Fayette school officials need to figure out better ways to deal with snowy days | Opinion

NTI use

The recent 4 NTI days and one snow day have revealed a massive blind spot in Fayette County Public School’s (FCPS) professed commitment to equity, demonstrating a privileged and inaccurate view of the community.

What does FCPS expect single parent households to do? Or households where the adults can be fired for calling off one day? Or those where one of the caregivers is disabled?

The current overuse of NTI is justified because 20 percent of the roads are unsafe and some schools DON’T HAVE HEAT! That is a planning and budgeting problem. Why prioritize Chromebooks over operational HVAC units in all school buildings?

True equity would lessen the burden on families who are poor, led by a single parent, and/or include disabled caregivers. It feels we’re not even thought of and that FCPS assumes every family has a safety net. I say FCPS must realign its priorities so NTI days are a rarity. Perhaps, if the roads are so dangerous, bus drivers should receive training in Michigan.

NTI was a policy needed during Covid. To rely on it still reveals a hypocrisy in the FCPS commitment to “equity.” FCSP can use these moments to do better. Please - do better.

Katie Scherrer, Lexington

Snow Plan B

Kudos to the Lexington Herald-Leader’s staff for the very thoughtful editorial expressing concern about Fayette County Public Schools closing for more than a week. Reading the editorial reminded me of the year almost five decades ago when Lexington was struck with snowstorms closing the local schools for weeks at a time. Having grown-up in New England where schools were rarely closed, I was befuddled and frustrated. And with two school-aged children at home, I decided to contact the mayor and school superintendent to see what could be done to remedy the situation. Shortly after that, the mayor appointed a snow removal task force and the school board appointed a committee which resulted in a more effective approach to removing snow and an alternate route bus route called “Plan B” that was used as needed for several years thereafter.

I’m not sure what has become of that plan, but I feel confident something can be done to alleviate the problem of students missing valuable in person instruction for long periods of time. As the editorial suggested, with collective, creative energy, this problem can be solved.

Sharon Brennan, Lexington

Crime realities

Our Kentucky Legislature seems hellbent on passing HB5 which is titled “Safer Kentucky Act” but should really be called “Incarcerate Kentucky”.

I want to try to dispel three myths about this act. Somehow our representatives think crime is a problem. It is not. Crime is down significantly in the nation and according to statistics from the Kentucky State Police it is also down in Kentucky. We do not need to be putting more people in jail. Kentucky already has the ninth highest incarceration rate in the country, according to worldpopulationreview.com. We put more people in jail than 80 percent of the states in the nation. And putting more people in jail does not make us safer. And a study by the Equal Justice Initiative (Eji.org) found that there is no correlation between incarceration and the crime rate. In fact, some states have decreased incarceration AND seen lower crime rates.

We do not need HB5. It does not make Kentucky safer. Ask your legislator to note NO.

Dan Nolet, Danville

3 strikes

In response to Kaylee Palmer’s recent Op-Ed on incarceration - so, she’s against a three strikes rule? How many strikes would she give a persistent felon? How many people would she allow that person to victimize?

The tried and true formula for centuries is that if you don’t want to go to jail; don’t break the law (3 times or more). It’s way past time that we start valuing the law abiding citizen again instead of the criminal.

Doug Reed, Lexington

Butt out

In regard to HB5, it’s interesting the Republican party, the party going to extremes to protect the unborn, has no problem with business owners knocking the crap out of homeless people if they are hurting the bottom line. The G.O.P. — the party of smaller government, the party intent on deregulating the administrative state — has no problem sticking its nose into local government, mandating exactly how every city in the state will deal with homeless populations.

Local ordinances exist for a very good reason: people who live in a community, know how best to address those issues affecting their community. Yes, there is a homeless problem in the city where I live, but we have many dedicated people working diligently, compassionately and tirelessly to get these people off the street. If and when new ordinances are necessary, we are perfectly capable of writing them ourselves, without Frankfort’s “help.”

Ross DeAeth, Lexington

Reproductive fights

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed 50 years of settled law, Roe v. Wade, and sent the decision back to the states. What used to be a private, personal, and painful decision for women, has become a public, political litmus test for local, state, and federal elections.

If you claim you are pro-life, you believe women cannot be trusted to decide what is best for their lives, bodies, and families. If you are pro-choice, you believe it is a personal, private decision for women with no role for individuals and politicians. Please note, there is not a pro-abortion lane because no one is advocating for abortion, only for women to choose. Voting is critical at every level, especially in Kentucky, because Frankfort isn’t finished with taking away women’s rights, just ask them.

Denise Combs, Hazard

Personhood law

A few Republicans in the Kentucky General Assembly have filed a bill that would require child support payments from the biological father “at any time following conception.” Will this eventually lead to a fetal personhood law, many of us are wondering?

I don’t pretend to know the answer, but I’m willing to admit that Kentucky voters’ rejection of the proposed state constitutional ban on abortion in 2022 left some questions unanswered. That momentous referendum told us that Kentuckians believe abortion services ought to be available. But, it said nothing about when or how. Some would say this lack of specificity indicates that Kentuckians don’t want any limitations, but that’s a very long stretch.

In the meantime, the Yahoo News/YouGov poll in December found that 79 percent of Americans think doctors, not the courts, should be the ones to say whether a pregnancy threatens the pregnant person enough to justify an abortion in the late term. Maybe Kentuckians agree with that.

In any event, we can’t know what Kentuckians think on the specifics until we ask questions about these specifics in public. That would require a public opinion poll.

Tom Louderback, Louisville

Biased claims

I know discussions around Israel and Palestine aren’t necessarily the most important thing to most Kentuckians. But as media outlets claiming to be neutral, all local news sources uncritically parrot Israel’s stance without fairly presenting a neutral side, let alone the Palestinian perspective.

When international courts accuse a nation of committing genocidal acts, that country is going to say anything and everything to deny such atrocities. Obviously this means their comments will be biased. And there are countless stories from international news outlets and social media which demonstrate that not only are Israel’s claims biased, many are false. As South Africa pointed out, Israel created an apartheid state and is actively engaging in genocide.

It’s true: Hamas is a despicable, violent, inexcusable terrorist organization. Also true: not all Palestinians are Hamas. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims there are no innocent civilians, a statement which – when spoken by any political leader – should horrify, especially with over 25,000 non-Israelis killed and 60,000 injured during a “war” heavily funded with U.S. tax dollars.

It’s shameful for any news agency to allow an allegedly genocidal regime to dictate the news. Please be more critical of Israel’s government; and please share Palestinians’ perspectives, too.

Bronson O’Quinn, Lexington

Ballot disqualification

In their latest brief to the Supreme Court, U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, and U.S. Reps. Andy Barr, Brett Guthrie, and James Comer (all R-Kentucky) conclude the rights of states are less important than the interests of the GOP. They seem more interested in validating their loyalty to former President Donald Trump then in the interests of this country or its people.

This brief is an affront to states’ rights based on the notion Congress determines the eligibility of candidates to run for office. Their view comes from the 14th Amendment. According to them, it doesn’t just give them the sole right to remove or overlook disqualifications of someone elected to public office -it gives Congress sole authority over states to decide who they MUST considered for office.

This brief says states have no right to decide who isn’t qualified to appear on their state ballots. These Representatives are telling voters in other states that only Congress can decide who they cannot consider for election. Isn’t it time to let these representatives know that placing their political interests before the interests of individual states and country is a violation of their own oath of office?

Peter Wedlund, Lexington

Run, Nikki, Run

I hope former S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley has true grit and intestinal fortitude. I hope Haley has exceptional endurance and faith. Haley must persevere in her quest for the Republican presidential nomination by not dropping out until after the Republican National Convention. She must qualify for every ballot and contest every state to the bitter end. She must endure even if her campaign dwindles to herself, a pick-up truck, and a bag of sandwiches, crisscrossing the nation. When former President Donald Trump implodes, Haley might snatch the nomination in the end.

A friend asked me what I thought of Haley and I was a little sketchy. I could never vote for her due to her authoritarian, anti-abortion choice position. Viewed from the framework of the “chaos kooks” like Trump and the schismatic House Freedom Caucus who swarm the Republican Party, Haley does seem semi-rational. I therefore lend my unsubstantial moral support to Haley.

Run, Nikki, run! Take it to the Convention!

Allen T. Kelley, Lexington

Compiled by LIz Carey