10
OPINION
Comment at www.fauquier.com
Like us at facebook.com/fauquiertimes
Email at yourview@fauquier.com
Follow us on Twitter @fauquiertimes
WWW.FAUQUIER.COM
Fauquier Times | August 26, 2020
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Remote teaching a tough and revealing call The school board’s recent decision to pursue virtual-only instruction must have been like tearing a bandage from an unhealed wound. It was necessary, and no less painful. After months of retooling, retraining, reconfiguring and hashing out ways to deliver a hybrid offering, they simply didn’t have the manpower or means to make it work. The effort was Herculean. Administrators and teachers who had worked throughout the summer were suddenly thrown back to the drawing board. Meanwhile, the virus reared its head to remind us that our educators and children are not beyond its reach. Bradley Elementary School became a bellwether. A decision had to be made, and there was no way to avoid some hemorrhage. Watching the process unfold, I couldn’t help thinking at times about a biblical tale that has always intrigued me. King Solomon is approached by two women who claim to have given birth to the same child. In his attempt to discern the truth, Solomon orders the infant to be cut in half: one half of the child to be given to each of the women. He hoped, of course, that the biological mother would be revealed by her passionate response. The child was saved -- but it was a calculated risk. Most difficult decisions are. Our educational pivot was no exception. How we respond to our school board’s decision is revealing. The finger-pointing, scapegoating, and accusations that clutter social media set a bad example for children at the
center of the conflict and reflect poorly on the people of Fauquier County. It distracts us from the legitimate and urgent needs that so many people are facing. Many individuals and organizations have actively and constructively answered the call. I am encouraged by the response of churches and civic centers creating learning hubs for students who need space, Wi-Fi, and moral support; I am inspired by food banks and local farmers working to address food insecurity. I am heartened by all who recognize that compassion is a far more powerful weapon than assault. County educators -- especially teachers -- have been at the forefront of that community of care, adapting to the tide of change and honing their skills to keep our schools afloat. Once again, they must restructure educational methods -- in short order -- to meet new and challenging demands, all the while remaining faithful to a promise every educator makes to advocate for children in loco parentis-- “in place of the parent.” It informs the decisions that good teachers make for their students. People who vilify the men and women to whom they entrust their children every day should consider the inherent paradox of that stance. Our school board made a difficult, painful and unavoidable decision. The burden of success will ultimately fall on the shoulders of teachers who will rise to the occasion, once again, diligently and without fanfare. But they will need the support of everyone invested in the welfare of our children if we want them to succeed ... without subjecting them to a Solonmonesque fate. CYNTHIA PRYOR Parent, grandparent, teacher, concerned citizen Warrenton
Heritage be careful! With all the fuss that has been in the forefront of the news regarding the Confederate flag and its meaning, I took some time to do a little research on the subject, mainly because of the seemingly anger in that we are trying to destroy past heritage and history. Since when does a battle flag represent heritage? The “Stars and Bars” was the original Confederate States of America. It consisted of three horizontal stripes of equal height, alternating red and white with a blue square. Inside that square are white five-pointed stars arranged in a circle. The first version consisted of seven stars, as that was the number of states at that time that had seceded from the Union. The final version was finalized in November of 1861 and consisted of 13 stars. There were two more versions of the official Confederate flag that were put into play during the conflict: the “Stainless Banner,” 1863 to 1865 and the “Blood Stained Banner” in 1865. The one that is most familiar is the Confederate battle flag, created so it would not be taken for the Union flag during battle, which seemed to be the case during the First Battle of Bull Run. I do understand how this flag causes some people great concern and anguish at a time when slavery along with all its tragic and horrendous forms of enforcement on human beings was well in force. It represents, in my opinion, a symbol of continued white supremacy and in-your-face distain
for African Americans, much like the Confederate war statues that seem to have been erected all over the South, most not until the early part of the 20th century, to perpetuate the white supremacy myth. Let’s face it, people. The South lost that war big time! To glorify this battle flag and the Southern statues of men who were fighting to keep people in slavery is not what I call a “noble cause.” The argument that is foremost to the front of this controversy, of course, is “heritage” and “history!” That, to me, is a poor excuse for a losing side. I have been fortunate both in business and in leisure travel to have been to a great many places in this world, among them most of Europe, which includes Germany and Italy. I have never in either of those countries ever seen a statue of Hitler or any of his field marshals in public; nor have I ever seen a Nazi flag displayed in public. I do believe if one displays a Nazi flag in public in Germany you can be fined a great many euros and possible jail time. Let’s not forget this period from 1933 to 1945 was and is part of German history, a history that I believe Germany wishes never happened, but it did. The original German flag, however, is still very much part of Germany. The same is true for Italy; I have never seen a statue of Mussolini or his henchmen anywhere in Italy. The American Civil War is long over. Let it pass, people, and get on with the business of making America the “more perfect union” it was designed to be for all its citizens. DAVID C. HORNE Markham
Resident asks supervisors: Don’t award contracts for Marshall project One reason that the Marshall Business & Residents Association is so opposed to the one-block Marshall Main Street Improvement Project is because we are the original grant applicant beginning in 2008, having submitted grant applications to VDOT each year from 2008 to 2011, until the county took it over. Secondly, our board has studied the project in depth since the county unveiled it to the public at our Sept. 11, 2018, community meeting. The project has changed several times since Fauquier County took it over. After having participated in three walks to cancel the one-block Marshall Main Street Project and having talked to many different citizens in Marshall, it is evident that most do not know certain facts about the project that the county wants to move forward with. Do you know that: 1) This project and bids have not
yet received final approval? 2) The county took the project over from the MBRA after 2011, and that year the project shrank from all of Main Street to only the one block between Frost Avenue and Winchester Road? 3) The last public hearing on the proposed project was in 2015 and that was simply on whether the county would apply for more grant funding? 4) The county has never held a public hearing on the design plans they have sent out to bid? 5) The only way citizens have been able to voice their opinions to the board of supervisors publicly is by showing up at Citizens' Time at the beginning of the BOS meetings? 6) The proposed project will narrow Main Street by two feet for wider sidewalks when the width of our existing sidewalks is already ADA-compliant?
7) That VDOT is and has been responsible for the maintenance and repair of our sidewalks and curbs, and for installing upgraded handicap ramps but VDOT has held off each year because of this pending project? 8) If this project moves forward, the responsibility will no longer be VDOT's, but will become Fauquier County taxpayers' responsibility for all future maintenance and repair of it? 9) That all residential and busi-
Letters to the Editor
The Fauquier Times welcomes letters to the editor from its readers as a forum for discussion of local public affairs subjects.
WRITE: Letters to the Editor 41 Culpeper Street Warrenton, VA 20188 FAX: Editor 540-349-8676 EMAIL: news@fauquier.com
ness properties within Marshall's Special Lighting Tax District will bear the 400% tax rate increase for this project? 10) That the county's "rock clause" in the bid documents is like signing a blank check for any needed rock removal, which will be additional costs taxpayers must pay? See more info at marshallva.org and ask the county to cancel the project now!
WILLIAM HINES Marshall
Letters must be signed by the writer. Messages sent via email must say “Letter to the Editor” to distinguish them from other messages not meant for publication. Include address and phone for verification (Not to be published.) Letters are subject to editing for clarity and length. Personal attacks will not be published. Long letters from those with special authority on a current issue may be treated as a guest column (with photo requested). Due to volume, letters cannot be acknowledged. All letters are appreciated. Letters must be received by 5 p.m. Monday to be considered for Wednesday publication.
