Ignored the Facts, Again

The IJ article Sept. 22 on the Ross Valley School District’s residence verification methods was an example of the news media spreading misinformation rather than reporting facts, as well as ignoring facts relevant to a story.

Although your story was about concerns regarding the wisdom of employing residency verification practices that could have unintended consequences for marginalized families in our community, two anti-Ross Valley Charter parents’ opinions were solicited and their misinformation repeated. No charter school comment was solicited on either.

One parent falsely asserted that RVSD “allocated the correct number of classrooms for in-district kids.” The facts are that a Sonoma County judge has ruled the district did not provide adequate space and ordered RVSD to provide the charter more space.

The other anti-charter parent asserted that Ross Valley Charter had not provided RVSD “residency information for at least 17 of its students” last year. The facts are that RVC provided residency documentation to the district on all its students in October 2017, and I emailed answers to district questions on 17 specific students within 10 days of belatedly receiving their names in early July and again in early September, copying the IJ.

In my emailed response to these questions, I had noted that an overwhelming percentage of the challenged students are economically disadvantaged. This fact was not included in the story despite being central to the story: citizen concerns that the district’s new residency verification processes create “discriminatory outcomes.”

— Conn Hickey, San Anselmo;
treasurer, Ross Valley Charter

15
Leave a Reply

Your name and email are not required to comment.

avatar
11 Comment threads
4 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
0 Comment authors
Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
AF
Guest
AF

Ross Valley has its own microcosm of the chaos that’s going on nationally. Stand compares to Brett Kavanaugh – aggressive liars who turn reality on its head, and RVC compares to Dr. Blasey Ford — quietly holding the truth and believing that people with integrity will hear it

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Good comparison. Stand is also full of anger and fury, similar to Brett Kavanaugh. Don’t be intimidated.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

The charter’s stance on this issue is a tenuous one. It’s another example of why trust is gone. If you want your school to survive with increased enrollment, campaigns such as this need to stop. Do the right thing.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

What “campaign” are you referring to?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

By campaign I am referring to the ICE rhetoric. It’s so off the mark trying to make this an immigration issue. It shows a lack of scruples. Seriously I think the way forward is to extinguish resistance to your school. There would be none if you consistently did the right thing. This community tends toward passivity. It takes a lot to get them riled up.

AF
Guest
AF

This is confusing. The issue is not about ICE. The issue is that RVSD implemented a draconian residency verification process that is harmless if you’re a well financed homeowner or renter, but intimidating if you’re on a thinner edge financially or your housing is less secure. And this impacts all less secure families in the area. An unintended consequence of the desire to punish RVC is discriminatory to families in or out of RVC. And the point of this letter to the editor is that the 17 families in question were confirmed, but the IJ reporter ignored that fact and… Read more »

Frank B.
Guest
Frank B.

Actually, RVSD has been silent on the 17 student issue. They received verification that these students were confirmed to be in-district residents months ago, but then asked for it again. Why? So Stand could take it up and spread the lie online, in the IJ, etc. The IJ reporter should have verified with either RVSD or RVC that this was actually an issue. It’s NOT! By the way, no one from RVC has taken a stance on the residency policy, nor conflated it with ICE. The people questioning all of it are NOT RVC leaders, teachers, or families.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I get the feeling you all have a bit of a disconnect with your leadership. They most certainly made verification an ICE thing. It’s an extremely unconvincing argument and only adds to the list of things the community points to as “wrong” with RVC. You need to get your story impeccably straight and honest. It will only help you in the long run.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Who is “they”? When and how did RVC leadership make the verification an ICE thing? Can you point to an example?

There are other people in the community who are frustrated with RVSD. Some of them have been very vocal about the residency verification. Don’t assume that they are from RVC.

AF
Guest
AF

You confuse people in the community who are critical of Stand and RVSD tactics and feel they’re damaging to the greater community with RVC. They’re completely different.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Interesting – so why are RVC leadership so against this form of verification?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Why is StanDistrict so pro haranguing and disproportionately impacting low income and immigrant families – why are they such outliers in the county?

Harry O
Guest
Harry O

RVC leadership is “so against”?
According to a quote from RVC leadership in the IJ the previous form is what was signed off on. The form has no impact on RVC . RVSD is creating havoc with their own families. The ship is sinking folks . Captain Bagley is throwing his own kids overboard. Can’t blame this one on the charter.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

No one has argued that RVC should not do the same verification that RVSD does to determine who are in-district and who are out-of-district students. What has been argued is that the types of policies and procedures RVSD is employing are problematic and prejudicial. And all the faux progressive hand-wringing about the public commons, railing against other people’s hypocrisy in supporting an alternative public option – just a sham when its apparent that its totally and completely selfish and solely focused on delusions about what they think is an assault on their own kids – hysteria being driven by many… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

“so why are RVC leadership so against this form of verification?”

Please stop assuming that if people speak out against the district that it’s coming from “RVC leadership.” Truly, this is not RVC’s argument–it’s others in the community who oppose it. Check your sources.