San Fran might rename 44 schools

Whew! National crisis averted. Even though I live in NJ and went to school in NY, I only remember who was the father of this country because of the name of one of the schools in San Francisco.

You know this information is publicly available, right?

In the November election 2 incumbents retained their seats and 2 newcomers were elected. No incumbents were removed. The board president, Gabriela Lopez, was not up for re-election. Her seat comes up again in 2022. From what I can tell there are no board elections until then.

So, no, there is no impending election.

But but but that doesn’t fit my preconceived notions about how Them Libs act!

Maybe she got scared by the Recall Newsom movement [/s]

Too bad it took them a month to figure it out.

How often does your school board meet? Ours is twice a month if we are lucky, with one meeting public.

It seems that rather than continuing to moan, those of us opposed to this blanket renaming policy should say “good job, thank you for listening to the public”.

Fair point. Still, IMHO, it would have been better if they hadn’t considered such a policy in the first place.

I graduated from Roseburg High School. Go Indians! The school board is currently voting whether or not to change the mascot. I guess I’m ok with that, as long as the new mascot is non-binary.

Meh, IMHO it wasn’t a big deal that they initially considered it and it’s not a big deal now that they’ve reconsidered it. But maybe at least this resolution will now enable all the outraged conservatives to redirect their attention to the comparatively minor problem of tens of millions of Americans believing unsupported conspiracy theories about “stolen elections”?

Tens of millions of people believe snow burns because of Bill Gates, or whatever. Are we doomed as a species?

  1. Cite for your “tens of millions” figure, if any?

  2. Is a major political party along with its media propaganda industry deliberately promoting blatantly false claims about “burning snow” in order to encourage widespread violence and distrust against the legally elected government?

The attempts of US conservatives to “bothsides” their party’s current commitment to massive anti-democracy lying propaganda initiatives, by trying to pretend that it’s no bigger a deal than viral YouTube urban legends about snow or a school board’s efforts to change the names of a few local schools, are not fooling anybody but themselves.

  1. OK maybe not “tens of millions” just yet. Give it a little more time.
  1. Not really wanting to get into politics here…
    Fake Snow Conspiracy Theory: Truth About Burning Snowball Videos

I’m not surprised, given that your own cite strongly indicates that it’s the climate-change-denying right-wing loonies who are primarily falling for this bullshit about Bill Gates somehow being responsible for flammable fake snow:

Yes, by all means, let’s openly contradict all false information—about flammable “fake snow”, about anthropogenic climate change being a hoax, about the specific deeds of some historical individuals after whom some SF elementary schools are named, and about lying con artists’ allegations of “stolen elections”. But let’s not kid ourselves that all such instances of false information are equally important or equally pernicious.

I agree. I didn’t mean to imply that renaming schools in SF is as bad as people believing snow can burn, or that tens of millions of people believe in election fraud. I meant no disrespect.

Doesn’t the School Board have more important things to do, such as getting kids back in school safely? The kids have pretty much lost an entire year of education at this point. THAT’s the pernicious thing.

Yes. That’s the reason the school board president gave. It’s already been quoted in this thread. What more are you looking for?

Gabriela Lopez, newly elected as president of the school board, said in a statement Sunday that school officials must focus on reopening schools amid the coronavirus pandemic.

“Reopening will be our only focus until our children and young people are back in school,” Lopez wrote. She canceled further hearings by a renaming committee.

Lopez called the school renaming issue “one of many distracting debates,” noting the process began before anyone anticipated a pandemic shutting down in-person schooling.

“I acknowledge and take responsibility that mistakes were made in the renaming process,” Lopez wrote.

When the renaming project reopens, district leaders will seek a “more deliberative” process involving historians along with parents and educators, Lopez wrote.

Yeah I forgot I was in Politics and Elections…

Why did it take a new School Board President to figure out the obvious? Were the old Board President (and members) that seriously dysfunctional?

It’s not good enough for you that the school board president’s priorities align with yours 100%? She needs to go back in time and convince previous school board presidents to agree with you?

I think you’re asking a bit much of her.

I understand the frustration, but I think you are overreaching here.

My understanding of the timeline is:

a) Pre-COVID some parents and educators brought up that some of the school names were problematic to students of color
b) A parent/educator committee was established. Sadly lacking were any historians.
c) Said committee defined criteria that were to be used to identify names to be considered for changing. IMO, these criteria were overly broad (as we will see below)
d) Criteria were applied to SF school names, creating the list of 44 schools to be renamed (including Abraham Lincoln, etc). The fact that this list was so long, and so misguided, was a direct result of ©, which in my opinion was a direct result of (b).
e) Somewhere around here the story hits the news. The SF Chronicle story linked by the OP was from October. Also around here board elections happen in early November. No board remembers were replaced, but like most boards after the election happens they internally elect a new board president.
e) The full board voted to approve the list the committee came up with and directed a study of possible replacement names. This happens on January 27, which may have been the first meeting of the new board.
f) Various responses from the community, including at least one allegation of historical inaccuracy (“Alamo”) and one accusation of violating open meetings laws, cause the board president to press pause and refocus on school opening and come at the school names thing at another date, if at all.

In the realm of school bureaucracy and school board idiocy, this is sort of the model of the best way it can go, IMO.

Ok, this is not a hill I’m going to die on, it’s obviously not worth it. However, I reserve the right to opine that some people in SF were being terribly silly. :man_shrugging: