Priorities & Stances & Beliefs

Why are you running again? What do you most hope to do with another term? I am running again because separate from Ms. Donna Jones, who is a 20 year fixture on the board, I am the longest tenured board member, so I want to sustain stability and continuity for the district and the city. I am also deeply invested in the Future Ready plan and want to make sure whatever changes the district makes, that we keep the promises we are making to our children and their families. Our children, especially our Black children & lower income children, deserve so much more than we have given them in the past. I want to push the district until every child possible is reading at grade-level, and reading for joy, not just to learn. Lastly and selfishly, if the voters give me a second term, I will be able to be on stage to hug three of my children as they graduate over the next four years—we only know from where our Spring 2027 grad will be graduating, given the Future Ready plan, but I cherish the thought of being there, no matter whose stage it is.

Position/thoughts on the proposed closure plan: My priority in the new portfolio plan is for all the kids to have all the things. As a former neighborhood school parent, current gifted + magnet parent, I have seen the disparities first hand. My children have more access to challenging coursework, art and music programs, languages and sweetheart deals than their peers in neighborhood and some magnet schools that function as neighborhood schools. The specifics of how we get there, while meaningful for me in terms of our communities’ emotional attachments and history (your story matters!) are less important than a fulfillment of the promise of certificated teachers in every classroom, full-time in building support and professional staff, excellent principals, and equal opportunity of access in terms of resources, electives, and enrichment. Because of the iterative nature of the plan, being responsive to board and community feedback, it does appear like we are just dancing around things, but I know every member of the team involved cares deeply for the children of St. Louis. And its important to point out that Black students will again be the most impacted in terms of relocation, and that matters hugely.

Generative AI — I’m dubious that adopting this technology will provide positive results. In many cases, we know it does harm. AI that involves running trained algorithms to expose cancerous tissue or find houses on a map is entirely different than a robot who’s been told their job is to keep the user engaged.

Devices in school — While I support the use of computers, tablets, calculators to complete specific tasks, my desire is for children to learn from their teacher with whom they have a positive relationship, and from their peers as they learn differently together. I would like to see our kids prepared for a far healthier society than what we’ve got now.

Charter Schools — The children in charter schools in St. Louis are still our responsibility, ultimately. I love them and want the best for them. The grown ups involved in the charter schools, however… yes, that’s a struggle. I do not love that for many of the larger “brands” of charter schools, public money flows through them via rent to religious bodies. I do not love that charters are precarious institutions that can close with no notice, leaving parents and receiving schools scrambling. I don’t love the bifurcation that occurs within communities. I don’t like the way our extreme school choice can detach kids from their neighborhood communities. I don’t love the inequality that exists within the charter school universe, the way they can sort kids in or out or deem a kid “not the right fit.” I do respect the schools that serve the same student body as SLPS does. I do not like that charter schools are privately governed by an appointed board (and who appoints them?). Most especially I hate‍ the way charter schools as they currently operate, give people an out to say, “hey look, those kids do better,” without considering the negative affects that charter schools have for children who stay in the public school system, not to mention the communities they disrupt.

Vouchers — again, I don’t think public money for education should go to religious institutions. Also we know that mostly the people who benefit are folks who were already enrolled in private schools, so the main excuse for vouchers is suspect. Additionally, private schools can turn kids away for many different reasons, from “we can’t meet the needs of lil Johnny because of his disability” to “we only take christian families” to “your gender or sexuality isn’t acceptable here.” One of the great joys of public education is that we are charged with meeting the educational needs of every student, not matter what it takes.

tax abatement — booooooo. My position is not “no tax abatements ever,” but rarely does it seem that the projects asking for them will contribute to the growth and stability of the city for families, especially low-income families. We will not grow as a city if we just keep providing more luxury housing for single white men.

state takeover of SLPS — deeply opposed. I want my children’s schools to be governed by people who love them, not appointed by out of town government entities, who have proven repeatedly that Black success is not on their agenda.

children — I believe that every child has gifts to bring to the world, and we should do everything possible to provide sufficient opportunities, starting with literacy, to expose and develop their gifts.

religious institutions — aka you are a pastor’s wife; why do you hate churches? — I come from and still am in a tradition that deeply values Christian education. I’m also from the South, where I have seen “Christian” schools be acceptable ploys to continue educational segregation. I also believe that the Christian part of the education is primarily a parent responsibility. If they choose to fulfill that by choosing christian education, I do not think the state should be involved. In fact, many of the institutions I remember from my childhood tried to be as far away from government rules or funds as possible, so there was no way the state could start to meddle in the church’s business. In addition, I definitely don’t like using public education money to basically subsidize religious entities’ existence. If your congregation can no longer provide the funds for your church to flourish, hosting a charter school in your now-empty educational buildings and sometimes (cough* cough * Eagle) trying to sneakily evangelize the students is not what I could call a blessing or a providence. God doesn’t need you to be sneaky to work.