AEM is not happy about SB1303

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Filters filters recess outdoors, nothing else, ignore vaccines and logic , aegghh filters filters filters aegegggrhfjdnfnfbfnncnnnjdjv

You might want to work on your reading comprehension. Vaccines are part of the message and are ALREADY being rolled out.

We still have issues with ventilation. Once those are resolved no need to push the issue further. Get it?

She'll keep pressing for filters don't pay attention that she as an advocate for special needs according to her board position, has not pressed for advocating special needs support and lawsuits against the crime of forcing special needs students to be at home virtually. Yes it is a crime.

Wow - you really are slow. If you make the schools safe to reopen then more kids can go back - including SN.

+ 1000

whoever is posting this criticism doesn't have a very good idea of the needs of special needs kids. probably one of the open uppers trying to use special needs kids to fit their open up agenda.

ha ha ha yes what do they expect - that everyone should scream and shout, and file a lawsuit, like they did?

whatever happened to that APE lawsuit anyways? did that ever even get off the ground? or did the guy just take all that money on his go fund me for nothing?

[Anonymous]

the APE crowd is too stupid to thank the safety folks for getting what schools need to open.

[Anonymous]

My kid has special needs and his doctor looked at APS plans and case levels and said heck no to going back now.

Some of us don't want our kids to get Covid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the APE crowd is too stupid to thank the safety folks for getting what schools need to open.

Lol. I’m in both groups. The APE group is way more tolerant and reasonable. Y’all just love to malign them so you can keep thinking your fighting a good fight. This pissing contest is dumb. SR is way more obsessed with APE than the other way around. I haven’t always agreed with APE and dislike the vocal trumper in the group. But their Facebook group is what AEM should be, much more civility and community. I now look their to figure out what’s going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the APE crowd is too stupid to thank the safety folks for getting what schools need to open.

Lol. I’m in both groups. The APE group is way more tolerant and reasonable. Y’all just love to malign them so you can keep thinking your fighting a good fight. This pissing contest is dumb. SR is way more obsessed with APE than the other way around. I haven’t always agreed with APE and dislike the vocal trumper in the group. But their Facebook group is what AEM should be, much more civility and community. I now look their to figure out what’s going on.

Hi APE. We see right through you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS is going to have a DL option next year. I suspect it will be an all-county virtual program because there won’t be enough demand at each local school. It will also prob be an elect in and can only move to in-person if there is available space. As so many of the AEM-ers love to say: if you don’t like it, go private or elsewhere. APS is a public school and the brick and mortar neighborhood schools need to focus on in-person instruction.

How will this work for those students at option schools? Would students with medical issues have to give up their spots at HB, immersion, etc. just because they’re sick? That doesn’t seem right. I

no this isn't right at all and very well could lead to a lawsuit.

Clearly the open uppers don't care about high risk kids but then they never ever did.

Eh, maybe, but I just don't see how they can staff a school-based DL option next year. I think its a non-starter.

Isn’t it exactly this concern that is making “AEM” so unhappy with SB 1303? Without an express requirement that schools offer a DL option, schools may not. It doesn’t seem like an unreasonable concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS is going to have a DL option next year. I suspect it will be an all-county virtual program because there won’t be enough demand at each local school. It will also prob be an elect in and can only move to in-person if there is available space. As so many of the AEM-ers love to say: if you don’t like it, go private or elsewhere. APS is a public school and the brick and mortar neighborhood schools need to focus on in-person instruction.

How will this work for those students at option schools? Would students with medical issues have to give up their spots at HB, immersion, etc. just because they’re sick? That doesn’t seem right. I

no this isn't right at all and very well could lead to a lawsuit.

Clearly the open uppers don't care about high risk kids but then they never ever did.

Eh, maybe, but I just don't see how they can staff a school-based DL option next year. I think its a non-starter.

Isn’t it exactly this concern that is making “AEM” so unhappy with SB 1303? Without an express requirement that schools offer a DL option, schools may not. It doesn’t seem like an unreasonable concern.

If there are enough families interested in DL APS will do it. The problem is that there are school districts where very few kids will stay DL. You cannot force school districts to devote resources to an all DL program when the state already has one! Don’t fret, APS will have one unless literally like only 20 kids stay virtual. There are kids every year who have to switch to VV for medical reasons.

[Anonymous]

APS has been wanting to start a virtual program for a while now to get out of building another high school. There’s no way they pass on the opportunity to get it started without community resistance this fall.

[Anonymous]

From crazy filterb lady's posts, you would think she works for 3m filterette sales division, not anything to do with special needs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From crazy filterb lady's posts, you would think she works for 3m filterette sales division, not anything to do with special needs

someone on here is clearly obsessed. but you call her crazy?

[Anonymous]

What do people have against air filters????

They filter out Covid from the air. Why would anyone oppose this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do people have against air filters????

They filter out Covid from the air. Why would anyone oppose this?

Because they are ignorant a-holes with nothing better to do.

[Anonymous]

probably the same ones who complaint about masks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I care because I'm fearful they will continue to battle, and we will not have 5 days in-person in the fall.

My kids have been in person 5 days since June and after being home March - June, it was super scary to send them out in the world again, with adults I don’t know well. It’s been fine - 1 exposure and quarantine for 2 kids over 8 months.
I think we just need to rip the bandaid off and prove it can be done safely so that we have a chance at 5 days in the fall. If we don’t to hybrid now, then it will be hybrid in the fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should have a tracker how many times a day that lady posts about air filters and outdoor lunch. It's as if that will stop covid and solve all the problems.

I don’t disagree with her efforts, but the amount she posts is comical. She post s so much that we now don’t even notice eyesight/screen time/school in the woods lady.

I guess the graphic design business is really slow these days.