Some Choice For Madison School Board

I guess it’s better than nothing.

I had expected that, per usual, the two incumbents up for reelection to the Madison School Board would face no opposition. So, I was pleasantly surprised that both Blair Mosner-Feltham and Nikki Vander Meulen will have opponents.

The trouble is that their opponents are not raising the issues that need to be raised, though Vander Meulen’s opponent does show some promise.

Mosner-Feltham’s opponent is Daniella Molle, an education researcher at UW-Madison, Molle said she’s running to advocate for multilingual students.

“When we have more than a fifth of our students identified as English language learners, to not have any representation on the board seems like something we should remedy,” she said.

I wasn’t aware that there’s any specific problem with teaching multilingual students in the Madison district. Maybe Molle will identify something that needs to be addressed during her campaign. But, in any event, the last thing this board needs is another special needs advocate. My counter to Molle would be that with 100% of Madison renters and property owners paying higher taxes than ever for the schools, to not have any representation for them on the board seems like something we should remedy.

Molle also said she chose to run against Mosner Feltham because she didn’t want to displace a board member of color or one who identifies as having a disability. Four board members are Black and Vander Meulen identifies as being on the autism spectrum. That’s the kind of obsessively politically correct point of view that is in no short supply on this board. And, by the way, how do you show respect for people when you say that you won’t treat them like anyone else, when you won’t pay them the respect of challenging their ideas?

And, in fact, Vander Meulen could use a challenge. According to this morning’s story in the State Journal she said she wants to continue “giving a voice to those who didn’t have a voice” — in particular, students receiving special education services. She also pointed to work she’s done on the board aimed at limiting how often students with behavioral problems are removed from the classroom and physically restrained.

Again, the voice that’s not being heard is the voice of taxpayers, the voice of people who aren’t satisfied with test scores or high truancy rates or classroom disruptions. In fact, Vander Muelen is actually proud of keeping disruptive kids in classrooms where they detract from the educations of others.

Her challenger is Dana Colussi-Lynde who said she would “prioritize responsible technology usage, transparency in spending, equitable resource distribution, and competitive teacher compensation, to ensure that our public schools remain the first choice for parents in the area.”

I’m not sure what any of that means, but “transparency in spending” sounds vaguely good to me. So, that’s sort of promising. It’s at least possible I may have one candidate I can vote for. With this dismal board that counts as progress.