Somehow, I think guest columnist Tony Giardina misses the point in his interesting Feb.9 Op-Ed (“The cost of careless words in the school funding debate“). I don’t think those of us arguing for increased school funding are trying to convince students of anything, nor are we trying to define their experience for them. Many of them have come forward to speak for themselves on that account, as have school staff and parents. I agree it would be interesting to have students consider some of the language being used, and ask them then if they find it appropriate/applicable or not.
We are using the obvious tool, speech, to target/question the actions taken by the mayor, her administration and various — in my mind — recalcitrant city councilors. While a lot of focus has been on the schools, we have been questioning the use of city funds overall, asking: are essential services like schools and sidewalks being adequately funded.
In terms of school funding, they “won” the first round of budget debates last spring. Organizing for the November election was the public’s effort to win the next round in the “debate”; school funding and overall city budget priorities might have been the number one issue on the mind of voters. The barely-eking-out-a win-outcome indicates the extent of dissatisfaction with the current administration across the city, yet judging by the Feb. 5 City Council meeting the mayor seems to have not changed her approach to the issue of school funding or to the people advocating for an increase.
Power dynamics obviously favors those in power — with the power to make decisions, take action and legislate; the rest of us must rely on words. I’m not on social media; what I see of this “debate” is not uncivil. In truth, the call for “civility” or “politeness” or “respect” has often been a tool of oppression, used to silence dissenters. And in truth we do want to condemn verbal abuse whether it’s coming from the president of the United States or the mayor’s husband. We are in difficult times and dissent is a complicated action. How many of those we honor for struggling on and on against the odds were accused of rude, uncivil — even abusive behavior before the tides turned in their favor.
Many of us are looking for transparency; for city government and offices (including Planning and Sustainability) to make an honest effort to hear, respond to and collaborate with residents, to show us by their actions and policies that they have listened to us and thought about our concerns. To change course instead of digging in their heels. This will help “the debate.”
Claudia Lefko lives in Northampton.