. We also want schools to stay in person and not close due to staffing shortages if there is another highly contagious variant.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am a constituent and this is outrageous. He has no right to give covid to my unvaccinated 2 year old, which is what will certainly happen if my elementary schooler is around unmasked children. I will actively support any primary challenger he faces. Masks protect people and are just not a big deal!


Are you saying that your elementary schooler has never been around an unmasked child this whole time? Somehow I doubt that he/she is masked ALL THE TIME. If you had been having unmasked playdates, dining indoors with unmasked people (with or without your kids) you are a hypocrite, because your child is exposed anyway. Now you want this little power trip over other kids to be obliged to protect you when you hadn't lived in a bunker this entire time either.


Nope, no unmasked indoor playdates, no indoor dining for anyone in the family. We are doing everything we can to be sure that no one in the family gets covid prior to getting vaccinated. We don't want to end up with some unknown awful complication many years hence.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:This push to get kids injected with this brand new concoction with no long term safety record for something that doesn’t threaten them is beyond strange. I know lots of our news programs are “brought to you by Pfizer” but it’s shocking how many people think this is a good idea.


I don't understand this child vaccine pressure either, especially given that in many other countries kids aren't even eligible. I guess they are doing different "science" there since they are so slow to approve childhood shots.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:“Also, state law requires districts comply with CDC guidance to the maximum extent practicable. CDC still recommends universal masks in schools. Why does he want schools to break the law?”

No one has a response to this?



He addressed that very clearly- "In the coming days, I will ask the Governor to either send down special legislation or amend existing legislation so as to end the Forced Masking of Children."
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Stop with all political phrasing and capitalization like “Forced Masking” and “Forever Maskers.” It’s such political BS and is tearing apart our community. No one wants to mask forever. Some people want science-based end to masking instead of “parent’s rights” political strategy. We also want schools to stay in person and not close due to staffing shortages if there is another highly contagious variant.


OK, but what if the science shows that school mask mandates on kids don't slow the spread? Even one of the CDC's own studies showed that while teacher masking (pre-vaccine-availability) had an impact on Covid spread in schools, student masking didn't.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I am a constituent and this is outrageous. He has no right to give covid to my unvaccinated 2 year old, which is what will certainly happen if my elementary schooler is around unmasked children. I will actively support any primary challenger he faces. Masks protect people and are just not a big deal!


Are you saying that your elementary schooler has never been around an unmasked child this whole time? Somehow I doubt that he/she is masked ALL THE TIME. If you had been having unmasked playdates, dining indoors with unmasked people (with or without your kids) you are a hypocrite, because your child is exposed anyway. Now you want this little power trip over other kids to be obliged to protect you when you hadn't lived in a bunker this entire time either.


Nope, no unmasked indoor playdates, no indoor dining for anyone in the family. We are doing everything we can to be sure that no one in the family gets covid prior to getting vaccinated. We don't want to end up with some unknown awful complication many years hence.


PP, not to scare you, but normal childhood respiratory illnesses also sometimes have unknown impacts on major bodily systems. It's a risk we all always live with.
Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
Go to: