Tell me more about the School Board election process

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever provides better services with details on how gets my vote.

That's what I'm trying to base my vote on. Unfortunately, very few of the candidates go into much substance about services for students with disabilities. Saundra Davis' website says " I will point out and help rectify when FCPS is failing to walk the walk when it comes to students with disabilities." But that is not substantial at all. Aucoin doesn't talk about it at all and only throws around that parents rights crap.

I tried to give Harry Jackson a chance. I really did. And I thought he put the laughing at the autistic performer behind him. But I watched him in a recent youtube video on a show talk about what he called "ADA accommodations." If you're running for school board you should know the difference between ADA, IDEA, and 504. I'll stick with Melanie who even though she has her problems she has always been insightful when I've talked with her about IEPs.

She voted to keep schools closed for all children while sending her own children to a teaching pod. She gives lip service only to caring for the kids. And, she thinks eating at hibachi restaurants shows her support for the Asian community.

I don't get to vote in Hunter Mill, but I want someone who supports all children.

Stick with the person who denied children with special needs school for a year during the pandemic as the 'equity' candidate AND lost an OCR lawsuit for denying children those services. Makes sense.

I have my problems with her (those aren't them), but at least she knows the difference between the laws protecting students with disabilities. It's a low bar, I know, but Harry Jackson doesn't meet that at all. I'm not happy about my vote for Melanie (and I voted for Paul Thomas in the endorsement btw), but I can't stand to vote for Jackson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever provides better services with details on how gets my vote.

That's what I'm trying to base my vote on. Unfortunately, very few of the candidates go into much substance about services for students with disabilities. Saundra Davis' website says " I will point out and help rectify when FCPS is failing to walk the walk when it comes to students with disabilities." But that is not substantial at all. Aucoin doesn't talk about it at all and only throws around that parents rights crap.

I tried to give Harry Jackson a chance. I really did. And I thought he put the laughing at the autistic performer behind him. But I watched him in a recent youtube video on a show talk about what he called "ADA accommodations." If you're running for school board you should know the difference between ADA, IDEA, and 504. I'll stick with Melanie who even though she has her problems she has always been insightful when I've talked with her about IEPs.

She voted to keep schools closed for all children while sending her own children to a teaching pod. She gives lip service only to caring for the kids. And, she thinks eating at hibachi restaurants shows her support for the Asian community.

I don't get to vote in Hunter Mill, but I want someone who supports all children.

Stick with the person who denied children with special needs school for a year during the pandemic as the 'equity' candidate AND lost an OCR lawsuit for denying children those services. Makes sense.

I have my problems with her (those aren't them), but at least she knows the difference between the laws protecting students with disabilities. It's a low bar, I know, but Harry Jackson doesn't meet that at all. I'm not happy about my vote for Melanie (and I voted for Paul Thomas in the endorsement btw), but I can't stand to vote for Jackson.

It’s so frustrating that the republicans screwed up by endorsing crazies like Jackson. Many of us are on the lookout for moderates of any party. Unfortunately, contrary to Saundra or her surrogates who post constantly on DCUM, Davis is moderate. I still might vote for her, though, because we eyed diversity of opinions on the board and one person so be able to ban books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever provides better services with details on how gets my vote.

That's what I'm trying to base my vote on. Unfortunately, very few of the candidates go into much substance about services for students with disabilities. Saundra Davis' website says " I will point out and help rectify when FCPS is failing to walk the walk when it comes to students with disabilities." But that is not substantial at all. Aucoin doesn't talk about it at all and only throws around that parents rights crap.

I tried to give Harry Jackson a chance. I really did. And I thought he put the laughing at the autistic performer behind him. But I watched him in a recent youtube video on a show talk about what he called "ADA accommodations." If you're running for school board you should know the difference between ADA, IDEA, and 504. I'll stick with Melanie who even though she has her problems she has always been insightful when I've talked with her about IEPs.

She voted to keep schools closed for all children while sending her own children to a teaching pod. She gives lip service only to caring for the kids. And, she thinks eating at hibachi restaurants shows her support for the Asian community.

I don't get to vote in Hunter Mill, but I want someone who supports all children.

Stick with the person who denied children with special needs school for a year during the pandemic as the 'equity' candidate AND lost an OCR lawsuit for denying children those services. Makes sense.

I have my problems with her (those aren't them), but at least she knows the difference between the laws protecting students with disabilities. It's a low bar, I know, but Harry Jackson doesn't meet that at all. I'm not happy about my vote for Melanie (and I voted for Paul Thomas in the endorsement btw), but I can't stand to vote for Jackson.

It’s so frustrating that the republicans screwed up by endorsing crazies like Jackson. Many of us are on the lookout for moderates of any party. Unfortunately, contrary to Saundra or her surrogates who post constantly on DCUM, Davis is NOT moderate. I still might vote for her, though, because we eyed diversity of opinions on the board and one person so be able to ban books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever provides better services with details on how gets my vote.

That's what I'm trying to base my vote on. Unfortunately, very few of the candidates go into much substance about services for students with disabilities. Saundra Davis' website says " I will point out and help rectify when FCPS is failing to walk the walk when it comes to students with disabilities." But that is not substantial at all. Aucoin doesn't talk about it at all and only throws around that parents rights crap.

I tried to give Harry Jackson a chance. I really did. And I thought he put the laughing at the autistic performer behind him. But I watched him in a recent youtube video on a show talk about what he called "ADA accommodations." If you're running for school board you should know the difference between ADA, IDEA, and 504. I'll stick with Melanie who even though she has her problems she has always been insightful when I've talked with her about IEPs.

She voted to keep schools closed for all children while sending her own children to a teaching pod. She gives lip service only to caring for the kids. And, she thinks eating at hibachi restaurants shows her support for the Asian community.

I don't get to vote in Hunter Mill, but I want someone who supports all children.

Stick with the person who denied children with special needs school for a year during the pandemic as the 'equity' candidate AND lost an OCR lawsuit for denying children those services. Makes sense.

I have my problems with her (those aren't them), but at least she knows the difference between the laws protecting students with disabilities. It's a low bar, I know, but Harry Jackson doesn't meet that at all. I'm not happy about my vote for Melanie (and I voted for Paul Thomas in the endorsement btw), but I can't stand to vote for Jackson.

It’s so frustrating that the republicans screwed up by endorsing crazies like Jackson. Many of us are on the lookout for moderates of any party. Unfortunately, contrary to Saundra or her surrogates who post constantly on DCUM, Davis is moderate. I still might vote for her, though, because we eyed diversity of opinions on the board and one person so be able to ban books.

?

[Anonymous]

It’s so frustrating that the republicans screwed up by endorsing crazies like Jackson. Many of us are on the lookout for moderates of any party. Unfortunately, contrary to Saundra or her surrogates who post constantly on DCUM, Davis is moderate. I still might vote for her, though, because we eyed diversity of opinions on the board and one person so be able to ban books.

I don't like all the GOP nominees, but I very much don't like what the current SB has done. I do not see the slate of Dem nominees being any better than what is currently there. Certainly, McElveen is not going to get my vote nor McDaniel.

As for those district nominees, I don't see any difference there with some of them. Lady seems to support what is already happening.

Are there going to be any debates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever provides better services with details on how gets my vote.

That's what I'm trying to base my vote on. Unfortunately, very few of the candidates go into much substance about services for students with disabilities. Saundra Davis' website says " I will point out and help rectify when FCPS is failing to walk the walk when it comes to students with disabilities." But that is not substantial at all. Aucoin doesn't talk about it at all and only throws around that parents rights crap.

I tried to give Harry Jackson a chance. I really did. And I thought he put the laughing at the autistic performer behind him. But I watched him in a recent youtube video on a show talk about what he called "ADA accommodations." If you're running for school board you should know the difference between ADA, IDEA, and 504. I'll stick with Melanie who even though she has her problems she has always been insightful when I've talked with her about IEPs.

Stick with the person who denied children with special needs school for a year during the pandemic as the 'equity' candidate AND lost an OCR lawsuit for denying children those services. Makes sense.

I have my problems with her (those aren't them), but at least she knows the difference between the laws protecting students with disabilities. It's a low bar, I know, but Harry Jackson doesn't meet that at all. I'm not happy about my vote for Melanie (and I voted for Paul Thomas in the endorsement btw), but I can't stand to vote for Jackson.

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”. — Albert Einstein

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But disability shouldn't be a word that we're afraid to say.

So, why did they change it from "disability" to "special needs?"

Sorry, but "disabled" brings a very clear vision of someone who is not capable. I taught many kids with learning issues--but all of them were capable of learning.

A totally new term is needed. Disabled conjures up "handicapped."

There is a vast range of kids who have "special needs." Some need a little assistance and some need constant assistance. I don't have the answer, by the way--but I don't like "disabled."

It was never changed from "disability" to "special needs."

The term "special needs" just evolved as a less offensive version of the r-word to refer to intellectually disabled people. 50 years ago, using the term "special needs" was somewhat revolutionary. But words change meaning and I think given that the vast consensus among all the disability advocacy organizations is not to use the term, we just shouldn't.

I think it's offensive to the disability community if when you are saying how much you support them, you can't even refer to them with the correct terminology. If someone can't even listen and learn about something as simple as terminology, I don't have high hopes for them to actually listen to advocates for students with disabilities. I don't know if this candidate just doesn't know the harm that terminology causes, or whether she is in fact deliberately choosing to use outdated language, but either way, I expect a lot more of school board candidates. And I don't say that from a partisan lens at all, this issue isn't nearly as bad as when KKG used the r-word multiple times and gave a half-hearted apology.

Sorry but I am far less offended by someone referring to my kid receiving services as "special needs" than "disabled"

Disabled seems like a slur, or a conscious limitation of my kid and others like them.

Special needs describes their need for additional services to reach their full potential.

That is the problem! We have stigmatized the word "disabled" so much by not saying it.

No one cares about your semantics dispute. Take it to the special needs board and get their buy in first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But disability shouldn't be a word that we're afraid to say.

So, why did they change it from "disability" to "special needs?"

Sorry, but "disabled" brings a very clear vision of someone who is not capable. I taught many kids with learning issues--but all of them were capable of learning.

A totally new term is needed. Disabled conjures up "handicapped."

There is a vast range of kids who have "special needs." Some need a little assistance and some need constant assistance. I don't have the answer, by the way--but I don't like "disabled."

To me, the term disabled means that you are not able to do things. Is that really what you want for your child?

It was never changed from "disability" to "special needs."

The term "special needs" just evolved as a less offensive version of the r-word to refer to intellectually disabled people. 50 years ago, using the term "special needs" was somewhat revolutionary. But words change meaning and I think given that the vast consensus among all the disability advocacy organizations is not to use the term, we just shouldn't.

I think it's offensive to the disability community if when you are saying how much you support them, you can't even refer to them with the correct terminology. If someone can't even listen and learn about something as simple as terminology, I don't have high hopes for them to actually listen to advocates for students with disabilities. I don't know if this candidate just doesn't know the harm that terminology causes, or whether she is in fact deliberately choosing to use outdated language, but either way, I expect a lot more of school board candidates. And I don't say that from a partisan lens at all, this issue isn't nearly as bad as when KKG used the r-word multiple times and gave a half-hearted apology.

Sorry but I am far less offended by someone referring to my kid receiving services as "special needs" than "disabled"

Disabled seems like a slur, or a conscious limitation of my kid and others like them.

Special needs describes their need for additional services to reach their full potential.

That is the problem! We have stigmatized the word "disabled" so much by not saying it.

No one cares about your semantics dispute. Take it to the special needs board and get their buy in first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem voting against McElveen and McDaniel. The other candidates are all easily better. If you have a Mc at the beginning of your last name, I hope the Fairfax County voters have enough sense to vote you out.

I know the Democrats will retain control of the School Board and that’s fine. What isn’t fine is the current echo chamber and lack of attention to academics, operations, and facilities.

Moon was a voice of reason and I’d welcome his return.

McElveen was silly when he was first elected, yet then acted bored out of his mind the last few years he was in the School Board. Like Frisch, he seems to be running again only because his other political aspirations were frustrated. No thanks.

McDaniel is a complete flake who is channeling every single interest group that he thinks might possibly get him elected. Big no.

If Davis and AuCoin will provide a bit of discipline and a counterpoint to the current board, I’m in.

Of the same thought. Davis and AuCoin are a needed counterpoint while having a reasonable disposition, agenda, and a mind to get FCPS back on track. They are much better than McDaniel and McElveen.

[Anonymous]

When the school board contains all or close to the majority representing only one party, what happens is that then the administrators think they are safe to get away with whatever they want. No checks. Having a school board that changes hands means that checks will also trickle down to the schools. It is easier for teachers, students, and parents to be heard when there isn't just one agenda being addressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When the school board contains all or close to the majority representing only one party, what happens is that then the administrators think they are safe to get away with whatever they want. No checks. Having a school board that changes hands means that checks will also trickle down to the schools. It is easier for teachers, students, and parents to be heard when there isn't just one agenda being addressed.

Say what you want about the Dems but I saw the Republicans hand out at my kids back to school night. Yikes. They’re completely out of touch.

I’ll stick with the Dems this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the school board contains all or close to the majority representing only one party, what happens is that then the administrators think they are safe to get away with whatever they want. No checks. Having a school board that changes hands means that checks will also trickle down to the schools. It is easier for teachers, students, and parents to be heard when there isn't just one agenda being addressed.

Say what you want about the Dems but I saw the Republicans hand out at my kids back to school night. Yikes. They’re completely out of touch.

I’ll stick with the Dems this year.

Worrying about academic achievement and special ed services is "out of touch"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the school board contains all or close to the majority representing only one party, what happens is that then the administrators think they are safe to get away with whatever they want. No checks. Having a school board that changes hands means that checks will also trickle down to the schools. It is easier for teachers, students, and parents to be heard when there isn't just one agenda being addressed.

Say what you want about the Dems but I saw the Republicans hand out at my kids back to school night. Yikes. They’re completely out of touch.

I’ll stick with the Dems this year.

What was in the handout? Please be specific. "Yikes" is not sufficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the school board contains all or close to the majority representing only one party, what happens is that then the administrators think they are safe to get away with whatever they want. No checks. Having a school board that changes hands means that checks will also trickle down to the schools. It is easier for teachers, students, and parents to be heard when there isn't just one agenda being addressed.

Say what you want about the Dems but I saw the Republicans hand out at my kids back to school night. Yikes. They’re completely out of touch.

I’ll stick with the Dems this year.

Worrying about academic achievement and special ed services is "out of touch"?

When Republicans are the party of banning books and banning certain curriculum, they are not the party of "academic achievement." And I'm laughing my a$$ off that you typed that with a straight face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the school board contains all or close to the majority representing only one party, what happens is that then the administrators think they are safe to get away with whatever they want. No checks. Having a school board that changes hands means that checks will also trickle down to the schools. It is easier for teachers, students, and parents to be heard when there isn't just one agenda being addressed.

Say what you want about the Dems but I saw the Republicans hand out at my kids back to school night. Yikes. They’re completely out of touch.

I’ll stick with the Dems this year.

Worrying about academic achievement and special ed services is "out of touch"?

When Republicans are the party of banning books and banning certain curriculum, they are not the party of "academic achievement." And I'm laughing my a$$ off that you typed that with a straight face.

Not either PP:

Dems are the party of combined gender sex education
Dems are the party supporting a graphic kinky novel in the schools. (The books are not "banned." They are still published and can be purchased. However, schools should not be purchasing them. What is the redeeming value?)
Dems are the party of letting biological boys into girls' locker rooms
Dems are the party of letting biological boys compete in girls' sports
Dems are the party of closing schools
Dems are the party of paying "experts" to teach administrators that we have to address "white priviledge." This expert has said that the only solution to discrimination is discrimination. FCPS also spend tens of thousands on his books.
Dems are the party of masking young kids who are just learning to read.