Outfall from Tuesday's Board of Ed meeting

This week saw an unusual amount of attention to a passing comment at the Board of Ed--unusual in that I'm accustomed to few people noting what happens at those meetings at all, let alone the comments that are said in passing. 

The Globe (for all that it leaves some pieces out) does a good job describing this, so I'm going to quote their work:

In the meeting, prior to the vote, Moriarty, who previously served 13 years on the Holyoke School Committee, commented that while this year “there’s no getting away” from freezing the designations, the state’s accountability system is vitally important in districts like Lawrence and Holyoke that have been labeled chronically underperforming.

“That’s a period of time now that we’ve been unable to take the kinds of actions that are necessary because of the deep inequities that exist from one district to [the] next, and we know they can’t change themselves, ‘cause they never do,” Moriarty said.

“So if there’s any place where there needs to be a very serious conversation and a very serious intentionality about moving forward, it’s going to be in a revived accountability system that follows the end of this pandemic,” he added.

Lawrence Mayor Kendrys Vasquez demanded Moriarty's resignation in an interview Thursday, calling the remarks a dog whistle. Vasquez was joined by much of the City Council, some of the state delegation, and the city's Congresswoman Lori Trahan in a letter written by State Rep. Frank Moran saying the same on Friday:

Today, I joined members of the Lawrence State Delegation, the Lawrence City Council, the Lawrence School Committee, and Congresswoman Lori Trahan in calling for the immediate removal of Michael Moriarty as a member of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, pic.twitter.com/abVGAjgTf2

— Rep. Frank Moran (@RepFrankMoran) April 23, 2021

 As best as I know, there's no mechanism by which a Board member can be fired, though I imagine the Governor can demand someone's resignation. 

There are two things that I think are key to keep in mind here. First, as the Globe itself notes, Moriarty was himself a member of the Holyoke School Committee for thirteen years; he was first elected in 1999. There is, thus, I'd argue, no "they" here, really. He was a member of the governance team in Holyoke for a good long time. 
Holyoke itself, of course, has a political leadership history reflecting ongoingly growing Latino population in a city that had white leadership for a long time. Moriarty himself also reflects that--as he frequently notes in meetings, he is a multi-generational Holyoke resident--and I think the "they" there thus is a tell.

Second, of course, there's the question of just what it is that we're doing with the receivership districts, and how any decisions there are tied up in a now-Commissioner who regards this as his road to success. Lawrence has shifted to a receivership board in 2017, and there's been not a whisper of next steps, despite it having now been in receivership since 2012. Holyoke has recently had another round of upheaval around its receiver. Southbridge--don't forget Southbridge!--has also has unevenness in leadership. 

The state decided that the only way to "fix" the districts was to remove their democracy. It did this in districts that are majority students of color. As I noted in another context this week, generally remarks about needing less democracy raise red flags. For some reason, they seem not to with school districts.

They should.