Panel votes to suspend Ms. Lawson-Muhammad

kmt said:
No surprise, the CCR is once again stoking racial conflict.  They’re kiss-up/kick-down people, slandered locals in BOE elections for years, desperately trying to appear relevant.

“Racial conflict.” “Just cheapens the real problems.” “Pathetic.”

You’re a Zagat Guide to indigestion in a serious discussion.


Nothing that you say has any legitimacy at all Dave.


That’s too bad, kmt. There’s a lot for us both to learn in this big ol’ world, and in the past I learned a thing or two from our MOL chats.


You would think so, but actually no you’re a white male.  So just apologize and then delete your account.


Yeah, I hear that kind of thing a lot from whites. Never, in my personal experience, from African-Americans.


yahooyahoo said:


DaveSchmidt said:
Six of the nine terms are listed as expiring next year.
Coalition on Race Asks Gov. Murphy to Review Ethics Commission in Light of Lawson-Muhammad Ruling (Village Green)

An excerpt from the Community Coalition on Race’s letter:
A significant amount of the Board’s written opinion and deliberation on the recommended length of suspension focused on their board assessment of whether or not a black woman feared a police officer. As not a single member has the life experience of a woman or person of color, their systematic dismissiveness of those claims displays bias.
Moreover, the revelation, if accurate, that one of the commission was in law enforcement and was indicted for first-degree manslaughter after shooting a black man in the back in 2002 (the charge was later dismissed), betrays the commission’s extreme poor judgement in allowing that member to deliberate on this case. How is it possible not to have demanded his recusal in a case involving a black woman expressing fear about the police in the context of increased national and local dialogue about the disproportionate use of force on black persons? 
Is the Community Coalition on Race officially backing SLM in this matter or are they just asking Murphy to address the Ethics Commission membership?

 Seems to me they were pretty clear. The board's makeup doesn't reflect the demographics of the state or this town and for that reason their assessment of Ms. Lawson-Muhammad's state of mind is always going to be faulty. Additionally, one of the members, a former law enforcement officer, was indicted (and as is the custom- cleared) for manslaughter involving a Black man during a police pursuit. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.  

Had the board been at all in tune with the world as it exists in the 21st century they would have asked (or he would have offered) the former officer to recuse himself.  The remaining members could have come to the same exact decision, but at least the optics would have been more palatable and the membership (while still not representative) would at least be able to point to the empty gesture as a 'good faith' decision.

The idea that this didn't occur seems to support the idea that the board is not at all concerned with being fair and impartial (much less politically astute) and therefore not qualified to render a judgement free of bias.

All of these "ethics" proceedings are really performance art bullshite since the entire ethics commission and the School Board have long been in violation of federal and state laws requiring equal access to education- which is of course an ethics violation per the rules and regulations of both entities.

Apparently that ongoing ethical misstep effecting thousands of Black, brown and learning-challenged students is being ignored so that Ms Lawson-Muhammad can do penance for making bad decisions one morning while driving her kids to school.


DaveSchmidt said:
Yeah, I hear that kind of thing a lot from whites. Never, in my personal experience, from African-Americans.

 You probably don't hear that much from anybody Black or white who has the capacity and desire to entertain competing ideas in an effort to expand their worldview. 

I know I understand more about certain mindsets when kmt (and others) take the time to make an actual point. If you don't read and then consider, why bother participating here? If you lack the intellectual vigor to read, decipher, contemplate, and then compose a useable response - why not go flagellate over the Mueller Report or offer tips on eradicating dandelions?

Bottom line-  some folks, like kmt, are challenged (and a little frightened) by your thought process. They're never going to cop to it- but they are. I'm more easily dismissed as are other folks presumed to be Black (or at the least "non-white")- but you present a different challenge to other white folks that they have more difficulty dismissing. That's why they keep coming for you to remind you that you're white, apparently not understanding how much they're actually saying about themselves and what their concept of 'whiteness' is and what it requires.


flimbro said:

 You probably don't hear that much from anybody Black or white who has the capacity and desire to entertain competing ideas in an effort to expand their worldview.

You’re right.

I know I understand more about certain mindsets when kmt (and others) take the time to make an actual point. If you don't read and then consider, why bother participating here? If you lack the intellectual vigor to read, decipher, contemplate, and then compose a useable response - why not go flagellate over the Mueller Report or offer tips on eradicating dandelions?

That’s as trenchant as it can be put.

Thanks, flimbro.


SLM is an ex officio member of the CCR Board of Trustees.

The CCR could have tried to be a bridge between different groups of the community on this matter.


yahooyahoo said:
SLM is an ex officio member of the CCR Board of Trustees.
The CCR could have tried to be a bridge between different groups of the community on this matter.

From the coalition’s statement in May:

The Coalition has a good working relationship with South Orange Police Chief Kyle Kroll. He has kept his door open to us when we have had concerns about profiling or bias in policing. He is proactive on these issues and works to change policies and practices when bias is an issue. We appreciate his efforts here and we believe he deserves the community’s respect.

BOE member Stephanie Lawson-Muhammad is the assigned liaison from the BOE to our Board of Trustees. Liaisons function in an ex officio role to keep our board informed of actions that are connected to our mission of equity and racial integration in the schools and towns. In her role as a Board of Education member and as our liaison, she is a volunteer who gives her time and talent to the community and she has a record of working for racial equity in the schools.

https://villagegreennj.com/opinion/coalition-on-race-concerning-the-traffic-stop-video-in-south-orange/


DaveSchmidt said:


yahooyahoo said:
SLM is an ex officio member of the CCR Board of Trustees.
The CCR could have tried to be a bridge between different groups of the community on this matter.
From the coalition’s statement in May:
The Coalition has a good working relationship with South Orange Police Chief Kyle Kroll. He has kept his door open to us when we have had concerns about profiling or bias in policing. He is proactive on these issues and works to change policies and practices when bias is an issue. We appreciate his efforts here and we believe he deserves the community’s respect.
BOE member Stephanie Lawson-Muhammad is the assigned liaison from the BOE to our Board of Trustees. Liaisons function in an ex officio role to keep our board informed of actions that are connected to our mission of equity and racial integration in the schools and towns. In her role as a Board of Education member and as our liaison, she is a volunteer who gives her time and talent to the community and she has a record of working for racial equity in the schools.
https://villagegreennj.com/opinion/coalition-on-race-concerning-the-traffic-stop-video-in-south-orange/

This statement is from May 2018.  It is basically meaningless in relation to the recent developments we are discussing.  What has the CCR done since the incident with SLM?


yahooyahoo said:

What has the CCR done since the incident with SLM?

Other than issue that statement, you mean? This week, it wrote to the governor to ask him to review the makeup of the School Ethics Commission.

In between those two actions, I don’t know.


Just reading all this makes me realize that people around here are just a few degrees from blowing a gasket. I keep wondering why someone who feels a town or club or whatever, will be prejudiced against them would want to join that club, or buy a home in that town. I know....it's a free country...but I was in an area in Florida looking to buy a home, and I decided against it when I was profiled by my licence plate. There's so much hatred in this country, on all sides, which is very unhealthy. Every single thing you do shouldn't be looked at based on race. If we only have white cops deal with white people, and black cops deal with black people, would it really erase incidents like these? 


Profiled by license plate?

Trying to figure it out. Only thing I could come up with is that it was from a Northern State and the Florida folks didn't like "Yankees".

Sorry to change the subject. Just happened to wander in and was very confused by that reference.


No it wouldn’t, and the superficial arguments here aren’t “challenging” in any way.  They’re unhinged ignorant bloviating.  Knowing nothing about the ethics committee, the role it plays in oversight, the rules that BOE members operate under, you question the integrity of a fair governing body based on nothing but the skin color of some current members.  It’s ridiculous.


The CCR has a history of stirring the pot.  I’ll never forget the Pai/Eastman/Bennett campaign where they tried to slander a local citizen and take down a guy whose major campaign position was to improve computer science education in local schools.  The CCR doesn’t care about improving educational opportunities for all kids, they care about keeping the subject on racial conflict.  They are a blight.


kmt said:
No it wouldn’t, and the superficial arguments here aren’t “challenging” in any way.  They’re unhinged ignorant bloviating.  Knowing nothing about the ethics committee, the role it plays in oversight, the rules that BOE members operate under, you question the integrity of a fair governing body based on nothing but the skin color of some current members.  It’s ridiculous.


The CCR has a history of stirring the pot.  I’ll never forget the Pai/Eastman/Bennett campaign where they tried to slander a local citizen and take down a guy whose major campaign position was to improve computer science education in local schools.  The CCR doesn’t care about improving educational opportunities for all kids, they care about keeping the subject on racial conflict.  They are a blight.

 Good job! 

Although I’d bet Dave actually did read up on the makeup of the School Ethics Board, just like I’m sure sprout took the time to research before presenting ideas on de escalation techniques. And I know I definitely took the time to review the mandates of the Ethics Commission and the BOE as well as the prevailing state and federal laws requiring equal access. So what did you read that qualified as ignorant bloviating? More importantly, I just checked and I don’t think I’m unhinged anywhere. 


As for basing an opinion on nothing other than skin color, I couldn’t agree more. Wonder how that got started?


STANV said:
Profiled by license plate?
Trying to figure it out. Only thing I could come up with is that it was from a Northern State and the Florida folks didn't like "Yankees".
Sorry to change the subject. Just happened to wander in and was very confused by that reference.

 Yes. " Go back to Jersey"...

Cop pulled me over asked me why I was cruising around the neighborhood. 


Jaytee said:


STANV said:
Profiled by license plate?
Trying to figure it out. Only thing I could come up with is that it was from a Northern State and the Florida folks didn't like "Yankees".
Sorry to change the subject. Just happened to wander in and was very confused by that reference.
 Yes. " Go back to Jersey"...
Cop pulled me over asked me why I was cruising around the neighborhood. 

Well I’ll be damned! It’s been the license plates all this time?!


PANEL VOTES TO SUSPEND MS. LAWSON-MUHAMMAD

$$$$   8   22   3

Choose your table wisely, because the “bloviating” is “ignorant” on one side of this “superficial argument” in the MOL district. The restroom’s “unhinged” pocket door is so smooth it’s “ridiculous.” But regulars who know “nothing” about “the rules that BOE members operate under” recommend avoiding the Rule (e).


DaveSchmidt said:
PANEL VOTES TO SUSPEND MS. LAWSON-MUHAMMAD
$$$$   8   22   3
Choose your table wisely, because the “bloviating” is “ignorant” on one side of this “superficial argument” in the MOL district. The restroom’s “unhinged” pocket door is so smooth it’s “ridiculous.” But regulars who know “nothing” about “the rules that BOE members operate under” recommend avoiding the Rule (e).

 In Inglish, please.


Formerlyjerseyjack said:

In Inglish, please.

I was trying again to be entertaining. Don’t give it a second thought.

kmt said:

The CCR has a history of stirring the pot.  I’ll never forget the Pai/Eastman/Bennett campaign where they tried to slander a local citizen and take down a guy whose major campaign position was to improve computer science education in local schools.  

BrickTamland’s brief MOL tenure sure ended with a bang.

https://maplewood.worldwebs.com/forums/discussion/coalition-on-race-responds-to-candidate-forum-question-dispute?page=next&limit=


DaveSchmidt said:


Formerlyjerseyjack said:

In Inglish, please.
I was trying again to be entertaining. Don’t give it a second thought.

 OK.


DaveSchmidt said:
PANEL VOTES TO SUSPEND MS. LAWSON-MUHAMMAD
$$$$   8   22   3
Choose your table wisely, because the “bloviating” is “ignorant” on one side of this “superficial argument” in the MOL district. The restroom’s “unhinged” pocket door is so smooth it’s “ridiculous.” But regulars who know “nothing” about “the rules that BOE members operate under” recommend avoiding the Rule (e).

 Nobody goes there anymore.  It's too crowded.  


pardon me.  just breaking up the run of white guy posts.


Robert_Casotto said:
pardon me.  just breaking up the run of white guy posts.

 

You sure?  

How do you know what color people here are (or are you guessing from content?)


BTW - I’m pink...


Letters to the state education commissioner from SOMA Justice and the local NAACP unit, as reported by Village Green:

https://villagegreennj.com/towns/south-orange/local-naacp-unit-and-soma-justice-weigh-in-on-lawson-muhammad-ruling-penalty/


flimbro said:


Jaytee said:

STANV said:
Profiled by license plate?
Trying to figure it out. Only thing I could come up with is that it was from a Northern State and the Florida folks didn't like "Yankees".
Sorry to change the subject. Just happened to wander in and was very confused by that reference.
 Yes. " Go back to Jersey"...
Cop pulled me over asked me why I was cruising around the neighborhood. 
Well I’ll be damned! It’s been the license plates all this time?!

 That's strange considering how many NJ retirees live in FL and probably scoped it out before moving down there.  Do they really want to discourage that migration (of people and $$$) into their state?


sac said:

Do they really want to discourage that migration (of people and $$$) into their state?

Take it from the husband of a native: Yes.


An excellent op-ed in today’s Times that addresses several themes raised in this thread, by a man (Teaneck native, Penn grad) whose acuity has long been obvious to Phillies fans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/18/opinion/sunday/doug-glanville-cubs.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

An excerpt:

The communication breakdown here can be illustrated by imagining a coordinate graph on which you plot what you understand to be the racist episodes you experience or hear about during your life. The x-axis represents the passage of time and the y-axis represents the degree of racism of an episode — from someone’s assumption that you’re a valet when you’re parking your own car to the burning of a cross on your lawn. For each experience, you mark a dot.

Over time, the dots accumulate, and you start to see a pattern. You draw a curve that connects the dots and you develop a keen sense of things that happen to you because of your race. The pattern allows you to notice correlations, to make predictions. You are learning from evidence, in part for your self-preservation.

Now imagine someone plotting a graph who encounters such episodes from a more privileged or isolated perspective. Maybe this person hears about them only if they are sensational enough to make the news. He sees evidence of racism only from time to time, and when he does, it tends to be stark and unambiguous — the use of racial slurs, an explicit avowal of hate.

This person’s graph has many fewer dots, with larger spaces between them. There is no curve he is able to draw. No pattern presents itself. Racism seems to him to be a rarity, maybe even invented.

How do I talk with this person and convince him of the pattern I see? What makes my curve real in light of his points? If I draw his attention to an episode that is not overtly racist, he may think it reasonable to dismiss it as an “isolated incident,” to accuse me of seeing things that don’t really exist. Why jump to conclusions? Why play the race card? He may tell me that racism wouldn’t be such a problem if I didn’t keep bringing it up.

Another excerpt:

Ambiguity can make people of color feel that their sanity hinges on a single verdict. If the Cubs fan was flashing a white nationalist sign, we are in danger; if he was not, we are “politicizing” things or “race-baiting.” This is an incapacitating position to find yourself in, especially when you are just an innocent bystander. You are now forced to redundantly relitigate the existence of racism from a defensive position.

This is why, whether the Cubs fan is innocent or guilty, my life does not just “go on.” I do not have the luxury to decide when I am done talking about racism, because I have to live with it. The public will eventually lose interest in this controversy; the Cubs can return to their bullpen questions. There can be a collective sigh of relief that racism is a topic we don’t have to discuss anymore; we can even declare ourselves “post-racial.”

If the Cubs fan is innocent, he will be O.K. That would be the just outcome. But racism will remain. Being wrongfully accused, while unfair, is not the same as living a life where your skin color automatically makes you a target. Being on guard about hate is not “political.” It is a matter of simple self-protection.

In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.