Submitted by John Alessio.
I want to thank those who took the time to read, and comment on, my October 16 letter in The Suburban Times. There were a number of positive comments. But as I predicted, Schafer’s attackers came out in full force. The depth of ignorrance displayed about CRT and matters related to equity would be humorous if it wasn’t so harmful to so many people and our municipal resources. We see multi-million dollar civil rights lawsuits being settled routinely now, including locally.
But one comment did make me smile. It was the reference to my letter as a “diatribe.” This was from a fellow who has written meaningless essay after meaningless essay – several in the last few months — attacking Dr. Schafer and the Clover Park Schools. To add to the humor of that comment, he frantically added five additional separate comments to his existing long list of ….. “diatribes”??. And, yes, I did read his 14 totally made-up uninformed claims about CRT. I’m somewhat embarrassed to say that I have actually read all of his and his comrads attacks, and their made-up arguments over the last few months. That is why I wrote my letter.
Today I want to discuss something that is very serious – David Anderson’s competency. We have been told by Schafer’s attackers that they spent a lot of time finding the right person to run against Dr. Schafer. So, who did they find? Some of the comments following my letter have given us a glimpse of his extremist views on issues like LGBTQ, and race. Like some of his supporters, Anderson has many posts in the Suburban Times, often poorly written and nonsensical – and, yes, he wants to be the SCHOOL BOARD President.
Here is one of Anderson’s striking “contributions.” He read an article about the compulsory work program of Dictator Paul Kagame of Rwanda, which is a public works/service program for everyone in that country. Anderson, however, wants to apply Kagame’s program specifically and only to homeless people here in the United States (Letter: Sweet dreams – the value of work – The Suburban Times (thesubtimes.com)). So, it isn’t really a public service in which everyone participates, but a punitive harassment of the already down and out. Of course, he claims it will be good for them – just as his supporters believe punishment is good for struggling students. I believe the term one of his supporters used in reference to students was “…crack the whip.” I doubt Anderson would think his forced labor program was a good idea if he, himself, were homeless. This is not a passing idea of Anderson’s. He has published at least two other posts dealing with this subject. He has really put a lot of “thought” into this.
Homelessness is a very complicated matter, involving mental problems, hard luck unemployment circumstances, losses of family and loved ones, addictions, affordable housing unavailability, PTSD and more. There are many problems with Mr. Anderson’s forced labor proposal on homelessness, but one that stands out is that a large percentage of homeless people are veterans. In 2009, 40% of the male homeless population were veterans, and many of them long-term servicemen (Microsoft Word – Homeless veterans-09.doc (nationalhomeless.org)). They have already served their country, and many have related disabilities. Mr. Anderson wants to violate their constitutional rights and humiliate them by forcing them to work picking up garbage along the highways and streets. Fortunately, Mr. Anderson is not in charge of fixing homelessness, or anything else for that matter. He has no idea what he is writing about.
Since 2009, veteran homelessness has been dramatically reduced with a special targeted government program that may eventually be applied to all homeless people. Needless to say, forced labor is not part of that program (5 Key Facts About Homeless Veterans – National Alliance to End Homelessness). Mr. Anderson is quick to FORCE homeless people to work, while claiming to be a champion of people’s constitutional rights. He speaks out for landlords’ constitutional rights – why not homeless people? Perhaps it is because homeless people don’t support his candidacy and a landlord does. A school board president is supposed to be a community leader, someone others can look to for sound ideas and problem solving. Is unconstitutional forced labor a sound idea? Is that a realistic solution to the problem of homelessness?
I raise one final issue for today. Has David Anderson told us how he is going to raise the average test scores that he and his supporters pretend to be so concerned about? No, he hasn’t. And that is because he doesn’t have a clue as to why the scores are what they are. Neither do his supporters, including the one currently sitting on the school board. Average test scores tell us nothing about each individual student’s success, and that is what we are concerned about. Where has a student been, where are they now, and what are their chances of success with and without a degree? Comparative average test scores tell us more about demographics, population homogeneity, and resources than they do about the qualifications of teachers or a school board president. This political takeover is not about improving schools. It is about a national movement of white extremists re-consolidating their power. School board races, and many other local races, have become manifestations of that movement. I don’t want to be a part of that and I hope you don’t either. We want challenging elections, but with honest arguments and for the right reasons. And we want the people who run for office to be reasonable and competent.
“and, yes, he wants to be the SCHOOL BOARD President.”
Not true. I am a candidate for the school board, not school board president.
You provided the wrong link to my article “Letter: Sweet dreams – the value of work.” So here is the correct link for your readers:
Letter: Sweet dreams – the value of work – The Suburban Times (thesubtimes.com)
And here is an excerpt from another article I wrote:
“Lakewood’s Mayor Don Anderson, after joining Pierce County Executive Bruce Dammeier’s executive team, travelled to New Mexico to participate as part of a homeless crew in Albuquerque’s nationally recognized program that hires the homeless to pick up litter.
“So enamored with Albuquerque’s ‘trash-to-cash’ success (‘over 6,700 people connected to services they may not have known about previously; 426 day jobs offered; 92 city blocks cleaned with over 41,000 pounds of trash and debris cleared’) Mayor Anderson encouraged the Pierce County Council to implement H.E.L.P. (Homeless Empowerment Labor Program) in its 2018 budget.”
Turns out I made the same mistake. For readers who want to read anything I’ve written regarding homelessness, type “homelessness” in The Suburban Times search box, and in particular for the article “Sweet Dreams, The Value of Work”.
I find it ironic that a highly educated professor, Dr. Alessio, who alleges “ignorrance” in others cannot himself spell the word ignorance!
That sets the tone for the rest of his letter: down hill!
Alessio is contemptuously dismissive of my and others’ letters and responses characterizing them as “meaningless essay”, “made-up uninformed claims” and “made up arguments”. Yet Alessio has failed to address any of the arguments or points made by those very articles and responses. Why? Because he can’t. He doesn’t have the facts in his favor. His pejoratives are not an argument; they are an abject surrender to an argument.
Now on to the issue of grades and success. I take it that Alessio has been a teacher and professor for many years. The questions that begs asking is “Did you give grades to any or all of your students as a measure of success in your class”? If you did then your claim that grades don’t measure success rings hollow. If you didn’t give grades back then, how did you determine student success and your success as a teacher? If indeed grades in your classes were a measure of success why wouldn’t the grades compiled from all other subject classes likewise provide a measure success? You can’t have it both ways.
In determining the success of your students after graduation, did you bother to track them into adult life to determine how successful they became and how your instruction contributed to that success? I doubt it. Granted there may be studies to that effect but then again how do you measure success? Financially, civically, spiritually, emotionally, politically? All very subjective measures. Some of the most “successful” people in this world are miserable. By the way, demographics are made up of individuals who have unique abilities, interests and potential. They cannot be “blended away” in group and identity politics which is exactly what CRT attempts to do.
With a minor revision I do agree with part of your closing statement:
“This political takeover is not about improving schools. It is about a national movement of LEFTIST extremists consolidating their power. School board races, and many other local races, have become manifestations of that movement.”
Just read the news and you’ll get it. The push back is grass roots, irrespective of race and an attempt by parents and others to re-gain control of their children’s education.
With regard to work programs for the homeless, it’s not “forced” if you have the option of not participating. By the way, work is not “humiliating” regardless of what it is. Did you ever serve in the military? I doubt it. I did for 21 years starting out as Private soldier who cleaned a lot of latrines, swept a lot of floors, even painted rocks but none of that was humiliating because everyone else was doing it and it was part of our training: attention to detail which many homeless have not developed as a skill. You ought to try it some time; it might be enlightening.
Mr. Alessio,
Consider it a complement when you get attacked by these folks.
Your expectations that candidates be reasonable and competent are what I want as well.
Thank you for giving me an education on the homeless situation with our veterans. Sadly, I was not aware of these statistics.
And as for your question about how David Anderson will raise test scores? That is yet to be heard. I believe he keeps talking about generic “best practices”….not any specific plan to implement that I have heard articulated. I wonder why?
Mr. Alessio, please cite your source for stating that David Anderson wants to be school board president. I have followed this school board campaign closely from its beginning and have never read or heard such a statement from David Anderson, in public or among supporters. Your unfounded assumption does not invite credibility in your opinions.
You state that Mr. Anderson hasn’t told us how he is going to raise test scores of the Clover Park School District (CPSD), and “Neither do his supporters, including the one currently sitting on the school board.” You raise an important point, Mr. Alessio. Of course, you are referring to School Board Director, Paul Wagemann who announced his support of incumbents David Anderson and Jeff Brown for school board positions in an issue of The Suburban Times which was published October 13 and sent via email to subscribers on October 14. (thesubtimes.com) No one person has all the answers to correcting the dismal academic scores of the CPSD; but research, critical thinking and informed debate among all five board members will produce best results when worked in tandem with the district’s staff and teachers . “Unfortunately”, Paul Wagemann stated in his letter, “my efforts to have open and informed debate of the issues have resulted in me being the minority dissenting vote on many recent issues without prior debate.” If he determined there was not enough information with which to make an informed decision, he would not cast an affirmative vote. He stated he was elected to the position with over 60% of the votes cast and “My assumption after being elected by such a large margin is that citizens want a debate of the issues and my voice, representing them, heard at the school board table.” A pattern has existed of other board members not even seconding his motions for informed discussion; therefore it couldn’t happen. The backbone of the democratic process was shut down. Not only is Paul Wagemann concerned about this, but David Anderson, as well as Jeff Brown, are, too. They see informed debate as the critical step between listening or observing and finally taking action. Solutions come from diverse experience levels and points of view, derived from constituents’ concerns as well as a board member’s ideas. Paul, David and Jeff represent that dynamic point of view for addressing and correcting problems. The current board’s way of doing business hasn’t solved the district’s declining academic scores, which rank in the lower third of Washington State school districts, over the last several years. A different way of doing business with new board members dedicated to that idea offers hope for improvement.
Your accusation that David Anderson is incompetent need not be refuted. Those who know him are aware of his skills, energy, compassion and lifelong commitment to his community. If anyone has been a champion of the marginalized, it is Mr. Anderson, especially for the children of all skin colors of his Tillicum Woodbrook neighborhood.