All candidates running for contested seats in the upcoming election were invited to submit a post in support of their candidacy to Village14. This is Valerie Pontiff’s
Many people are concerned about our schools.Here is why.
Diminished Education. From Boston Magazine, our high schools in 2008 were both ranked in the top 10. In 2020? 16 and 25. Just released 2021 rankings of “top 40” elementary, middle, and high schools did not include a single Newton school except Brown. Newton’s MCAS scores in 2019 for 10th grade English were 12th out of our 13-district peer group. The most recent test from the spring of 2021 showed our disadvantaged students at the bottom in nearly every category and across grades. Education is the objective, not rankings and MCAS scores. Still, we have to take these barometers seriously. Similarly, many parents tell me that they moved to Newton for the reputation of great public schools only to be disappointed. This disappointment is evident in the data: over the past decade the percentage of children in Newton attending NPS has dropped from 81 to 76 percent. This places Newton’s public-school participation at 12th out of 13 in our peer group.
School Committee: Watch a school committee meeting and you will see constant 9-0 votes, endless one-directional NPS department-level presentations with no critical discussion, and self-congratulation. I will bring a different voice focused on data, metrics, academics, and parents.
What to do about it? Valerie Pontiff’s Platform: I will advocate for a school committee (not administration) survey. I will advocate for district-wide goals that are focused on parent’s expectations and academic excellence. Let’s deliver for the kids.
All Newton voters can vote me on November 2nd or during early voting.
One question I have for you, Ms. Ponitff, is that as a contributor to former President Trump’s campaign, were you in agreement with his administration’s educational policies at the time?
Bruce,
It goes so far beyond Trump’s education policy. This is a man who enabled and embolden white supremacy, misogyny, and a host of other deplorable policies and values.
No one who voted for or supported Trump should be considered for an elected position. This is not a matter of policies on which reasonable people might disagree.
I will die on this hill.
Ms. Pontiff says she offers a “different voice.” We don’t need that kind of voice on the School Committee.
Sean you’ve been on this blog for the last year crying about racism,
yet when you had the opportunity to elect the first African American in 30 years to the city council you voted for the white candidate. Nothing will ever change that. Nothing.You had a chance to put your money where your mouth is and you voted to continue the systemic racism in our city politics.
You’re the last person that should be
calling anybody out for anything, Ever.
Joe Biden was instrumental in passing and promoting the crime bill in 1993 that incarcerated and punished a generation of African Americans.
As Biden would say “True story”.
Would you care to die on that hill also?
Yup, the Trump donations are a deal breaker to me. As unhappy as I am with the current school committee and would like to vote out the incumbents, I can’t vote for Valerie. I don’t want Trumpism seeping into NPS.
@ Paul- Are you saying that if I vote for a white candidate over an African American candidate ( irrespective of their political stance ) I am supporting systemic racism? That’s so ridiculous. I hope we all vote for the best candidate. Putting race aside, where it belongs, any association with Trump or Trumpism is an instant non-starter. And I don’t find any inherent hypocrisy between those two positions.
Thank you Ms. Pontiff for your statement. I have a couple of comments/questions.
When I read your statement, it is almost entirely about what you state the public is concerned about regarding our schools, followed by your high level critique of the School Committee. You then include two sentences describing your platform: advocacy for a school committee survey and advocacy of goals based on parental expectations. Your website includes a third goal, “elevating all students”, which is an awesome goal but not an especially specific or distinguishing one.
Speaking as a person who doesn’t know you, I find this statement and these goals quite thin. Your web site provides no more details. What qualifies you for this role? How would you work with others on the School Committee? What experience or insight do you offer?
As an outsider, it’s easy to run against something, and especially easy to run against imperfect schools and school administration. But you’re running *for* an office, not against it. A survey and some general goals are, in my opinion, unlikely to make a significant difference addressing the challenges that NPS or the SC has. Bluntly, what are you going to do in your second month? How will you turn these generalities into specifics and make them happen?
My second question is COVID-related. There’s widespread disagreement about exactly how Newton should have dealt with COVID, from big picture issues like remote learning to specifics such as ventilation, social distancing, masking, and vaccination. However, I appreciate that Newton and Massachusetts basically followed a course correlated with the CDC guidelines for COVID. Given that Massachusetts was at the epicenter of the earliest COVID outbreaks (the Biogen conference), I appreciate that we avoided the worst of the tragedy of COVID while mourning those who suffered and perished. While I am critical of aspects of NPS’s COVID response, I don’t doubt their best intentions and I approve of their highest-level health-related priorities.
I am not an especially partisan person. I believe in the qualities of the individual and I don’t paint with a broad brush. However, the response to COVID is highly politicized, and there is a strong correlation between supporters of former President Trump and a view on COVID response that I strongly, strongly disagree with.
Given the continuing importance of an effective COVID response in our schools, and given your documented financial support of not just Republican or Conservative causes, but then-President Trump and his political movement, understanding your perspective specifically on COVID response in schools is really important. That includes your view on the mask mandate and vaccination of school children.
The health and safety of our children is first and foremost on the mind of every Newton parent. I could not in good conscience even consider voting for you without understanding your views on COVID response. And that’s even if I understood and agreed with your qualifications, approach, or specific actions you plan to take as part of the School Committee. Health and safety is now the front and center issue in our classrooms.
Your statement and your campaign web site don’t shed any light on any of these topics. So, what are you running *for*, not against, what makes you the better candidate, and what are your views on COVID response in NPS?
Thank you for your willingness to serve our community and for any clarifications you could provide.
@PeterBloy-
Is your name Sean Roche?
No, it’s Peter Bloy from Newton. Newton born and raised. Pierce, Warren, Newton North and a 22 year resident of Newton Highlands. I’m an infrequent visitor to this blog- too much of the same voices going round and round. Yet I always come away with some precious nugget of provincial insight. But not from you.
As a parent of two NPS elementary students, I have the outmost respect and admiration for Valerie for leading the effort to get the kids back to in person learning. This has been the single most important issue for me and most NPS parents that I have interacted with over the past year. Additionally, the current members of the SC do not seem to understand or acknowledge that the historic excellence of the NPS system is now gone. I wholeheartedly agree with Valerie’s assessment of the state of NPS as posted above. Parents care about actions that benefit our kids, and we want someone that actually listens to us and will fight for us. I personally rather have her than someone who had her chance, failed us, and does not even recognize that NPS is in a state of crisis.
David C, can you expand on this statement: “I have the outmost respect and admiration for Valerie for leading the effort to get the kids back to in person learning.”
How did Ms. Pontiff lead the effort to get kids back to in person learning? I see no mention of such a significant effort on her web site.
Let’s evaluate Valerie Pontiff on the traditional three criteria for elected office, that is to say, experience, character and policies.
Experience: PTO President of Bigelow Middle School and NNHS. That’s a clear plus, and she has other civic engagement creds.
Character: Well, now. She advocated for reopening the schools in February, before vaccination was widespread, simply because hybrid or remote learning was apparently an inconvenience for working parents, irrespective of public health concerns.
Of her list of supporters, I know none, so there’s no-one I trust that vouches for her. On the other hand, my kids didn’t go to the same schools as hers, and I don’t live in the same part of town, so maybe that amounts to nothing.
But the Trump donations! Maybe they were forgivable in 2016, but in 2020? Nope, nope, nope.
Policies: “Excellence in education”, “Elevating all students”, and “Annual survey of parents and guardians”. The first two are motherhood-and-apple pie statements, because everyone is for them. There’s not much substance there. By all means, let’s measure customer satisfaction of how the schools are doing, because metrics are useful, and it would be great to have a responsive school system. But really, there’s not much else there. How would she actually influence our children’s education? She doesn’t really say.
Overall verdict: Lacking in judgement and vision. A hard pass.
Robert, thank you for linking to Valerie Pontiff’s post from February 2021 regarding COVID and schools. I hadn’t seen it. It doesn’t provide me any of the reassurance that I’m looking for regarding her views on COVID response in public schools.
Specifically, I agree with Robert’s view that Ms. Pontiff’s motivation primarily seems to be how school closures impact business, specifically real estate. This view may in part be due to the forum of the article (a real estate blog), but I don’t see it as a school- or community-centric viewpoint. Health and safety first.
As a working family with two kids in Newton Public Schools, I understand how having kids at home disrupts both home and work life. One of our kids thrived, the other suffered during remote or hybrid learning. I feel there were huge inadequacies in NPS’s response, and I don’t feel reassured by NPS’s ability to address lingering learning, social, and emotional impacts.
BUT, the schools, the city, the nation, and the world had to act quickly within the pandemic with incomplete information. I disapprove of 20:20 hindsight. The risks were huge even if, fortunately, they didn’t come to fruition.
If we face a resurgence of COVID in the future, or face another “it can’t happen” crisis, I want leaders who are agile enough to react to circumstance, not locked into dogma or any self-interest other than the well-being of our kids.
These quotes from Ms. Pontiff’s post don’t give me any confidence:
“Business leaders must demand that schools reopen in full in the fall for all grade levels. Hybrid school is functionally equivalent to no school from the perspective of working parents.”
This is a pretty absolute statement that doesn’t address potential health issues.
“In addition to offering partial in-person education, hybrid school permits school leaders to intermittently close the schools–for any reason (threats, influenza, weather) or no reason.”
This happened a couple of times in Newton. It was inconvenient. But as I remember, it happened around snow days, which are sudden and inconvenient for parents as well. The fact is that serious events in our schools may *always* lead to inconvenient closure; the ability to switch to learn-at-home just kept them from being the equivalent of snow days.
Reasonable minds may differ, but there’s no absolute here.
“Hybrid school harms working parents, children, and businesses. It must be rejected.”
Does this include remote learning as well? When you have very few tools in your toolbox, I don’t think you start throwing tools out even if you aren’t especially fond of them.
“Our businesses pay significant real estate taxes through rent and deserve functioning schools.”
How does this is a very business-centric view evolve into an effective School Committee member’s view?
“Many businesses have announced that employees will return to the office in phases over the summer. Assurance should be made that this decision is final and will not be delayed.”
This isn’t a school-related statement, but it is perhaps the most concerning one in this article. Viruses don’t follow dicta or mandates. They evolve. Business, and personal, and governmental, response to something as serious as a pandemic must also evolve with public health guidance.
I get that uncertainty plays havoc with the real estate market and the broader economy. But the answer to uncertainty is agility and adaptability, not a “damn the torpedoes” approach.
This article offers more than enough concerns for me to justify asking the candidate to explain in depth her views on the details of school pandemic response. There are different views on these issues in Newton. Clarification of a candidate’s views are an essential part of our discussion and policymaking.
Robert,
Advocating for opening schools well before vaccinations were widespread was hardly a fringe position, and to characterize this view as rooted in “inconvenience to working parents” is pretty gross. You no doubt know that all of Newton’s elementary school are open now despite not a single student in that cohort being old enough to be vaccinated. You may not know that schools in many “progressive” European countries either never closed or closed only briefly, and that the kids in those schools don’t wear masks.
I have a big problem with her donations. I also have a big problem with a school committee incumbent. I am just going to write-in somebody. Any suggestions?
Looking past the SC’s Covid responses, I question her reliance on rankings as a measure of educational excellence. Valerie uses a lot of rankings which are suspect. I don’t really understand the purpose of ranking a high school, let alone a middle school or elementary school. Boston Magazine just as US News & World Report do it because it is a revenue producer. Ranking schools reduces a complex idea to its most simplistic form. Same thing with college rankings. Am I better educated if I go to Harvard or UMass? Outside of a badge of prestige and perhaps networking, I would say I get an equally valuable education at either institution, assuming I put effort into it. We can argue about MCAS scores and comparing them to school districts but again one needs to dive much deeper into demographics, etc.
Another issue I have is her goal to survey parents. Having kids in at NPS for the past 16 years, I have found the number of surveys coming from NPS to be infuriating. How many surveys did they send out about Covid and hybrid/remote learning last year. Over the years, so many had been sent out about school start times. I am not interested in filling out another survey that becomes dated by the time the results are tabulated and analyzed.
I, by no means, think NPS is perfect. I sincerely hope we get a new superintendent. I think the SC dropped the ball when the plagiarism issue arose with the superintendent several years ago. He should have been let go then if for no other reason than to send a message to students that it is not acceptable. The self congratulating at every turn during meetings last year was nauseating and I hope they can tune it down in the future.
One item that I strongly disagree with Valerie and her opponent on is the elimination of bus fees. Both stated at the area council debate that they are opposed to eliminating bus fees but would consider eliminating sports fees at the high school level. This is one issue where the SC has decision making power. In the interest of equity, Newton’s purported commitment toward the environment, and just plain reducing the amount of traffic congestion that occurs each day, it would be great if NPS could encourage more kids to take the bus. Having parents pay $350 per year and allowing students to park their cars for the same amount is not exactly encouragement.
The bus fee really gets me. $350 per year????? That is very high. Make the bus routes better and enourage the kids to take the bus. $350/kid is too expensive.
The parking fee should be higher than the bus fee.
PLEASE no more surveys! I want a conversation with a human over yet another survey.
Craig said “Advocating for opening schools well before vaccinations were widespread was hardly a fringe position, and to characterize this view as rooted in ‘inconvenience to working parents’ is pretty gross.” I agree. Which is why I find Ms. Pontiff’s opinion piece on the subject that includes this emphasis a bit jarring. I acknowledge it could be due to the forum of her post, but I’d like reassurance.
While advocating for opening schools is in fact hardly a fringe position, as you say, it is a point of debate. And details matter. When during the pandemic was this advocacy made? Is such advocacy evidence-based and responsive to changing conditions and experience, or inflexibly rooted in dogma? And open with what conditions? Masks? Ventilation standards? Testing? Vaccines?
When you’re a challenger, you can gloss over those details or not mention them at all. When you’re in the position, those potentially life and death decisions aren’t optional. They have to be made, popular or not. We may judge those choices as lacking, but we also have to judge the challenger.
So, what are the candidate’s positions on these issues, which remain relevant right now and potentially into the future?
“You may not know that schools in many “progressive” European countries either never closed or closed only briefly, and that the kids in those schools don’t wear masks.”
Actually, I have followed this issue quite closely, and this oft-repeated meme is extremely misleading. The European response to COVID, including schools, is far, far more complicated and changed significantly over the duration of the pandemic. Some countries like Germany had multiple national lockdowns that closed schools. Others were remote for months. Others, like France, primarily stayed open but require masking this year (this restriction is being lifted in areas of low infection rate now). The UK doesn’t have masking but has other restrictions. Most countries have different policies for different ages, in part due to vaccination.
These lessons are important. We learn as a world’s experience. But learning from the world’s experience is a lot of work and involves a commitment to flexibility of approach. What evidence exists that Ms. Pontiff has that commitment?
I personally don’t want a whiff of politics in our COVID response. And that’s a big concern for me.
But maybe we can agree on one thing. The nature of the past and future NPS COVID response is an important issue. Candidate Pontiff agrees. Newton schools are currently in-person (which she favors) with restrictions (which we don’t know if she favors). The candidates views on these restrictions and mitigations are thus relevant to the School Committee race. These issues are of both interest and debate within the Newton community.
So a clear statement of the candidate’s view on the details of school COVID response is extremely relevant to this election, yes? Can we learn more about them?
Dear Village 14 Community,
Thank you for considering my candidacy for Newton School Committee. I believe there are three questions in the threads: 1) national education policy; 2) interest in hearing me be more specific about goals; 3) request for more insight on my Covid response views.
Before addressing these questions, I will note that The Committee to Elect Valerie Pontiff has held nine in person gatherings between our kick off June 24th and our final event October 24th. These were advertised on Facebook, Google, the campaign website, and via email. We hosted a booth at all three village days, and addressed both the Newton Republican and Newton Democrat City Committees. The two debates (League of Women Voters and Area Councils) are posted, as is my 30 minute NewTV visit with the Newton Taxpayers Association and the three minute NewTV video intro on the campaign website. The League of Women Voters posts candidate profiles and NewtonPatch asked for a blurb, posted today, here:
https://patch.com/massachusetts/newton/candidate-profile-valerie-pontiff-ward-7-school-committee
The Committee to Elect Valerie Pontiff has worked hard to answer questions and will continue to do so.
In reference to the questions here:
1) National politics: This is a non-partisan local city school committee race. I am, however, a lifelong Democrat.
2) Deeper explanation of goals: The school committee has three jobs: Hire/fire/manage the superintendent; budget; strategic plan. I have gone on record that we need to compete the superintendent job at the appropriate time. I have also gone on record that we need to change the management goals of the superintendent in the immediate term to elevate education metrics. As to the strategic plan, the current Systemwide Strategic Goals do not reference excellence in education as defined by strong academics. I have pledged to change that for 2022-2023. Regarding the budget, I have gone on record that we need to expand teachers on the front lines to address Covid learning loss, while at the same time consider and address possible duplication of effort in the administration.
3) Covid response: We have lost 1,100 students from NPS over four years or about 8.5 percent of our students. That is a catastrophe. NPS performed worse than our peer districts in getting kids back to school. I do not support that. Our kids are so important. To watch them languish is a local, statewide and national tragedy. I do not believe people who participated in keeping kids out of school, especially at a rate beyond our peer districts, should be rewarded.
As to masks and vaccines – we are bound by state guidance. I will adhere to that guidance as a school committee member.
Regarding the “survey of parents and guardians,” the School Committee does not do this. Instead, the endless surveys are from the administration, with seemingly pre-ordained outcomes. The School Committee needs to hear directly from parents and perform to their expectations. This will restore confidence and enrollment in Newton Public Schools.
I am working to earn your vote and hope that you will contact me at [email protected] or at 617-230-9839 if there are questions that you may wish to ask in that way. Sincerely, Valerie Pontiff
We are lucky to have two passionate and hard-working women running for this SC seat.
There would have been no race, had NPS delivered on people’s expectations and its reputation. However, it clearly has not. At 25% of students in private schools, NPS is in bottom few across the state (this is not good for the entire system and also the city). We have experienced reduced educational offerings for MS and HS over years. And while equity is critical, NPS (under this SC’s approval) approach is sub-optimal. NPS chose to take the approach of equity by subtraction instead of adding more services to students who need it – something that also affects elementary students.
C19 magnified these problems! Additionally, self lauding by the SC and the mayor just showed they were out of sync w us. These and above actions directly affected students’ education outcomes and mental health.
I support Valerie because I am hoping for a change. Maybe a changed direction can just result in different and better outcomes.
I met Valerie at one of her events and found her approach pragmatic, and agree with her platform. Earlier, I saw her work during the high school reopening delay. I found her style professional and respectful.
I will be voting for Valerie.
No question that Covid has precipitated an exodus from public schools. Whether this trend continues is something to keep our eyes on.
Historically, though, Newton has had a relatively high percentage, and some might say stable percentage, of students in private or parochial schools. My guess is that this high number (again pre-covid) is due, in part, to the fact that Newton is one of the wealthiest communites in the state. As a point of comparison, 81.9% of students attended public school In the 2000-2001 school year. In the 2019-2020 school year, the percentage of students in the public schools was 80.6%. Last year, the percentage of students in public schools dropped to 76.5%. https://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/schoolattendingchildren.aspx
Is it just me, or is “I am, however, a lifelong Democrat” a kinda thin answer to concerns about multiple donations to Trump and the Trump-supporting organizations?
Actually, it raises more questions than it answers. What would cause a “lifelong Democrat” to switch sides?
Out of curiosity, I peeked and saw the same numbers that Bruce got – from the same source. I can confirm that the bulk of any exodus is confined (not 100% perhaps, but in large part) to the pandemic era, and not so much a four-year problem, and that Newton’s percentages were on a par, and remain so, with Wellesley, Weston, and to a slightly lesser extent, Brookline. For what it’s worth.
I plan on voting for Valerie for Ward 7 School Committee. Over a year ago, when advocating for more in-person school was scientifically justified but politically risky, Valerie helped organize concerned parents and was instrumental in the successful petition for the SC to vote down the proposed MOA (a petition many smart people told her beforehand had virtually zero chance of success). I really respect people who take public risks and then back them up with action. This election year many people have said they want incumbents challenged, Valerie is the only person that has stepped up and done that for SC.
Understandably many people will say the kids are back in school now, so what about the future? I know Valerie will passionately advocate for all of the district’s children. She is also blunt, and won’t pussyfoot around hard facts. I personally would not have focused so much on rankings in the opening statement above, but with Valerie you never have to guess her intentions! I think she’ll ruffle some feathers as a SC member and may receive pushback from the holdover members. I’m fine with that, that body could use some more robust debate (and many of the holdover members would privately agree with that). Her years of deep involvement in NPS will arm her with a multitude of facts for those debates. Hopefully the other members of the SC, who are also smart, knowledgeable parents, will respond in kind, and the sophistication of discourse will be elevated. Also, Valerie knows the NPS high school landscape well, and other than Anping Shen no other SC member next year will have any connection to our high schools.
I believe this will be a close race. Valerie’s opponent is well spoken, well credentialed, and I believe also has good intentions. Our conversations have been meaningful. I’ve heard many informed people say they wish Valerie were running in a different Ward. On balance though, I believe Valerie will help pull the SC toward what many voters say they want: more vigor, transparency, and active oversight of NPS.
And to make some other assumptions about decrease in enrollment from NPS during the pandemic….
* A large public school system will always have more constraints and less flexibility on policy than a private school, even if they execute perfectly (which Newton did not).
* Private schools could set their COVID policy with more flexibility and impose more flexible constraints based on their relatively small student bodies. Given their dependence on tuition, these schools may have been more motivated to be open sooner and longer, but that’s really a supposition on my part. I have heard from families with kids in private school that classroom or even school-wide closures did happen because of COVID outbreaks.
* Families of means have the luxury of being able to make choices optimized for themselves. If they decided they wanted or needed their kids in school, they could make that happen with a few phone calls and a check. If remote or hybrid wasn’t working for them, they had the means to hire a tutor. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that at all. But it’s no surprise that a city of affluence like Newton would see such departures.
Incidentally, one of our friend families moved to a smaller district to keep their kids in school for 2020-2021. They also moved back for this school year to benefit from the educational and social environment that NPS offers. Changing environments certainly aren’t great for kids either. We don’t yet know how much flight was a tactical decision and thus temporary. Worrying too much about it right now seems like a distraction from the excellence we all want to achieve.
Craig,
I think the title of Valerie’s article in the New England Real Estate Journal, “Open the schools to improve business conditions”, speaks for itself, and Mike Halle has highlighted up-thread some of the content that supports the conclusion that she was not overly concerned with the health risks. Recall that in February the vaccine was not yet widely available, and so the community as a whole had not yet had time to develop any herd immunity.
The fact that private schools re-opened more more quickly than the public schools I suspect had a lot to do with their need to maintain an income stream.
And so some of the wealthier families in this wealthy town moved their kids to the private schools. Time will tell whether they keep them there when the pandemic eventually subsides, but these people are still paying the real estate taxes that fund our schools, and so I would have thought that the extra funding per remaining student would actually be a welcome benefit.
Sean – Most disturbing to me about all of those Trump contributions is that she continued to donate even more after the election was over. There are not many “life long Democrats” that are in that club
Valerie:
“This is a non-partisan local city school committee race. I am, however, a lifelong Democrat.”
I’m sorry, what?? Let’s see, in 2019 and 2020 you contributed to:
National Victory Action Fund, “Build the robust grassroots digital fundraising infrastructure Republicans will need to win the House and Senate”
WinRed, a payment platform “designed to help GOP candidates and committees across the US”
The National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Help us take back the Senate”
Donald J. Trump For President, Inc.
Republican National Committee
Trump Make America Great Again Committee
…for a total of $1800.
I cannot for the life of me understand how someone who professes to be a lifelong Democrat could do this. The fact that you had four years to understand what kind of man — and party — you were donating to makes it even worse.
I will leave it to readers to assess the veracity of your statement.
I realize I am posting quite a bit on this thread, but I just realized one fundamental difference I have with Candidate Pontiff’s statement.
I think Newton Public Schools are providing an excellent education for our kids. For my kids’ teachers, I really couldn’t be happier this year. Even last year, with all the hurdles in place, and having one kid in an older school, I feel we have much to be grateful for from excellent teaching staff and school leadership.
Would I like affirmation of a well-ranked school system of individual school? Sure. Could NPS do better? Always. Was decision-making during COVID not-excellent to say it nicely? Absolutely.
My biggest criticisms of NPS beyond COVID are with its physical plant, some of its internal and external processes that impact students and families, the intrigue around its relationship with its teachers, and the vague disconnect and other issues that exist between parents and some parts in NPS leadership. I also want to make sure that our positive experience is shared by all students and families.
But I look forward to my kids continuing the progression from Franklin to Day to Newton North. I really do. Our search for excellence for every child shouldn’t overlook the fact that Newton schools have so much positive to offer.
There, I said it.
Her political donations and later assertion that ,”I am, however, a lifelong Democrat.” tells me that she is either an idiot or a liar. Take your choice. She is unfit for the job.
@Jackson joe: I agree, it’s shocking to see contributions AFTER the election. Were they meant to help Trump “stop the steal”?
Mike Halle: “Our search for excellence for every child shouldn’t overlook the fact that Newton schools have so much positive to offer.”
Yes!!! Amen!!
Too tired tonight to argue, but will lead and end with this…
1. Most of these comments are laser focused on whom the Pontiffs donated to (a list that also includes Mayor Fuller, Rep. Auchincloss and Governor Patrick, btw) but Councilors Danberg and Noel gets a pass for receiving donations from developers with active projects in Newton.
2. If Valerie was on the SC last year, there is no doubt she would have fought like mad to get our kids back in-person sooner.
Voting for Valerie!
Matt,
It’s not whom Valerie received contributions from that many folks find abhorrent, it’s whom she gave to. She is, in short, a Trump enabler.
I realize that you are just being loyal to your preferred slate of candidates, but you really do have at least a couple of duds.
@Robert – yes, loyalty is my kryptonite, 😉
Don’t know why she voted for Trump and can’t imagine to guess why – especially since she’s donated to all the Mass Democrats previously mentioned and more.
That said, the sign of a good leader and consensus builder, is someone who can empathize and openly receive various if not opposing points of view. It’s easy to be blinded by passion for a cause, even if it means rejecting good ideas and solutions.
In both Valerie and Paul, I see candidates who can work with all sides, and not dig in their heels simply our of principle. That is one of many reasons I’ll be voting for them both.
(And before you say anything, I will personally try to do a better job of seeing the other side as well…. after this election) 🙂
Matt – Consider that she gave money to Trump AFTER the election.
Maybe that agrees with your own philosophy if so I had you pegged wrong.
Matt said: “In both Valerie and Paul, I see candidates who can work with all sides, and not dig in their heels simply out of principle.”
Matt, I really do try to be fair. But please read Ms. Pontiff’s post linked by Robert Welbourn and tell me it that it doesn’t sound like someone who would dig in on principle.
How else do you interpret, “Many businesses have announced that employees will return to the office in phases over the summer. Assurance should be made that this decision is final and will not be delayed.”?
Such a rigid “principled” stance is pretty far out from where many companies and other institutions ended up setting policy, because they adapted to the Delta variant and the needs of their employees.
That’s categorically different than Paul Levy.
Mike — I agree that Paul Levy is a quality candidate, and would likely get my vote. It’s a pity he’s tied to a slate, whereas he should have broader appeal than just to the anti-development crowd. (I know, it’s a crude characterization.)
It’s been said before, but it’s a shame that we now have two de-facto local political parties characterized by their attitudes towards development, which does us all a disservice.
@Matt ” Most of these comments are laser focused on whom the Pontiffs donated to (a list that also includes Mayor Fuller, Rep. Auchincloss and Governor Patrick, btw) but Councilors Danberg and Noel gets a pass for receiving donations from developers with active projects in Newton.”
Just to be clear, there is no record that Noel took any donations from the development team for 145 Warren Street. I have plenty of reasons not to support Noel but taking inappropriate donations isn’t one of them.
Now Danberg is a different story and there is something very wrong when a developer feels they can makes such a donation and a candidate accepts it. And the fact that it was returned after it came to light is irrelevant.
I just think we need to be 100% factual. Don’t mean to highjack this thread regarding Valerie Pontiff, but since none of the moderators of V14 who can initiate a thread on this issue have chosen to do so, I am commenting here since Matt brought it up.
If Valerie has one issue that she is going to champion it is bringing back the excellence to our schools. Our schools have been riding on the Newton education reputation but reality is catching up. That is her true passion. Our schools should be preparing our kids for college and to compete in the real world. That means offering the appropriate rigor to challenge students and differentiated learning to meet the needs of all students (really not superficially). As a high school parent I have been incredibly disappointed in the experience my children have had. Last year kids got all As for showing up. Yes there should have been some flexibility due to remote learning but what occurred really did not do students any favors. NPS was going to continue with this grading system into this year until parents spoke up. Honestly I do not want my kids receiving grades that have no meaning. I want them leaning. Grades and school reputation do have value when our kids are applying to college. We need for SC members who will be advocating for NPS to bring back excellence so that our students are not at a disadvantage both from a learning perspective and for access to future opportunities.
In the reference to the article Valerie wrote about the difficulty of remote learning on business and working parents that is one area that she addressed. This is because she herself is a working parent so that is the one facet of who she is. Everyone to some level speaks from their own experiences. I do not feel this is her overwhelming agenda but rather a piece of who she is.
Valerie was involved in organizing Zooms for parents to get together to discuss their experiences with remote learning and ways to advocate for a safe return to school. NPS Administrator often made parents speaking up individually feel that it was their issue along. Valerie served a key role in bringing people together. She has a nice way of making people feel heard but also keeping things moving along in a productive manner. The zooms involved people with varying philosophies (strong advocates on testing, building experts etc) on how to get kids back in the classroom. Parent voices should have been heard by the SC and Administrators but as individuals we were being ignored. She is not going to be pushing her own agenda other than making decisions that best serve our students.
@NewtonHighlandsmom is correct. Valerie does deserve credit for bringing parents together who felt there should be a plan to return to school sooner in a safe manner. But geez, these Trump donations…I know a SC election should be non-partisan, but I’m just having a hard time getting past it. I may just leave my ballot blank on this race.
I’m with you, Bruce. I don’t think the SC election truly can be non-partisan. When you’ve got someone who donated that much to a president who openly endangers democracy, appoints someone like BETSY DEVOS, denies COVID life saving measures, says racist things like “China Virus” among countless others…this is not something I want on the school committee. This is not someone I want making decisions about education. I find it frightening, frankly.
Okay, so, here’s why I’m not voting for Ms Pontiff: Her campaign somehow acquired my cell phone number, and felt free to spam me with a campaign message. That’s *my* “kryptonite” right there: rude, invasive, permission not asked.
@MMQC, I agree 100%. Ms. Pontiff’s financial support of a dangerous anti-democratic cause is IMO disqualifying, and she makes matters worse by gaslighting us above.
@Bee Seeking Valerie is not unique in using texting for campaign messages. I got several from Ed Markey’s campaign in the last election and my husband got one today from Ruthanne’s campaign, We did not give either our phone numbers. My guess is that a marketing co that sends those texts.