If you can stomach it, go listen to the failed liars in the legacy media in the tweet below. Then watch Merlin deal with a Queen whose time has come and GONE.
You are the media now.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 9, 2024
They are the past. https://t.co/eFxN6ou9Pq
By Gretchen Garrity
The Springfield School Board, in a 4-3 vote on Tuesday night, voted against publicly supporting a bill that aims to bring more local control to school districts.
You read that right.
The News-Leader's Claudette Riley does a nice job outlining the issue here, although she should have referred to Dr. Mary Byrne by her professional credentials. Dr. Byrne, who is referenced in the article has nearly 40 years experience as an educator from K-12 and post-secondary education. She deserves to be referred to properly.
Senate Bill 814 is designed to give local school districts more control over testing, sharing of testing results, and accrediting agencies. The full bill is here.
According to the News-Leader, "...the state board will not accredit the districts and will only be allowed to use test results to satisfy the federal law that mandates testing in certain grades and subject areas on an annual basis." Sounds reasonable.
 |
| Sen. Jill Carter |
While Springfield school board members acknowledge that the system is broken, the status quo was preserved as the board declined to show support for SB 814 or invite its sponsor Sen. Jill Carter, and educator Dr. Mary Byrne to speak on its behalf.
 |
| Dr. Mary Byrne |
Board member Dr. Maryam Muhammadkhani's move to have the bill publicly supported by the school board ultimately highlighted the status quo positions of the four members who voted against it: board member and current candidate Danielle Kincaid, board member and current candidate Scott Crise, and board members Judy Brunner and Shurita Thomas-Tate.
Both Kincaid and Crise have been endorsed by the self-described "non-partisan" political action committee United Springfield. Ironically, it was Muhammadkhani who noticed the partisan manner of the "non-partisan" candidates/board members as they refused to meet with Carter and Byrne. As quoted in the News-Leader, she said, "I feel that we came together tonight, not in good faith, because if we wanted to come together and really give this a chance, we would have agreed to hear from the senator, let her make a case for her bill."
Kincaid paid lip service to bipartisanship, but in the end she felt it more important to let the hired school lobbyist provide direction. "I don't support or not support this bill," she was quoted as saying.
Crise likewise noted, "Things could be added to [the bill] we don't agree with so let's just let our lobbyist do their job and support it through the platform rather than specifically support this bill."
The outcome is that the Springfield Board of Education declined to hear from the bill's sponsor and a seasoned educator about returning some local control to their school district. Instead, they decided to rely on a hired hand to do their thinking for them.
Status quo candidates.
Nick Reed weighs in on how the Left coerces speech compliance, which leads to much more compliance in other areas. The Springfield School District and the News-Leader are rolling out the narrative/plan. See here. Can't unsee it. Listen to Nick:
By Gretchen Garrity
Setting the narrative is important in politics. We can see that in the local Springfield Board of Education race that is gearing up for election day on April 2, 2024.
Recent News-Leader articles show how a narrative is built and sold to the public. Eight people are now in the race for 2024. First, let's look at a pretty straightforward article from Oct. 24, that discusses which candidates will be running and who on the board will be running for re-election.
Not only does the article mention two previous candidates who will be running again, Landon McCarter, and Dr. Chad Rollins, but makes sure that their vote totals are mentioned. Other previous candidates who were contacted did not get the same detail, including a former incumbent who was defeated in his 2022 reelection bid. Nor are the vote totals for the winners given, which might show a closer race than many would suspect.
Perhaps it's because some of these candidates have not made a decision, or have decided against running. At any rate, there seems to be a subtle nudge there with McCarter and Rollins, both of whom seem to be excellent candidates.
Six days later on Oct. 30, is an article introducing a new PAC called "United Springfield." Watch how the narrative is building. The article starts off:
"Prominent, long-time Springfield leaders have formed a political action committee to support candidates in upcoming school board and city council races that are required by state law to be nonpartisan."
We see words like "prominent" and "long-time leaders" and "nonpartisan."
The PAC's launch was the day before packets could be picked up by potential candidates. We are told "its creation is a direct response to a dramatic increase in the participation of partisan and 'dark money' groups..."
The article goes on to say "such groups have raised significant sums of money, and sent or paid for political attack ads on TV, social media and through text messages."
PAC co-chair Jim Anderson speaks about "civil discourse" and "community partnership" and "collaboration." He's "very concerned with the disruption and the divisiveness and the polarization that seems to be all around us..."
Anderson goes on to opine that the new PAC "is the vehicle we think we need to make the community better."
Here are some of the PAC's goals:
"Support of candidates running for nonpartisan office who aim to unite, not divide..."
Then there is "Protecting civil discourse, community partnerships..."
And finally, "Preserving a united, nonpartisan local government."
Remember President George W. Bush, who said he was a uniter, not a divider?
The ick!
To people who have been "long-time leaders" like those who are forming the local PAC, just having candidates who do not align with the status quo power structure can seem divisive and uncivil.
The fact is, schools have been suffering academic decline for years, including the years that the "prominent, long-time Springfield leaders" have been actively in charge of things.
While it's nice that both Democrats and Republicans are forming the PAC together in an effort to be nonpartisan, it's pretty well understood that there is a Uniparty power structure on all levels of government--local, state, and national. And it's the Uniparty members, long used to being in charge, that oversee bloated government budgets, declining schools, and higher taxes.
Back to the narrative building. In a Nov. 10, 2023 News-Leader article, an eighth candidate has emerged to run for the Springfield Board of Education. Susan Everett Provance has announced. Self-described as a "team player," Provance has a long history with Springfield Public Schools, from student, to teaching and coaching, to having children in the district.
Here comes the narrative part:
"She said the ugliness of recent school board races--with candidates subjected to negative TV ads, flyers, and videos--was a concern as she explored a campaign.
"'The priority ought to be the kids,' she said, adding that she is nonpartisan."
"'In this nasty world of politics, I consider myself part of the silent majority that now needs to step up and not be silent.'"
If Provance tows the line, if she speaks only positivity, rainbows, and unicorns to voters, she will undoubtedly earn the endorsement of the United Springfield PAC.
This is the narrative that is being built by the local power brokers in Springfield. If you step out of line, if you say anything about school issues that seems remotely negative about another candidate or their platform, then you are a divider, and you must be silenced through appeals to civility and nonpartisanship.
This is how the free expression of ideas is suppressed in public discourse. This is how "prominent long-time leaders" retain their power structures.
This will not help Springfield schools. Hopefully, voters will be awake to the narrative. Look for similar narratives when Christian County school board races start up.
UPDATE: Here is more of the Narrative Business in this latest article about the Springfield School Board Race. The "uniters" are pulling out all the stops. In this article about Kyler Sherman-Wilkins we immediately see the narrative words "partisanship," "divisive," "inciting division," and "one voice."
Once you see the Narrative, you can't unsee it. The latest candidate is going to be an interesting one in the mix. He's got lots of experience in the public sphere and his politispeak is smooth. The powerful in Springfield are walking a tight line. We may see some unusual alliances in the coming months.
By Gretchen Garrity
It looks like the Ozark School Board has called on their friends in the media after Right to Win Ozarks published an article detailing recent events at the Oct. 19, 2023 school board meeting. Since the News-Leader does not have pictures of the meeting and instead used a photo from the poorly-attended Oct. 10 town hall, it would seem the news outlet was not in attendance.
According to Riley in her published article, "parents and community members have shouted, talked out of turn, mocked the board and chanted "D-E-I" -- an acronym for diversity, equity and inclusion efforts -- or "D-I-E" in meetings."
The article goes on to say "Board members admitted they were not sure if "D-I-E" was just a transposed version of the DEI acronym or a threat, but noted it was unsettling for others in the audience." 🙄
One would hope that the school board and the News-Leader would identify those who chanted "D-I-E" in the meetings. In the interests of truth, please do. It should be a relatively easy thing to do since the board has recently been recording and archiving all the meetings.
Board member Amber Bryant is "demanding" respect. A two-way street when "patrons," as the school district refers to taxpaying residents and parents, are involved. "How many times have we been in these meetings since I've been on the board when people are talking and people are saying things that are rude?" she was quoted as saying.
A school board meeting is not a classroom. It is the local forum of the republic and its elected representatives, working out how best to conduct the business of the school district. Just ask Sen. Mike Moon, who was taken to task by a constituent at a recent work-study meeting of the County Commission. He listened quietly and managed to not call the police in to haul off the resident. In other words, he knows how to govern.
While Riley's apologia of the Ozark School Board mentions the Oct. 19-approved "rules of order for patron participation," she does not address that there was not a public reading of them at the meeting, nor does she say at what point in the meeting the rules were approved and publicly posted.
Let's move on.
Board member Patty Quessenberry is quoted as saying the "primary purpose of a school board's work session or business meeting is to conduct the public business in an orderly and efficient manner."
I wonder how many "patrons" are aware that these meetings can be marathon endeavors, the Oct. 19 public portion beginning around 3:35 p.m. and ending around 9:15 p.m. That a public business meeting, with very few public comments, can last over five hours is not a testament to efficiency.
 |
| Ozark School Board Member Amber Bryant |
Later in the article, board member Amber Bryant states the "...board has received complaints about disruptions and "cuss words" from others in the meetings."
If either the Ozark School Board or the News-Leader is unwilling to name who is making complaints or cussing and causing disruptions, then one can only surmise that the paper is publishing what is termed hearsay. And it should be immediately discounted.
One of the few helpful sentences in the article states, "The board tweaked the list during the Thursday meeting and the final version has not yet been posted."
Very, very problematic since that new final version not yet posted was used to remove a taxpaying citizen from the meeting.
One last point. A board member is recorded as saying the school board agreed they heard three outbursts. The comment is on the published video. That is very interesting, since I have almost three-and-a-half hours of audio recording that shows almost complete silence except for the moment when the board voted not to table the agenda item with the student data sharing/agreement (which you can read about here).
If any board member would like to listen to the recording, they can contact me and I will play it for them.
Updated 10/23.
By Gretchen Garrity
In
August, education reporter Claudette Riley of the Springfield
News-Leader, teased her readers with a tweet from X (formerly Twitter)
about some local students who had "reached out" to her.
Nixa student group pushes "banned" books
Met tonight with a group of high school students for an upcoming story. They were articulate, passionate and interesting. So happy they reached out. pic.twitter.com/8LpQLrTCHB
— Claudette Riley (@CRileyNL) August 15, 2023
Back in June 2023, after months of citizen interface with the Nixa School Board about sexually explicit and pornographic books available to students, the school board voted to remove four books from the school library. Later, another book was retained.
Groups like U-Turn in Education, positively featured by Riley in an October 2022 article, have been active in working to prevent the removal of obscene and pornographic books from school and public libraries. In fact, U-Turn is heavily involved in the student group featured in Riley's article.
The teaser tweet finally came to fruition Sept. 27 in an article titled 'It's not their library.' Nixa High School students form group to fight book ban attempts.'
'It's not their library.' Nixa High School students form group to fight future book ban attempts from parents, community members. https://t.co/AK0Dfb2LfY via @springfieldNL @nixaschools @PENamerica #BannedBooksWeek
— Claudette Riley (@CRileyNL) September 27, 2023
According to the article, a group of little Lord and Lady Fauntleroys has been fighting valiantly against devilish parents that are attempting to keep literature out of their hearts and minds. The students are described as "calm" and "reasonable" while adults called the school board "names and made ugly comments leveled at students, other adults and high school librarians."
(As an aside, Nixa School Board President Josh Roberts may want to clarify his comments. He is surely not aware of everything that goes on in the school board meetings, since he sits apart from citizens.)
Nixa student group links to Marxist bookstore
This type of accusation is a common tactic of the Left, and has been in play in articles about our local area for months now. In several articles, children are being put on the front lines of the battle for parental rights. It can't be about smut in our schools. It can't be about protecting children or letting parents decide what books their children will be exposed to. It has to be about mean adults taking away a child's right to read.
See here and here and here. Once you see the tactics, you can't unsee it. The latest article in the News-Leader is ramping up the narrative.
Thankfully, few citizens are buying what they're selling. And if you want to find out what U-Turn in Education thinks about parent rights, go here to see how they subvert them.
U-Turn in Education linked from Nixa student group
In fact, at least one of the four founding members of the student group, Nixa Students Against Book Restrictions, has parents involved in U-Turn. And U-Turn is linked at the top of the SABR Instagram page.
For some intelligent commentary about the article, Nick Reed featured it on his show The Nick Reed Podcast on 104.1 KSGF. And for a little humor:
@right2winozarks ♬ Funny - Gold-Tiger
 |
By Gretchen Garrity
We tend to think that news on the local level is pretty clean. Agendas don't seem to be much of a thing.
Or are they? Let's take a look.
The Springfield News-Leader published an article on August 7, 2023 (keep that date in mind) titled "Ozark school board issues 'rebuke' of member who hosted solo 'town hall' meetings," by reporter Claudette Riley. In Riley's defense, reporters do not usually write the headlines.
Knowing that people often read only the headline--especially those who are online and don't subscribe to either the digital or physical edition of the paper--the impression overall is a negative one.
While Riley quoted part of the public letter the Ozark School Board issued in response to School Board Member Christina Tonsing's community chat, she left out some important points that bring clarity to the issue.
 |
| Link |
The actual meat of the Board's letter was this ill-advised statement:
"However, under Missouri Law individual Board members have no authority outside official Board meetings or unless a majority of the Board votes, to provide specific authority to an individual Board member regarding a matter. The Missouri Court of Appeals has stated as follows: 'Unless otherwise authorized by the board, individual members are not empowered to act and cannot govern.' Colombo V. Buford. 935 S. W. 2d 690, 698 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996)."
Tonsing responded publicly by pointing out the cited court case actually supported school board members meeting with the public:
"The quoted sentence, which IS indeed found written in the opinion on the case (seventh paragraph under "Discussion" part C, found at https://law.justia.com/cases/missouri/court-of-appeals/1996/wd51723-2.html, does not AT ALL reference one board member holding listening sessions or anything else like that. It instead is used to support the next sentence's conclusion (note the use of the word 'thus') that groups of less than a quorum do NOT violate the Sunshine Law, so they CAN talk together with each other (and as the entirety of that point in the court case addresses, with the public) without worry of violation. Ironically enough, the very quote attempted to use to quell individual "meetings" with the public, was instead intended by the Appeals Court to support them:
This court previously addressed the issue of what constituted a "public governmental body" in Tribune Pub. Co. v. Curators of Univ. of Mo., 661 S.W.2d 575, 584 (Mo.App.1983). There we recognized the power to govern as being a factor in determining what constitutes a "public governmental body", stating that "the quintessence of a `public governmental body' is the power to govern.... It defies semantics to believe that the legislature intended inclusion of bodies or entities barren of the power to govern in the definition of `public governmental body'." Id. Unless otherwise authorized by the Board, individual members are not empowered to act and cannot govern. Thus, because members of a body cannot act individually. Groups of less than a quorum of the board would not logically fall within the definition of a "public governmental body" subject to the Sunshine Law."
Read Tonsing's July 22, 2023 response for yourself. (Scroll down) It's quite good. While the Ozark School Board's letter was linked to in the article, Riley failed to link to Tonsing's public response, which frankly, is a devastating critique of the Board's action against her.
The real issue, that the School Board was somehow threatened by a board member meeting with the public which elected her, was entirely missing from the article. Does anyone else wonder why the article was just now published on August 7, when the Board's public letter was presented at the June 29, 2023 meeting? Timing is everything, as they say.
MOVING ON
"Wilson said the community wants transparency, good communication and fiscal accountability. She said all of those are high priorities."
It goes on:
"Board president Sarah Adams Orr," (the same gal who signed the Board letter rebuking Tonsing for meeting with citizens) "said the district has committed to hosting four town hall meetings this school year dedicated to hearing from the community...Orr said parents and taxpayers are also welcome to "email or call board members with questions, comments" before and after the meetings. She said public comment regarding agenda items will still be accepted at board meetings."
RECAP
1) August 7: article published about Christina Tonsing's June 29 public rebuke by Ozark School Board.
2) August 7: Springfield News-Leader's Claudette Riley interviews Interim Superintendent Lori Wilson and Board President Sarah Adams Orr.
3) August 8: Riley tweets out a thanks in response to a School District teaser tweet about the upcoming puff piece on Wilson.
4) August 10: Springfield News-leader publishes article about Lori Wilson.
Does anyone believe this is all just a coincidence?
There are many well-known issues with the Ozark School District. That is why two new board members were recently elected. It's why groups like Ozark Schools Support Team exists. The OSST has published an open letter to the School Board. It is worth reading. You will get a truer picture of the situation. And then attend one of their two town hall meetings scheduled for next week.
By all means attend everything the Ozark School District is offering and take advantage of the new spirit of transparency there. But don't rely on either the press or the school district to give you the whole picture.
 |
