Two things there were several people commenting on the thread and where I left their comments I deleted everyone but my and Fischer’s icons and names. Even though it was a public thread I felt that was the right thing to do.
Next, at one point, Fischer, said, as long as I was trying to be a journalist, and I wish I would have zinged back, well you have been pretending to represent people for years so you obviously know something about pretending but I didn’t. Like Costanza’s shrimp comeback I didn’t think about it until much later.
I thought however that would give me the opportunity to remind people I am not a journalist. Now sometimes, actually quite a few times the blog has broken news and I do cover a lot of education news that the local media for whatever reason refuses to do.
That being said, this is a commentary and opinion blog and where I try and source as much as I can, I would recommend you verify everything for yourselves. It does me no good to get stuff wrong and I can say I have never once lied but a fair bit is just my opinion on subjects.
Okay here is the thread.
isn’t actually what’s required by the bill, but it’s one of the higher cost
options. That was their choice.
a “higher cost” option? What exactly SHOULD we do when asked to arm
non-law-enforcement personnel? If the legislature isn’t going to pay for the
safest manner of protecting our children, it shouldn’t make the
mandate. Do we care if they can run? How accurate their target shooting
is? Whether they’re psychologically fit? Policing is a job for police. You and
your buds in the FL legislature have allowed the NRA, and some extreme primary
voters, to erode our foundational ideas about civilization.
voted against that bill, but my point was that there is not a mandate to
actually do what they are doing. Have you read the bill? I’m not sure how many
of them have based on their comments.
wonder if Fischer has read the budget. I am sure voters will remember he snuck
in 2 million for his donor’s charter school while at the same time voting to
kneecap public education.
yes, I’d love more information about what the $2M for KIPP was for, specifically,
as I’ve been unable to find it. Can you please speak to what the money is
for, Jason Fischer? THAT AMOUNT could pay for the deficit for the
safety program more than three times over, given the $600k deficit I cited in
my article on this thread. As for the bill, I am posting it below. The only
thing worse than paying untrained, unscreened, un-deputized personnel to
“protect” our children with guns, would be recruiting volunteers for
the job, as part of the bill permits.
that’s the link but did you read it?
instance, they could assign Officer Julie to elementary school A, assign her to
school B, and assign her to school C. Then they could assign Officer Tad to
School D, assign him to School E, and assign him to School F. And so on. That
strategy meets the requirement of the law.
through, it looks like it covers a lot of ground for law enforcement. It
establishes a grant for school safety, says sheriffs can create programs,
mentions volunteers. Right now I’m more interested in the budget item that
gives KIPP an extra $2M gift, without explanation (that I can find) in the
budget. Can you please tell me what the $2M was for, Jason?
what? They already do it that in Duval.
get distracted by the trolls. It would be easier for other people to follow if
we stick to your OP.
I have read every page. The guardian language does address your questions about
psychological evacuations and so forth. It’s voluntary program for the School
Board and it’s voluntary for the Sheriff. That program is not a mandate.
Officer Tad, Julie, or any self-respecting responsible adult, is highly
unlikely to volunteer for such a position, and less likely to do it for $12.50
per hour. If the idea is to have someone on hand for immediate “protection,”
then why would School A bother to call “Officer Julie” (who is a
non-law-enforcement person) away from her rounds at School C when the police
might arrive even faster? If we want to make schools safer, we need to fund
police officers to do the job. We need to put a substation in every high school
feeder pattern, and make the schools part of the patrol process, instead of/in
addition to untrained personnel patrolling our elementary schools.
basically, the law is saying, “We think it’s a good idea to do this, and
we’ll give you just enough money to get you started if you choose to do it, but
don’t expect us to appropriate the actual money it would take to do things
appropriately.” MY POINT is that instituting this bill responsibly takes
money that is not coming from Tallahassee.
which is insufficient to do the job responsibly.
already assigns an SRO to every school, in elementary schools they just float
between locations. So that law did not require them to do what they are doing.
THEY’RE DOING (the board) is trying to take the idea, take the grant money, and
implement a RESPONSIBLE program according to the grant’s mandates.
this particular section about officers/armed security, every school DCPS
already has an assigned SRO so they already meet the letter of the law. No
mandate to hire more police / guards unless they wanted to.
they’re trying to increase their force. But the money is insufficient. If I
give my child $25 to go get ingredients for a meal to feed my family, but I
know the ingredients are really going to run $40 if we’re all going to be fed,
then yes, he can “choose” to (a) pull money from his own pocket, (b)
tell everyone they’re eating PB&J and he’s not going to the store, or (c)
spend the $25 but not buy what it takes to make the meal I requested in a
manner that feeds everyone satisfactorily.
maybe he doesn’t have an answer about the two million. Also what Duval does now
isn’t for safety, which i believe is what the bill mandates. Think about this,
if something happened at one of officer Julie’s schools while she was at
another, Fischer would be yelling the loudest about how public schools weren’t
keeping our children safe. He wants to have his cake and not pay for it and so
he can send that money to his donor’s pet school.
according to the press release it says assign one or more safe school officer
at each school facility. It doesn’t say one could be at three schools.
job Jason Fischer. We hired to do that and when we need answers,
again it’s your job to answer us. Don’t deflect by asking if we read the whole
Bill. I was on the Hill in DC for years. Aides read the whole Bill and a
Senator goes over it. They do read it if they are responsible.
summary says the same thing. One or more at each facility. Looks like fischer
is the one who needs to read the bill.
I appreciate your time today and will add an addendum to my post in order to be
as clear as possible. I would appreciate even more if we could tell the
taxpayers why KIPP is receiving its $2M gift from the state.
NOT optional, that will require extra work and /or personnel.
some folks I do read bills before voting on them. In fact going back to my days
on the school board they had a process of voting to approve contracts before
finalizing contracts and I refused to vote for something I wasn’t allowed to
read. That was one of the first changes they made when I got there. Also, I
didn’t deflect by asking if people discussing the bill had actually read the
bill. It seems to be common that people have issues with bills that they’ve
never even read and as data based person I like to read something before I make
definitive statements on it. More to the point about deflecting, I answered
questions on it
always enjoy talking to you about issues, even when we disagree. You’re an
advocate who is articulate, respectful, and you clearly care…basically
everything Guerreri isn’t. The world could use more people like you and John Louis Meeks
know when i have a disagreement with someone, i don’t say go look it up. I post
the information. Both the press release and summary say one or more safety
officer at each facility. Not that they can be divided up but seriously that’s
about the same as doing nothing. If Fischer is sure that is what the bill says
why doesn’t he site it.
jason i just don’t have the patience for liars, self promoters and people who
would hurt children to enrich themselves. I will own that while pointing out
once again you have given no answer to the kipp expenditure.
is optional; I stand by my position that if we’re going to recommend doing
something optional, we pay for the most responsible way to choose that option.
However, there are 50 provisions in the bill that are not optional, i.e.,
they begin with the word, “requiring,” and many of them pertain to
individual schools and school districts, i.e., the bill does mandate increased
duties related to school safety, regardless of whether the districts take the
grant funds or not. There is a LOT to unpack in this bill. Thank you for making
me pour over it more diligently, Jason.
last thing the summary which i have open in front of me says, requires, not
hey, if you feel like it.
referring to the article you wrote about law and I asked if you read the bill,
and you dodged & dodged and cited a letter by someone who didn’t write or
vote on the bill. If you’re gonna pretend to be a journalist you shouldn’t get
credit you shouldn’t
get credit for me doing your homework for you.
Lastly, and I’m not posting any further on this thread, it appears to be the
governors preference that at least one SRO is physically at the facility the
entire time and frankly that was my position when I was on the school board.
It’s expensive but would be better for protection. However, the language was
specifically crafted the way that it is so that it wouldn’t too expensive and
not be an“unfunded mandate.”
piece wasn’t about the law, my piece was about not funding education. You can
rest assured i have read the bill now. And about that 2 million for kipp.
you’re saying is the legislature wanted to give some money toward the cause.
What we’re saying is to do it right, it’s going to take more. We both have legitimate
positions. We disagree on what might have been the better course.