Instead of explaining why or if they disagree with my amendments to limit or postpone mandatory masking of Anchorage School District students, two former School Board members said my motions were procedurally inappropriate. But no such objections were made by actual board members the night of the meeting, and no other opportunity to object to mandatory masking will be available prior to school starting this fall. If no formal objection to the superintendent’s plan was allowed to be raised at that meeting and no vote allowed, how would that have been fair to those parents opposing mandatory masking? In fact, when one member asked if we would be amending the policy, even the superintendent stated: “The board said come up with a plan and certainly the board can make a policy or recommendation to change anything.”
Over the past four years, I voted differently than former Anchorage School Board members Starr Marsett and Alisha Hilde on many key issues. They opposed playing the national anthem at least once a month in schools. They supported adopting yet another failed common core math curriculum. They voted for the last teacher union contract, which has been terrible for teacher accountability and used money that could have reduced class sizes. They voted to give the superintendent a raise, even though ASD educational outcomes have not improved.
Multiple times they tried to cut off my free speech as a board member in manners I felt were inappropriate. I campaigned for opponents to them in elections because in my opinion, they were not supporting what is best for the students and families of the school district. But I never made false accusations against them, as they did in attacking me personally in their recent opinion column. I focused on their voting records and public policy differences.
Multiple news media stories stated the superintendent’s plan to mandate masks would be before the school board last Tuesday. Almost 100 people testified that night, and about 80 did so about the superintendent’s plan. While a formal vote was not listed on the agenda, the plan was, as the main part of the Superintendent’s Report, which was on the agenda. No other school board meeting is scheduled prior to school starting on Aug. 17, so there was no other opportunity for any board member to disagree with the masking mandate before school starts.
As I stated in my opinion column, I continue to hope the superintendent and my fellow board members will reconsider and actively seek alternatives to mandatory masking of all students.
The bottom line is, if I had not offered the amendments I did, the public would not have a public record of who on the school board supports mandatory masking and who does not. Is that what Ms. Marsett and Ms. Hilde wanted?
— Dave Donley
Anchorage
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.