Meeting Public Comments

Subcommittee meeting and times are as follows:

Attendance at subcommittee meetings by lobbyists and the public is via zoom or in-person. See agenda for zoom details. Only authenticated users are permitted access.

SSB 1064

A bill for an act relating to temporary in-person and remote learning instruction and instructional time requirements for school districts and accredited nonpublic schools, and including effective date provisions.(See SF 160.)

Agenda

Subcommittee members: Zaun-CH, Goodwin, Quirmbach

Date: Monday, January 25, 2021

Time: 2:00 PM - 2:30 PM

Location: RM 24A

Comments Submitted:

Download Comments

The purpose of comments is to provide information to members of the subcommittee.

Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.

01-21-2021

Zebulun Treloar []

I do not support this bill, as I believe that it is unnecessary and improper for the state to usurp the role of the local school board. The more local areas are able to make their own decisions about their children's schooling, the better. This is an act of governmental overreach.

01-21-2021

Benjamin Johnson []

I do not support this measure. Forcing schools to hold inperson classes will drive the spread of COVID19. A much better solution is to rescind the Governor's proclamation from the summer, and return control of learning delivery mode to local school districts. This is an issue best solved at the local, not legislative, level.

01-21-2021

Marisa Keeney []

I do not support the proposal to mandate all schools provide 100% in person schooling. This will make it impossible for large school districts to provide physical distancing. Proponents of this claim all parents deserve a choice, but it negates the choice of students & families who need or want in person learning in a safe manner that limits risk of exposure. If 100% in person is mandated those students can only choose to accept dramatically increased risk of exposure or go completely online. Please continue to allow local control so that schools may provide the Hybrid option to decrease the likelihood of students, staff & families being exposed due to the school environment. If you want kids in the classroom 100% of the time then work on legislative matters that decrease the spread of Covid in our state & work to increase the speed with which Iowans are vaccinated so that the level of community spread decreases to levels that make it more reasonable to have 100% in person schooling.

01-21-2021

John Cook []

I oppose this bill. 1) It ignores the real hazards of the COVID virus. This is a threat for students and staff which is likely to exist until next fall. 2) Providing for student and staff safety should be the responsibility of local school boards, not the legislature.

01-21-2021

Emily Buckley []

I am requesting that you oppose requiring schools to have a 100% inperson education option. Iowa is a diverse state with urban, suburban, and rural districts. As Iowans, we know that situations and circumstances vary greatly between these different settings. Just as we know that school district organization, offerings, sports, and activities must vary from setting to setting, we also know that there can be no onesizefitsall solution for COVID safety.Our local school boards, administration, and educators know their communities best. They partner with local public health experts to assess their risk and mitigate accordingly. They understand the limitations of their facilities, staffing, and community size. SSB 1064 would undermine this good work and take away local authority and decision making. Iowans should be proud of our diverse school district settings and empower our local leaders to make focused decisions based on local factors. We have trust in our school boards, administrators, and educators to act with our students best interest. SSB 1064 runs concurrent to our shared Iowa values.

01-21-2021

Chelsea Sims []

I oppose this bill. As an educator, we deserve to be safe. Our local districts deserve to make decisions for our local communities. Vaccinate us all before forcing us into a building with hundreds of people.

01-21-2021

Jonathan Sims []

I DO NOT support moving any Iowa schools to 100% in person schooling at this time. Let local districts make those decisions. Now is not the time to open everything up. Let us get a higher vaccination rate. We do not have control of the virus spread. Don't put Iowans at risk. Lives are more important.

01-21-2021

Lori Conway []

Members of the Senate Education Committee,SSB1064 should ONLY be enacted after all staff involved with schools and educating Iowa's youth are vaccinated, preferably AFTER the second dose. Requiring every district, no matter the size to offer 100% face to face instruction five days a week will be a disaster for the education system. A "one size fits all" approach as a solution to anything is not feasibly responsible and ignores the safety of all. Let's give the vaccine distribution a chance, especially given a new strain of the virus has already emerged. Let's give our students, teachers and staff a chance by not being forced to knowingly risk their health during a national pandemic that remains out of control.

01-21-2021

L Engels []

I fully support this bill. As an educator and a parent of a daughter with special needs, I am seeing the toll the Hybrid Schedule is taking on our students, and my own children. While my daughter has an IEP, she is not "eligible" to come to school 5 days a week because they are able to meet the minutes of her IEP on her hybrid days. But my daughter also needs the socialization found in the classroom 5 days a week. It is time to bring our students back to school.

01-21-2021

Maggie Rietz []

I oppose SSB1064. This is not the time to force school districts back to 100% in person. The positivity rate in Iowa is still not low enough in most places to safely send back every student. Not all districts are the same, and districts ought to have local control to make decisions that are best and safest for their individual school districts. We cannot compare small rural school districts to large, heavily populated urban districts. When we are at the point where all teachers and all other school staff have actually been fully vaccinated, hopefully in the next few weeks, then that is the time that this conversation can begin. Let's have a plan in place that doesn't feel completely rushed. Further, only allowing approximately two weeks for school districts to offer this option is simply not feasible. Districts need the time to plan and change staffing and classes as needed. Also, in some districts, this could potentially occur in the middle of the quarter, complicating the issue further as it will not provide a seamless transition for students, families, or teachers.

01-22-2021

Kristine Aubrey []

I oppose SSB1064. Decisions on learning models should be made locally based on the circumstances within each school district. The State Legislators' role in getting kids back to school in person is to do everything possible to slow the spread of Covid 19 and get people vaccinated. This bill is government overreach.

01-22-2021

Cindy Garlock [Cedar Rapids Community School District Board of Directors]

The Cedar Rapids Community School District (CRCSD) Board of Directors would like to register its objection to the Senate Study Bill 1064, which would require school districts to provide full time, in person instruction. It is our view that local school boards are best positioned to make instructional decisions. Iowa Code 274.3 gives school boards the authority to operate, control and supervise all public schools located within its districts boundaries. Local school boards understand the needs of their community and are best suited to making this type of instructional decision. We know our community, we know our staffing resources, we know best how our facilities can safely accommodate student learning.Large, urban high schools present particular difficulties in safely providing in person instruction to all students at the same time. Because of the specialized nature of coursework, students must be able to move around the building, mingling with hundreds of other students during passing times. Keeping high school students in cohorts is impossible so every class period brings new potential COVID exposures to students and staff. Classroom staff would be placed at undue risk as 150+ students could potentially move through their classroom every day. We value the health and well being of our staff and students. The use of technology and synchronous learning by the CRCSD high schools has provided an effective platform for delivering instruction while keeping staff and students as safe as possible. Forcing schools to provide instruction in a way that prevents social distancing, as prescribed by CDC guidelines and without adequate and widespread vaccinations, is unsafe and not in the best interest of our community. CRCSD has been flexible in safely meeting the needs of our community, while also working cooperatively with the Iowa Department of Education. The health and safety of our community is of primary importance to us.Please vote no on SSB 1064.Sincerely,Nancy Humbles, PresidentDavid Tominsky, Vice PresidentGary Anhalt, DirectorJennifer Borcherding, DirectorCindy Garlock, DirectorDexter Merschbrock, DirectorJennifer Neumann, Director

01-22-2021

Jessica Roman []

This bill is government overreach. We elect school boards for the purpose of making decisions for our local schools based on local needs, priorities, and safety. If there's a blizzard in Orange City, and the sun is shining in Cedar Rapids, we don't expect Cedar Rapids to call off school. The same is true for the pandemic. Community transmission is very low in some areas, and high in others. The needs of a high school with 2000 students are much different than that of a high school with 100 students, and vice versa. We know mitigation is key in preventing outbreaks, including masks and social distancing. That distancing is pretty impossible in the halls of a 5A school during passing times, or in classrooms of 30 kids. Schools need flexibility during these everchanging conditions to protect the health of their teachers, bus drivers, custodial staff, nutrition staff, secretaries, students, and families; and prevent overwhelming local health systems.

01-22-2021

Gerene Denning []

A bill that would require 100% inperson attendance in the midst of a pandemic is breathtakingly irresponsible. It is particularly egregious in partnership with bills that would decrease support for public schools. So, we take away money essential to creating a safe inperson learning environment and then demand that public schools unprepared to open safely (because we failed to provide the resources needed) do so. I honestly don't understand what the supporters of this bill are thinking. Why is it that some politicians demand local control when it can be used to hurt people but prohibit it when it is used to protect them?

01-22-2021

Alan MacVey [University of Iowa]

I am strongly opposed to this bill. I have granddaughter who attends school where half the class meets 2 days a week and half meets 3. This is a very good way to proceed. There is room for the children to stay safe. As a result, my wife and I feel comfortable seeing our grandchildren regularly. As soon as she attends with many more children in the class, we will not be able to see her because of the increased possibility of Covid exposure. In addition, we have specialneeds grandchild. If she is exposed to the virus (through her sister) it is likely she will die. Offering parents the option of full time classes means there will inevitably be too many students in the room. Finally, as a former junior high school teacher I am extremely concerned that this new policy will be dangerous to all, Meanwhile fulltime online instruction is simply poor. Let's stay safe for the rest of this semester and return to normal next fall please!

01-22-2021

Meg Tisinger []

I do not support this bill. We need to put partisan politics and money grabs to the side and start protecting our citizens. We are already seeing rates rising in our schools, even as the county rate drops. That correlation tells us that schools are hotbeds of spread especially with this new variant that can spread faster. Students and teachers are scared. Please allow us to get vaccinated before sending students back full time. Students will receive a better education when they return full time if their teachers aren't stressed or dead.

01-22-2021

Analisa Gerig-Sickles []

I am very concerned about this bill. We are providing education to our students, even on the days they are not in the school building. As an educator, I want all of my students back on site, but I want that to happen in a safe way. Unfortunately, we are not yet vaccinated and if students come back 100% we will not be able to keep them socially distanced. I think it would be better to wait a month or so until school staff is vaccinated so we can lower the risk of spread of Covid. Please allow local district to make the best decisions for them.

01-22-2021

Dawn Alam []

I do not support this measure. Forcing districts to hold 100% in school is unsafe. This decision is best left to local school districts. Different districts have different needs and resources. I enrolled my child in the hybrid plan only because at that level social distancing is possible. 100% in person will not allow for social distancing, it will create unsafe conditions for our children and school staff, and will drive the spread of COVID. Additionally, districts have worked hard for months to plan and deliver a return to school plan. Yet again, you are looking to pull the rug out from under them, and our students, with almost no thought and very little time to adapt. Shame on you.

01-22-2021

Dawn Alam []

01-22-2021

Jonathan Rogers []

In contrast to the state of Ohio that is waiting till all teachers get vaccinated before going to a "hybrid" school model this bill is out of line with science, safety and the general consensus of other states.This bill also takes away local control from schools to manage the safety of their students and teachers based on different levels of the virus in different areas of Iowa.The rist of people and teachers dying will increase if this bill is passed. The complications of getting Covid beyond death are also a risk factor that is becoming more apparent.

01-22-2021

Alina Borger Germann []

This bill is not taking several key factors into account:1. No teachers or secondary students in our county have been vaccinated yet. 2. High schools can no longer provide socially distanced classrooms at 100%. In addition, we cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms at 100%. 3. To meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat. Why? Because not all families who are comfortable with hybrid will be comfortable with 100% inperson, so they need the option to move to online learning. On a personal note, this bill appears quite petty, and somewhat vindictive. We are doing everything in our power to make this crazy year work with as much safety and normalcy as we can ...and vaccination is RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER. Honest to goodness, what is the matter with waiting for the vaccines? At least for teachers and staff? Or making this law go into effect once every teacher who wants to has been vaccinated?

01-22-2021

Dorothy Whiston []

Covid19 (and other epidemics that are likely to arise in the future) will never be spread uniformly throughout the state's population, so it is imperative that local school districts are allowed to monitor the everchanging rate of Covid infections in their area and to respond in ways that will keep students, teachers, and staff safe. Please defeat this bill.

01-22-2021

Leah Tweedy []

I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill it fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous:1. No teachers or secondary students in our county have beeneven partiallyvaccinated yet. 2. Schools in large districts cannot provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. In fact, these schools cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms with 100% inperson learning.3. To meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat.My son is in 1st grade in the Iowa City district's standard enrollment, which means he's onsite 50% of the time. If you push this through to 100% while rates are still high, I feel like I'll have no choice but to pull him out of school completely for our safety. PLEASE do not do that. Right now, his school is able to have them in person in two groups that allow for socially distancing. I understand you want students in person, which is what we currently have and love. But pushing them into a 100% environment before it's safe will have the OPPOSITE effect for my family. He will go from 50% to 0% in person learning because socially distancing will not be able to happen. To do this just as we see new strains that are more contagious are popping up around the country, is reckless. Please, please do not do this. I don't know how I will manage my job (single mom here) if he's at home 100%. However, I will not put him (and me) in such a risky environment like you are proposing. I beg you not to do this. Let districts make the choice that is safe for them and their children.Please.

01-22-2021

Julia Coelho []

I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous. Students will not be safely social distant in hallways and classrooms because IT IS NOT POSSIBLE in most spaces

01-22-2021

Gabriel Wylder []

01-22-2021

Katy Doran []

01-22-2021

Lara Marsh []

We live in Johnson County. Our teachers have not yet been vaccinated. We are still vaccinating healthcare workers. No children have been vaccinated at any measurable level. There is no way to socially distance anywhere in any school if all kids attend. Why rush this? We will all get vaccinated within the next six months. And in person school will start. It takes away local control too, which is critical since each county has such varying populations.I want kids in school. But I think the better approach is shut down bars and restaurants if you want kids in schools. Community spread is how we got here in the first place. Do not force our kids to make more sacrifices. Please.

01-22-2021

Rachael Holmes []

I do not support mandating full in person instruction. This will drive spread of the virus and put school staff in dangerous work environments. Our teachers and staff are valued members of the community and they are not expendable! We need to return local control to our elected members of local school boards. What works for one community will not necessarily work for another.

01-22-2021

Meghan Kincade []

01-22-2021

Stephanie Trannel []

I cannot support forcing schools to offer a 100% in person option until all school personnel have received both doses of the vaccine. I think the decision regarding in person learning should be left to districts and based on actual facts and infection rates in the individual districts. The legislature has no business implementing a onesizefitsall solution to a very complex problem. I very much want students back in school but not this way.

01-22-2021

Brett Cloyd []

I strongly oppose this bill because it represents state government overreach that removes agency from our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous:1. Teachers, staff, or secondary students in our county have not been vaccinated. 2. Schools in large districts are severely challenged to provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. In fact, these schools cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms with 100% inperson learning. With new variants of the virus pending, not being able to socially distance is a risky strategy.3. To meet the extremely tight timeline proposed, secondary schools would need to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a severely difficult logistical challenge.This bill seems like an attempt to rush a process that would happen quite sequentially over the next few months, given that the vaccine is here and systems are being developed to deliver it. I believe we must wait to make this change until we can do so safely and fairly for everyone.

01-22-2021

Stephanie Tutson []

01-22-2021

Connie King []

I oppose SSB 1064 for the following reasons:1. Overreach on the part of the state government: local school districts are more capable of making decisions for their students and families because they are on the ground and know what is going on locally;2. Students are not the only ones at risk for exposure to COVID19: the staff and faculty of each school contain many vulnerable persons. Given that the state is not receiving enough doses of the vaccine to even begin to vaccinate all individuals in districts, it is foolhardy to expose so many people to the virus; and3. Students are doing ok: too many peoplewho are not educatorsgo on about how "students are falling behind." Baloney! Students are doing okare they happy about the situation? No. Are teachers happy about the situation? No. But everyone is making it work and work well; consequently, going to 100 percent inperson in the midst of a pandemic is foolish and dangerous.Please vote against this bill.

01-22-2021

Jordan Garrett []

I oppose this bill as it is yet another case of the state government's overreach. That is not only disrespectful our locally elected school boards, teachers, staff, parents and students but also the long tradition Iowa has of maintaining local control of schools. Further, this bill fails to address many of the issues that make 100% inperson learning safe. Such a decision:1. Overrides local control a cherished tradition in our great state2. Puts teachers, staff, students and their families at risk3. Does not take into account the need for vaccinating school staff members. 4. Additionally, large enrollments cannot provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. 5. Other public spaces (hallways, lunches, or bathrooms) will not be able to provide adequate space for social distancing in 100% inperson learning.6. Fails to acknowledge the need to make staffing changes or give an appropriate timeline with additional inperson learning We must wait to make this change until we can do so safely and fairly for everyone instead of trying give the appearance of normal. If "not falling behind" or our children's futures were the core issue, we would not have such a terrible track record for the current administration's (nor the legislature's) as it pertains to education.

01-22-2021

Marjorie Davis [- Select -]

01-22-2021

Evan Hartley []

Its with a sense of shock I write to express my disappointment in the push to mandate that Iowa schools offer an inperson experience. In my mind, the push is one that essentially dooms my colleagues to an increased likelihood of developing COVID19 and the serious symptoms and longlasting effects that accompany such a fate. To make matters more unbelievable, this decision is being considered prior to the vaccine rollout just around the corner. Government decisions are impacting local control in a way that jeopardizes people's health and lives. There's simply no way to rationalize this. Due to the unfortunate misinformation downplaying the longlasting effects of COVID19, I link to the Mayo Clinics article describing them: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseasesconditions/coronavirus/indepth/coronaviruslongtermeffects/art20490351I quote from the trusted source: Even in young people, COVID19 can cause strokes, seizures and GuillainBarre syndrome a condition that causes temporary paralysis. COVID19 may also increase the risk of developing Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease.What is it that members of the Iowa Legislature dont understand? Large districts are in a more dangerous situation than small ones. In my district, a mandate to offer this inperson option will have serious consequences to peoples health and lives. My colleagues will be working in a crowded room, effectively not even being able to social distance. I struggle to understand how the Iowa Legislature fails to see this. How is this possible?

01-22-2021

Mike Keller-Wilson []

I do not support this bill. School boards and local districts have worked incredibly hard to meet the diverse needs of their communities while handling brand new logistical challenges. This bill will force school boards and districts to go against what they and the vast majority of their constituents believe is in the best interest of students and communities.

01-22-2021

Renne Lietz []

I oppose SSB 1064. Individual school districts know best when the time is right for 100% in person education. Teachers are scheduled for the Covid vaccine, but it's not available. The curve of the pandemic is barely flattening. This bill treats the largest districts, the urban districts, the rural districts, etc, like they all have the same concerns. They do not. Let local school boards retain control.

01-22-2021

Amy Kahle [ICCSD]

Have you ever been in a tiny classroom with 37 students? I have. And I love it. And I dont want to get sick because of it. The vaccines are right AROUND THE CORNER! Why is the world would you put our teachers at risk now? I dont get it. Are you trying to kill us? I am angry and sad and yet again disappointed by the lack of concern for Iowas educators. Its shameful.

01-22-2021

Matthew Pistilli []

Greetings:I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous:1. No teachers or secondary students in our county have beeneven partiallyvaccinated yet. 2. Schools in large districts cannot provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. In fact, these schools cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms with 100% inperson learning. 3. To meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat.Finally let me say, this bill seems like an attempt to rush a process that would happen quite organically over the next few months, given that the vaccine is here. We must wait to make this change until we can do so safely and fairly for everyone.

01-22-2021

Ann Hartwig [Parent]

01-22-2021

Nichole Eden []

01-22-2021

Lisa Mellecker []

Please consider leaving this decision to individual districts. Most already have a full onsite option and those who don't know that they cannot do so safely. This process will naturally occur over the next few months as teachers and high risk community members are vaccinated. Please focus your efforts on vaccine distribution and not creating even more logistics and health problems for schools, while we're still in the middle of a pandemic.

01-23-2021

Christine Etler []

Forcing schools to offer 100% in person school takes away our families choice. We were considering sending our kids back to school under the hybrid model because 100% online is taking its toll. If hybrid is not available they will remain 100% online because the schools will not be safe. Densely populated schools will not be able to follow White House, CDC, and AAP guidelines.Please at least consider a compromise. The Federal government hopefully will provide schools with new guidelines and funding with the goal of getting more kids back to school (goal is K8 back to 100% school). It makes sense to delay action so we can align our guidelines with those from the federal government. Additionally, opening 100% should be delayed until teachers and school staff can be vaccinated.

01-23-2021

Anna Basile Wehner []

I oppose this legislation. If the state had taken more aggressive action to keep the coronavirus under control earlier, the threat of this bill would never have been needed. Teachers want to be back. Students want to be back. But, even in hybrid environments, the virus spreads. Redirect this energy toward public health initiatives. Communities should have every avenue available to them to run their schools in the ways that will best mitigate our community spread.

01-23-2021

Kristen Rummelhart []

I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous:1. No teachers or secondary students in our county have beeneven partiallyvaccinated yet. 2. Schools in large districts cannot provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. In fact, these schools cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms with 100% inperson learning. 3. To meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat.Finally let me say, this bill seems like an attempt to rush a process that would happen quite organically over the next few months, given that the vaccine is here. We must wait to make this change until we can do so safely and fairly for everyone.I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous:1. No teachers or secondary students in our county have beeneven partiallyvaccinated yet. 2. Schools in large districts cannot provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. In fact, these schools cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms with 100% inperson learning. 3. To meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat.Finally let me say, this bill seems like an attempt to rush a process that would happen quite organically over the next few months, given that the vaccine is here. We must wait to make this change until we can do so safely and fairly for everyone.

01-23-2021

Blakely Mortvedt []

It is absolutely ludicrous to take even more control away from individual districts as they try to balance the needs of their students and staff. As vaccination is just getting underway and theres finally a light at the end of the tunnel now is not the time to force students and staff back into the building 100%. This will have a negative affect on those in the building, as well as their families at home. Spend your time and money finding ways to support students and staff without forcing them into the building. You risk losing lives and losing teachers from our state for future years.

01-23-2021

Mary Peterson []

Dear Representatives:I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous:1. No teachers or secondary students in our county have beeneven partiallyvaccinated yet and we do not know when this will become available. 2. Schools in large districts cannot provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. In fact, these schools cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms with 100% inperson learning. We are struggling to provide the recommended social distancing with 50% inperson.3. To meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat.It is important to acknowledge a one size fits all bill will negate all of the precautions our large district has worked so hard to implement. We will have classes of 3035 students placing students, teachers and staff at risk for a superspreading situation.Finally let me say, this bill seems like an attempt to rush a process that would happen quite organically over the next few months, given that the vaccine is here. We must wait to make this change until we can do so safely and fairly for everyone. Once teachers and staff are vaccinated, we would love to have all of our students back in the classroom. We miss them, but we must make sure everyone is safe first.Sincerely,Mary Peterson

01-23-2021

Jill Hofmockel [Iowa City West High School]

I oppose this bill. Unless and until teachers and school staff are vaccinated, it should not be mandated at the state level that all schools must offer 100% in person. Not all districts will be able to maintain safe social distancing measures with their entire student population in attendance at once.The only way this bill should go forward is if it establishes that all school staff must be vaccinated before and so that districts can resume 100% in person learning and includes a plan for the timely and immediate vaccination all teachers and staff.In the meantime, local decision making on this issue it vital. Allow local communities to decide when it is safe for their schools to fully reopen.

01-23-2021

Jenny Saylor [ICCSD]

I do not support this bill. We need to stop letting politics play a role in decisions that affect the health and safety of our students and educators. How many more lives of educators and students do we need to lose before we all agree that our lives and our health should be our top priorities. Without those education means nothing.

01-23-2021

Kimberly James []

I do not support this bill. Teachers know that in person learning is in the best educational interest of students and we want our students back in the building. However, student and teacher health must remain our top priority. Rather than creating a bill requiring in person learning, focus your efforts on vaccinating everyone in our state. The sooner everyone is vaccinated, the sooner we can safely return to in person learning.

01-23-2021

Mary Kenyon []

I do not support this bill. Our locallyelected school boards should be allowed to make the decisions that are best for our communities. Large schools, particularly secondary schools where students move through different classes and crowded hallways throughout the day, will not be able to maintain the physical distance between people that is so essential to reducing the spread of Covid19. We are VERY close to a time when enough people will be vaccinated to reduce the threat of spreading the virus. Forcing this issue now is like putting your umbrella down while it's still raining because you are dry.

01-23-2021

Caitlin Marek []

I strongly oppose this bill. I am opposed to this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, it fails to address important factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and dangerous at this time.

01-23-2021

Jeff Finn []

Everyone should have a choice. School boards should have a choice to do what is best for their communities, parents should have a choice for highquality athome learning, and teachers should have a choice other than feed your family or die.

01-23-2021

Ann Johnson []

I do not support this bill mandating 100% in person schooling for all students before school staff has the chance to get a vaccine. Whatever model is currently in place for districts is working for their district/communities and the best chance of being back in person 100% is after school staff get the vaccine and fewer school staff and students become sick.

01-23-2021

Kristina Brown []

I do not support this bill. As an employee in a bigger district, local control should determine whats best for that specific community. Smaller districts can go 100% in person, larger districts likely cannot do 100% safely. This bill comes on the same week that the largest number of people died in one day due to COViD. This is not in the best interest of our teachers or our students

01-23-2021

A Wernimont []

I oppose this bill. Requiring 100% face to face instruction 5 days a week in the midst of a pandemic is careless and endangers the health of staff and students. The focus should be on controlling the virus and vaccine distribution to school staff so that schools can open up safely. Give local control back to elected school boards. So the urban and rural school districts can be governed by their school boards and do what is right for their communities.

01-23-2021

Tyson Smith []

Please do not enact this billit removes local control. If you must enact it, dont have it go into effect until school staff have had a chance to be fully vaccinated in phase IB. This is a recipe for disaster in terms of student and staff absenteeism and disease spread among school populations and their families.

01-23-2021

Rachel Tegeler []

I am writing to oppose this bill. As many others have stated, I believe these decisions need to be left up to the school boards at the local level. Every district has their own set of circumstances and ability to maintain a safe learning environment for both their staff and students. I am in two different national organizations and am discovering that many other states around the country are either running their schools with the options as we currently are here in Iowa or they are educating students 100% virtual with no plans to go hybrid or full face to face until next Fall. Iowa has been on the news for being in the top of the Nation for cases of COVID before. Not exactly something to be proud of. Forcing schools to provide 100% face to face instruction could cause our numbers to go back up again. Please I realize it is difficult to wait this out and be patient for our vaccinations to be distributed in mass, but no ones life should be at risk for one year of schooling in a new way. Please do. Of pass this bill.Thank you.

01-23-2021

Katy Nahra []

Vote NO, please. As a teacher that is currently teaching inperson hybird, I cannot wait to go back to school full time with all of my students togetheras soon as we are all vaccinated. Until then, please don't make my already huge personal sacrifice of putting my own family at risk even greater. Don't make parents who currently feel safe in the hybrid model have to pull their children from the classrooms. Morale is at an all time low, and teachers need support. Our state government has the power to get these vaccines to the public. Make that the priority and the rest will follow.

01-23-2021

Rachel Tegeler []

01-23-2021

JoAnn Miller []

I respectfully request you do NOT pass SSB1064 and allow school districts the right to determine what is best for their district.Quote from just one middle school teacher (and I could provide hundreds more), "This is a dangerous course of action. There is not room to keep our students properly distanced, I currently have a class of 32 middle school students. They will sit inches from each other, not feet! Vaccines are weeks if not months away for school staff in Linn County. Student lives are on the line." A "one size fits all approach" does not work for every school district in the State of Iowa. Schools across the state vary widely with regards to class sizes, building capacities, ability to keep pods of students, funds to use for mitigation, availability of substitute teachers, ventilation systems etc. On the COVID19 Iowa website, 15% of the positivity rate for the last seven days is in the 017 age category. We cannot allow more of our children to be infected, particularly considering the lack of research on the long term effects of this disease. Although the COVID19 Iowa website indicates an 11.2% positivity rate over the past 14 days, John Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center paints a much grimmer picture. Even if we average the two sets of statistics, it is clear the COVID19 remains a substantial threat in our State.Signing this bill will negate the carefully crafted and implemented plans by schools that address the ability to social distance students. Please allow school board members the right to do their job as locally elected officials. They know what is best for the children in their district. Are you willing to accept the responsibility of students being infected and having life long health effects? Please, just say no to SSB1064 or amend to require a minimum 50% in person instruction; this will give school districts a fighting chance in providing social distancing of students. Thank you for your considera

01-23-2021

Diana Smith []

I do not support this bill. First of all because it is not safe for all districts to have that many students back together in person. I am a public school teacher in Des Moines. My classroom would have 2630 students in it. We would not be able to safely social distance with that many students in my classroom. Also, you are taking away local control from school districts and treating all schools like they are all the same. I urge you to visit a DMPS middle school or high school building and talk to leaders from this district before you pass this bill. Talk to other educators and administrators in a variety of districts around the state to gather accurate information before passing something that impacts so many people. Important legislation shouldn't be forced through so quickly and without input from those it will actually impact.If you do decide to pass this bill, PLEASE do not make the mandate start until after all teachers and school workers can be vaccinated. You are risking the health and lives of people if you don't wait. We have a vaccine. Why can't we wait another month? Many of us can't afford to take a leave of absence from our jobs. We won't be given a choice. If we need income and our health insurance, we will have to risk getting sick, possibly dying or infecting family members. Thank you.

01-23-2021

Tyler Hagy []

I do not support this bill. It takes away local control and ignores the local conditions in any individual school or district. It is an example of "big government" that is often derided by the same party that is putting forward this bill. It is a clear danger to the health and safety of our teachers, students, and all their families.

01-23-2021

Lisa Bryant []

I vote to pass this bill. My child's school board (Urbandale) in the metro is disregarding our children. Surrounding school districts are able to safely have the children 5 days a week but some of our school board is not listening to the parents or the facts making it impossible to have 100% in person learning. Hybrid is not sustainable and wasn't meant to be. My child has been in person 38 days this year and that is unacceptable!

01-23-2021

Pam Gronau []

I fully support this bill. Most research has concluded that schools are not super spreaders. Dr. Redfield indicated that the CDC does not recommend school closures. In fact, he said that the safest place for children to be is in school. He urges schools to follow the data and not to make emotional decisions, as the school is not where we are having the problems with the spread of Covid19. My children are only getting half of an education right now compared to others getting to be in school every day. There is serious concern that our children will not know grade level standards by the end of the year. I have a special needs son who is especially being impacted by this time out of the classroom. I implore you to give parents the option to have their children attend school full time in person as so many others are getting the opportunity to do.

01-23-2021

Sara Nichols [Nationwide]

I strongly oppose this bill. Local school boards are elected by their residents. School Boards are given the authority to make local decisions because of this. As a parent of a child who is learning in the 50% hybrid model, I am very grateful for the opportunity. (And the students are ROCKING IT and learning so many new skills BECAUSE they are learning virtually part of the time.) My child is able to attend school with socially distanced measures in place. That will not be true if 100% f2f is forced upon our school district. (Even though the bill states that schools must OFFER 100% f2f, our school district will not have the capacity to continue to offer true hybrid. Therefore, the bill will actually REQUIRE 100% f2f.) You will actually be taking away parental choice. We CHOSE hybrid, not 100% f2f. Let school districts make their own decisions. I realize that school staff will be able to be vaccinated soon, but not children. Sick or dead children will be on your heads if you approve this bill.

01-23-2021

Ericka Petersen []

I strongly oppose this bill. I want nothing more than for my daughter to be in school with her friends in a normal way. The way to get there is to get the virus under control. State government has utterly failed at this not even requiring masks in defiance of science and logic. Forcing more kids into schools, making social distancing impossible just as new, more contagious strains spread and before even the teachers can get vaccinated (let alone our kids!) is reckless and short sighted. If you are in a rush to get our kids back to school (and you should be) take scientifically backed steps like mask requirements and getting the vaccine roll out to go more smoothly.

01-23-2021

Kiersten Maertens []

I fully support this bill and the effort to get kids back to school inperson fulltime. There is currently no option for families who desire this, and as a working spouse of a teacher, the ongoing impact and burden of hybrid schooling is having a ripple effect that is vast. My son has absolutely fallen behind where he should be because of the districts unwillingness to offer a fulltime option but Im worried most about the social and emotional impact of this if it continues. Our children are suffering most please force the option.

01-23-2021

Allyson Day []

I am in complete opposition to this bill...1) Completely goes against the Republican ideal of LOCAL CONTROL. PK12 students in urban and rural communities do not fit into a onesize fits all law. 2) Completely goes against Education 101, which trains teachers that NOTHING comes before the SAFETY of students.3) Completely goes against the science of cause and effect. Want 100% in person learning? Easily done if teachers are all offered the vaccine FIRST. It's very simple.

01-23-2021

Carissa Williams []

I oppose SSB 1064. Each district has a unique set of circumstances. We elect our local school board to represent us and guide the operations of our schools. They are constantly reviewing the unique circumstances in our district, including physical building space, enrollment, staffing, virus transmission, etc. to make the best decisions for our community as a whole. A onesizefitsall mandate is irresponsible.

01-24-2021

Alicia Huguelet []

I strongly oppose any legislation that would require schools, staff and students to be in person disregarding whats happening on the ground and other republic health advice. Our kids and our teachers are worth more than making sure high school sports can be played. I hope our kids can continue to stay in school but also want to make sure there is flexibility for school districts to do what is based on the latest guidance and COVID data available. Thank you for your time.

01-24-2021

Meredith Gall []

I oppose this bill. In larger school districts, it will be impossible to adhere to social distancing. Hybrid schooling has allowed for smaller class sizes and number of students in the building, which has allowed for social distancing. It is irresponsible to have 100% in person schooling when teachers have not been vaccinated. For the safety of our teachers, staff, students and familiesplease allow districts to determine what is safe based on public health recommendations and the districts' specific situation.

01-24-2021

Anson Kritsch []

I urge you to oppose this bill. The erosion of local control of districts across the state has to stop. Districts, Educators and parents deserve the right to choose how their district moves forward in this unprecedented time. Forcing the opening of schools will only cause a domino effect of hurting public schools and families. Parents will yet again have to choose between online or in person. Causing many districts to yet again reorganize their districts employment, money will be siphoned away from districts, staff will be put at an unnecessary risk with vaccination around the corner. This decision is short sighted. Iowa has had a long history of districts having local control over these issues, please dont take that away.

01-24-2021

Alaina Santizo [Parent]

I support the passage of this bill. Approximately 92% of Iowa schools are meeting 5 days per week, with great success. Yet, a small group of districts maintain that it cannot be done. The buck stops with the Iowa legislature, who sets the standard for education in our state. All Iowa children should have equal access to quality education. Despite heroic efforts on the part of teachers, hybrid cannot maintain the same quality and vigor of inperson instruction. Two of my children are in the elementary school within the Urbandale school district. They have set foot in school 38 times since last March. Meanwhile, our neighbors attending school in West Des Moines and Waukee have had the opportunity to attend school 5 days per week. The argument that our school district is differently situated than our neighboring districts is impossible to understand. The argument that students cannot social distance 100% of the time if attending 5days per week is true. It is also true that students cannot maintain social distance while playing basketball. Why is one okay and the other is not? Please continue to allow parents to select an online option, for those that do not feel comfortable sending their children to school at this time. Thank you for receiving my comment and for your service to our state.

01-24-2021

Teresa Miller []

As a licensed school social worker who has over 10 years of training, I urge you to do your duty to the taxpayers of Iowa and support public schools which are a foundation our state. We do not need school choice in the state, as it will further the economic, educational and social inequities that already exist.

01-24-2021

Amira Nash []

I am the only Black social studies teacher in my district. Does my Black life matter at school? Based on this bill requiring a 100% in person model, the answer is quite loudly, no. At a time where not a day goes by that I have to remind students to keep masks on their face while also comforting students who have just lost loved ones to Covid, this bill will face my to choose between a district and state that do not care about me, and saving myself. With this bill, that choice seems much more clear.

01-24-2021

Lindsey Robb []

I urge you to support this bill. Our children are being left behind as others across the state and country are able to attend school in person full time. The online and hybrid model does not provide adequate instruction.

01-24-2021

Shelley Skuster [n/a]

This legislation makes demands of our public schools, but what additional resources does it provide for them?As the mother of four children enrolled in public schools, I oppose this bill and strongly recommend legislators crafting these bills seek input from the Department of Education, Iowa public school leaders and educators.

01-24-2021

Sheila Hocking []

I do not support this bill. Though I completely agree that inperson learning is the optimum vehicle for student success, the extenuating circumstances of Covid'19 does not make that viable at this time. The health and well being of the entire community district should be your number 1 concern. If this bill is passed you are risking too many lives. At the very least, you should mandate that 100% of the district staff has been given the opportunity to complete the required vaccinations before you risk their lives. Even with that, I think you are risking the lives of our students and their families. We are working tirelessly to provide quality education in our current hybrid model. We are experts in education. Let us do what we know is right. Allow local control in this decision making. You're simply an armchair quarterback.

01-24-2021

Dan Ramsey []

The denial of science, facts and reality is the main reason we are in the midst of this pandemic and is responsible for the great divide in our country. It is the greatest threat our country has ever faced. Further denial will cost lives

01-24-2021

Holly Meagher []

Local control is the hallmark of effective education in Iowa. I do not support this bill that strips local school boards and county public health authorities of their roles in determining where and when it safe for students to attend school. School boards are accountable to their constituents more immediately because they live in the communities and hold frequent, public meetings. County public health officials have a more complete and detailed view of the current community health situation. Together, they are the ones who can make effective decisions that allow for safe school attendance. The legislature and the Governor's office is illequipped to make these decisions in strategic, surgical ways. Passing this bill is terrible overreach and has the potential for unforeseen consequences that will damage public education in the future.

01-24-2021

Theresa Seeberger []

I oppose this bill for a number of reasons. Of immediate importance is the need to stay the course until end of the school year for the health and safety of everyone in the school system. Covid is still in Iowa!

01-24-2021

David Miller []

I am appalled by the lack of belief in science being exhibited by the authors of this bill. There is very clear evidence that children get Covid and spread Covid. Forcing schools to effectively end their hybrid programs by state fiat is unethical and will lead to more sickness and death in Iowa.

01-24-2021

Olivia Howe-Espinosa []

I am concerned about the implication of state government overreach in enacting this bill. This is a matter appropriate for local school boards, with the advisement of county health/associated stakeholders, to determine, given the unique contexts of each community. At a minimum, if legislative action related to this issue moves forward, consideration for vaccination of school staff should be incorporated (100 percent of school staff to be offered or completed vaccination schedule).

01-24-2021

Tambi Heiter []

I strongly oppose this bill. It will make schools, staff and students even more unsafe than they are now. In addition, I keep hearing how Iowa wants to attract and keep teachers. I can tell you with 100% certainty that this will NOT accomplish that goal.

01-24-2021

jack kimberley []

While inperson learning is important it should be up to the parents whether they send their kids to school or stay with on=line. Listen to the science and only requiire this when the experts say it's OK, I believe it is way too soon at present!

01-24-2021

Patricia A Hopes []

I strongly oppose this Bill. Local districts should be able to make decisions pertaining to their own school district, not Congress. Covid cases continue to increase as do the number of deaths in Iowa. The vaccine distribution Is still uncertain. Until the majority of teachers receive both vaccine doses, no decision to return to 100% inschool attendance should even be considered. I think that the Iowa legislature has overreached their powers. Local districts need to make their own decisions.

01-24-2021

suzanne ackermann []

I strongly oppose this bill. Teachers and staff should be vaccinated before even thinking of returning to 100% inperson attendance. Each school district should be the authority in deciding how their district handles learning. The Covid rate is still fluctuating and this would only increase cases.

01-24-2021

Jessica Dagel []

I am a 20 year veteran teacher and I do not want to die. I do not want any of my students today. I do not want any of my associates to die. Republicans claim to want local control except when they dont. Get out of local control business and what local school boards the side when its safe or not safe to be inside of school buildings.

01-24-2021

Cecilia Norris [Norris]

I strongly oppose this bill for many reasons. First, it goes against local control. Iowa is composed of many different types of communities and school districts and what works in a small school will not work in a larger school. Most of our school districts have put enormous amounts of resources into plans that they feel are best for their specific communities balancing safety and health of staff and students with the practical obstacles of providing learning opportunities with inadequate resources. As physician who cares for those disproportionately affected by pandemic (low income Black, Indigenous, People of Color without health insurance), I have seen the impacts that loss of income from jobs after contracting the virus at work or from children who brought it from school or from eating out at restaurant can bring. Sending more students back into overcrowded classrooms is not the solution to child care. Instead the state should have been looking at programs and providing funding for parents needing childcare through innovative programs such as the Nest program in Iowa City and Coralville. In these challenging times we need leaders who are willing to listen to the science and infectious disease experts while working with educators to promote programs that work in individual areas. By going to requiring 100% learning, you will actually take some students out of the classroom who are in a hybrid model now as it is impractical and impossible with current infrastructure for districts to offer online only, 100% inperson and hybrid models. Several families, including my own, were willing to take the risks when mitigation recommendations such as wearing masks, spacing desks 6 feet apart and restrictions on food consumption, etc. I am much less willing to take that risk in crowded classrooms because that endangers not only the lives of my child, her teachers, and school staff, but also the lives of my fragile patients until they are able to be fully protected by the vaccine. Stop playing political games with the lives of Iowa's citizens.

01-24-2021

Abby Goldsmith []

I do not support this bill. The governor has frequently says that she trusts Iowans to make the right decision, and this bill directly contradicts that. Schools need to be able to make the right decisions for the health and safety of their students and staff based on local data, and this will not allow that to happen. We need to leave the decisions in the school districts.

01-24-2021

Andrea Cook [WDM public and Dowling Catholic parent]

Local control is key to a strong, thriving educational system. Ironically, as a private school parent, I have not had the ability to get the educational model that I feel best serves my children, but that is an issue for me and the current school administration. I do not feel it is a good use of your time to force a one size fits all approach a knee jerk reaction in a time of pandemic to our schools.

01-24-2021

Chris Rolwes []

I oppose this bill. As a high school teacher that has taught high school classes in a fully remote setting this September, we have created a schedule that allows students to attend class in a hybrid setting. Changes are currently being made for this semester that will allow students who want to come to school each day, the ability to do so. This is being done in a safe way that will continue to allow for social distancing to limit the spread of the virus. Everyone wants kids back in school 100%. What needs to happen is for the Legislature and Governor to set parameters so that large urban districts can do this in a safe way. This should only be done when all school staff can have access to the COVID 19 vaccine. It should be obvious to all on this committee that what can work in the rural districts may not work best in our urban districts. Please allow the Board Members that have been elected by voters to make decisions. Please value local control.

01-24-2021

Sharon Poplawski []

I do not support SSB 1064,the proposed 100% return to school. The decision to return to school should be determined by our local school board and their elected school board members.The positively rate for Covid 19 differs from school district to school district. A blanket decision is not feasible. Vote no.

01-24-2021

Kathy Graeve []

I do not support this bill because each school district elects a school board to make decisions. Republicans supposedly believe in local control and this bill is an attempt to over run schools and their individual needs.

01-24-2021

Joanna Carpe []

I do not support this proposal. Local control of schools allows individual districts and schools to make decisions based on their specific circumstances. Until we have reached significant and safe vaccination levels and unless safety practices are available to all schools a requirement of 100% in person learning remains unsafe.

01-24-2021

Ellen Johnsen []

I oppose having the legislature make decisions that are best made by local school boards. Local control has long been a tenet of Republican policy, and I hope they will vote for local control in this case. The teachers here in Ames are working really hard to make sure students learn well using a hybrid model. It might not be ideal, but it is working, and it helps keep our students, staff, and community safe. Forcing all of our students back into 100% inperson learning could cause COVID19 cases to increase. The risk simply outweighs the benefits. When more people are vaccinated, I trust our school board to make the choice back to 100% inperson learning when it is safe.

01-24-2021

Wendy Johnson []

I oppose this bill!!! The Storm Lake School District has been functioning all year on a hybrid model with 70% of our students learning 100% in person. To pass this Bill will completely upheaval our plan and put lives at risk.

01-24-2021

Jennifer Harris []

I oppose this bill. Taking local control away from schoolBoards goes against any Republican stance in too much government over site. We are in a pandemic, something we havent seen in 100 years. Something we may not see again for 100 years. Schools are educational centers, NOT DAYCARES! Yet this bill effectively turns them into daycares. Larger districts in Iowa have more students in their classrooms. Those classrooms can not socially distance at all. How do you expect teachers to provide in person learning, hybrid and online at the same time. Will you properly fund all districts to provide the extra teaching support? Will you force districts to treat COVID as workmans comp for staff. Who have to risk their health and safety because you are forcing 100% in person learning. Then lets talk about scheduling 1200 1012 graders into 8 periods a day and the time it takes to do so. Now toss all that out each week abs re do it because this week my kid is in person, but next week they are virtual or only attending hybrid. Have you all really thought this out. So Garrett Gobble teaches MS and is a miracle worker and can handle 3 modalities of learning. Not every educator in Iow can do that! This bill makes zero sense and is just Governor Reynolds way of controlling everything! It is time to just let our local school boards make those decisions.They know what a building can handle. Please vote NO toThis ridiculous bill!

01-24-2021

Debra Venzke []

I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address three factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous, especially with new variants of the coronavirus that likely are more contagious:1. No teachers or secondary students in our county have beeneven partiallyvaccinated yet. 2. Schools in large districts cannot provide socially distanced classrooms with 100% inperson learning. In fact, these schools cannot provide socially distanced hallways, lunches, or bathrooms with 100% inperson learning. Crowded classrooms, on top of those with no mask mandates, contradict public health measures, needlessly endangering staff, students, their families and the wider community. 3. To meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat.Finally let me say, this bill seems like an attempt to rush a process that would happen quite organically over the next few months, given that the vaccine is here. We must wait to make this change until we can do so safely and fairly for everyone.

01-24-2021

Kathryn Robertson Hammer []

I am concerned about the governor's drive to require a 100% inperson option in all school districts. I understand that parents could hopefully still choose between 100% virtual and 100% inperson, but it doesn't seem feasible that schools could also provide a hybrid option.My son is a kindergartener in the Pleasant Valley Community School District. We started out in the 100% virtual learning model but it didn't work well for him, so we switched to the hybrid learning model and it's been great. He's benefitting from the inperson instruction, but the hybrid model allows for social distancing that makes our family feel more safe.The Pleasant Valley Community School District has been doing a great job of assessing the preferences of parents and teachers and analyzing current COVID19 statistics in order to offer the best learning options to its students. By mandating a 100% inperson option, the governor takes local control away from the PVCSD and other school districts throughout the state. Schools should be able to choose the learning model that works best for the students and parents in their district.I would love to send my son to school 100% inperson there's a reason I didn't become a teacher but not if that risks the health and safety of our family.

01-24-2021

Nicolle Phifer []

I do not support this bill. Give local control to the school boards and let them decide what is best for their community. And really, 100% back in the building shouldnt even be an option until all teachers, support staff, etc are vaccinated.

01-24-2021

Brenda Krull []

I do not support: *mandating 100% inperson instruction decisions should be made locally*Vouchers or scholarships for private schools my tax dollars should be used for public schools, additionally this would create a direct path for segregating by income, special needs, and possibly race*our state universities having to get approval for nonpublic dollars from the BOE. That seems ridiculously overreaching.

01-24-2021

Allison Carr []

I do not support this bill. It needlessly endangers the health and safety of our communities at a time when variants to covid19, found to be exponentially more transmissable, are lying in wait. let local disticts have local control.

01-24-2021

Terry Schneekloth [Cedar Rapids Community School District]

I am requesting you to vote to allow school districts to determine when the time is right for them to return to 100% inperson attendance. Every school district has a different circumstance so a onesize fits all approach is not appropriate at this time in the pandemic.My personal circumstances are that my classroom cannot be arranged to maintain proper social distancing. I've never had a classroom in my 26 years of teaching that would have been able to follow the 6foot distancing rule with a full capacity classroom. It is just not possible. I am not worried about myself, but my students and their families. If COVID19 were to be spread to any of my students or their loved ones because of exposure in my classroom, I would feel like I let my students down. I would have failed in my #1 priority as a teacher, I would have failed to protect my students.Again, I am not personally concerned about my own health, but my wife and I own our house with my motherinlaw. If I were to contract COVID19 and spread it to her and she were to suffer or worse, I would have a hard time living with that fact, especially when it is preventable. I have personally done my personal responsibility when it comes to social distancing and wearing a mask when appropriate, and I would like to be able to continue to do that without having to decide if I my job or my motherinlaw's life is more important. They are both extremely important please do not make me have to make that decision.

01-24-2021

Wendy Arnburg []

I oppose this bill. While many schools are able to provide social distancing while at full capacity, many other schools do not have the physical facilities to safely provide space for all. Often, the schools that have the least amount of space per student are those in lower socioeconomic areas. Safety should not be another redline. The local school districts know their resources and are supposed to be making decisions as they have been entrusted to do. Let them do it.

01-24-2021

Judy Mcintosh []

I opposed this bill. It is reckless and dangerous to return students to 100% face to face learning before the vaccine is given. It puts the life of students parents teachers and the community in danger

01-24-2021

Nicole Cable [parent and staff of Des Moines Public Schools]

The COVID pandemic is far from over. Vaccine rollout to persons eligible in Phase 1b, Tier 1 (includes all PK12 school personnel) will take timemost of this spring given the current amounts available for allocation and distribution. Requiring schools to offer a 100% option will work for some districts but not all due to class sizes/spaces. We cannot afford to short change the mitigation measures that are critical to slowing the spread of this virusmask use, distancing of 6 feet, limiting crowds, avoiding poorly ventilated spaces. Furthermore, requiring districts who are not currently offering an 100% option at the time of bill passage to survey families for a preference would be incredibly disruptive to the learning process. Second semester/3rd term starts for nearly all schools NOW. Allowing families to make a new selection at this phase in the process would require rebuilding the master schedule and individual students schedulesprocesses that take WEEKS under normal circumstances. It is NOT a viable solution.Instructional model decisionmaking has to remain at the local district level; it is the only way to make things work safely this year.Our students may not be learning the traditional curriculum in the traditional classroom this year, but the are learning important life lessons and skills. Balancing the greater good, resilience in the face of challenges, the importance of building systems that support change and equity for all.Our kids deserve safe schools. Get the pandemic under better control in Iowa; 202122 holds the potential for more normal schooling.

01-24-2021

Amy Soppe []

I oppose this bill. I want all my students back in person, but I want everyone to be safe. My students cannot socially distance with our current hybrid model, let alone having all the students back. My students are 6 and 7 and they are awesome about wearing their masks, but they still sneeze, pick their nose, let their masks fall beneath their noses. My students eat breakfast and lunch in the classroom so large chunks ofTime with no masks. Please think of the students and staffs health.

01-24-2021

M Kritsch []

As a resident in the state of Iowa I believe in local control. Local communities should make the decisions that are best for them. I strongly object to requiring all schools to return to 100% in person learning.

01-24-2021

Angel Shawda [UCSD Parent]

Although I fully believe that local control is very important in our education system, as a parent in the Urbandale Community School District I ask you to vote yes on SSB 1064 in order to provide a mechanism for parents wishing for the option of 100% inperson learning. I have watched numerous online UCSD school board meetings since late last summer where it has become clear that our district continues to push the hybrid model despite the successes surrounding districts have had with 5day a week, 100% inperson attendance. As the governor has noted during her press conferences, most schools in Iowa are meeting 5 days a week and provide the choice of inperson education to the parents who want that model. I applaud the legislature for recognizing last year the need to instruct districts to provide options for parents so they have the final say in how their children were educated during the pandemic. Most districts have embraced thinking outside the box to meet the goals their parents have wanted, but not all.I have read multiple comments echoing the "we are all in this together" mantra in response to children falling behind due to the pandemic, but that is not the case. It was true when discussing the effect of the spring 2020 school closures, but not for the 20202021 school year because most schools have found a way to teach facetoface, thus putting those students in the hybrid model at a disadvantage by only receiving 50% of the education their peers are receiving. I have a 7th grader and a 2nd grader in the UCSD district. Based on how poorly athome learning went for our 2nd grader in spring 2020, my husband and I contemplated trying to enroll her in a nearby private school because their plan was to start in 100% inperson attendance, but chose to stay in our district because the UCSD board and administration stated that hybrid was a starting point and until this year we have had little to no issue with our administration or board. Now that same private school has a waiting list for 2nd semester and other districts are not accepting outside enrollment so our option to send our 2nd grader to an inperson environment is gone.Under the current hybrid model, our daughters only see their teacher 2 or 3 times a week, depending on the week. Our 7th grader isnt pleased with the system, but has not fallen behind only because she was already advanced in many subjects; she just hasnt continued to progress. Our 2nd grader is not meeting the benchmarks set for her second grade year despite the best efforts of her teacher and us as parents. We started out behind from last spring and have made up little to no ground this year with the limited teaching time. Resources such as our school reading associate are limited by the hybrid model.As first semester progressed it became clear other districts had made inperson learning work and as such, options for daycare on the "at home" days became nonexistent putting even more strain on our household. As a parent, I have repeatedly reached out to our administration and board members to ask that they contact WDM or Waukee to see what procedures they have put in place, to get some "lessons learned" that could be applied to our district. Many times the discussion during the board meetings boils down to being sensitive to the families with high risk situations, but what our board fails to remember is those families have been provided with the option of 100% online on multiple occasions and that the boards decision affects families that chose the inperson model knowing that 100% inperson was the stated goal.I appreciate the ability to provide comment on this bill and thank you for taking on this issue and trying to provide equity for all families in Iowa by holding the districts to the same standards.

01-24-2021

Lisa Jones []

This is absolutely ridiculous. The government has already taken some control away and now you want to take the rest. Why do you want to punish our children and teachers during a pandemic? Our children can't get the vaccine yet and are just as vulnerable to this virus, even dying. Stop attacking public schools. You work for us and we are telling you to stop so you all need to listen!

01-24-2021

Claire Olsem []

I strongly oppose this bill. This bill takes away the ability for local school districts to make the decisions about mode of instruction for their communities. Each district is unique, with unique facilities and needs for the communities they serve. Requiring 100% Face to Face instruction in all districts across the board flies in the face of science and the recommendations of the CDC and the World Health Organization. Local districts are allowed to make decisions about inclement weather in order to keep students, teachers, and staff safe based on the needs of their communities (safety for bus routes, etc). Why should they not be allowed to make decisions about instructional modes in a pandemic as well. What is appropriate and safe for one district may not be safe for a district in another part of the state, or of a different size. Please do not take away our local control just as new more contagious variants are hitting the US, and before vaccines are widely available.Thank you for your time. Please Vote No on this bill.

01-24-2021

Christine Lehman-Engledow []

I strongly oppose this bill. Forcing schools to hold in person classes will drive the spread of COVID19. My daughter is a teacher. She has already had Covid and passed it to me and her children. I am sure she caught it at school, since it is hard for young children to keep their masks on correctly all day. A much better solution is to rescind the Governor's proclamation from the summer, and return control of learning delivery mode to local school districts. This is an issue best solved at the local, not legislative, level. That is why we have school boards. Each district should be able to judge what is best for them.

01-25-2021

Jeff Fahrmann []

My wife and I have lived in the Ankeny school district for the past 15+ years. We have three kids who were enrolled in the district ages 13, 11, and 9. Last summer as it became clear that the Ankeny school district was moving forward with a hybrid option instead of fulltime inperson instruction, we made the difficult decision to unenroll our three kids. We did not believe the hybrid option would allow for the quality education that our kids deserve. The Ankeny school district refused to seek input from its parents. We ultimately enrolled our seventh grader in on accredited online public school, while my wife homeschooled our fifth and third grader as well as a friends fifth grader. We were fortunate in that my wife has been a fulltime elementary teacher and had been most recently substitute teaching in the Ankeny district. Our younger two have done well with and enjoy being homeschooled by their mom, but our seventh grader would benefit from the social interaction that he would have with inperson school and wanted to go back to Ankeny schools to be with his friends. Once the Ankeny community school district made the decision to return to 100% inperson instruction in January, we reenrolled him in the school district. We saw first hand the negative impact that online schooling can have... at least on some kids. All that we ask is that parents be given a choice as it relates to their childrens instruction. Parents know what is best for their kids and should always have the opportunity to send their kids to school fulltime, 5 days a week. We support a bill that gives parents an option of either fulltime inperson or virtual instruction, which is what schools should have offered to begin with this last fall. Thank you for taking the time to read my email. We appreciate your service and consideration of our comments. Let me know if you have any questions.

01-25-2021

Michelle Weber []

I am a middle school educator that is currently supporting students in a hybrid model. Teachers are in the first tier of 1B for vaccination. I urge you to please consider postponing a 100% in person requirement until school staff have had the opportunity to become fully vaccinated, which should hopefully be within a matter of weeks. We want our students back in school every day. We also want our working conditions to be safe. Until vaccination is available to all school staff who desire it, we need to continue our current mitigation strategies. Allow local districts to determine what best fits their needs rather than mandating a onesizefitsall policy. Larger urban districts have different needs than smaller districts that have lower community spread.

01-25-2021

Jennifer Brown []

I do not believe it is right to push the requirement for 100% in person learning in all schools. We need to allow local school boards to make the decision that best fits their unique situation. In larger high schools, having all students present every day is a recipe for disaster with the spread of COVID19. Our school staff and students and their families deserve to be protected. Hybrid models are working for many and should be allowed to continue. This is an overreach and should be defeated immediately.

01-25-2021

Sarah Hilby [Cedar Rapids Community School District]

I oppose this bill as it is not safe to have full classrooms until all educators get the COVID19 vaccine. I teach at a large school and there is no way to socially distance 30 students in the classroom. Please let our elected school board make the decision.

01-25-2021

James Schwiebert []

As and educator, we are taught from day one that "one size does not fit all" Making school in person for 100% of the population is a "one size fits all" mentality. Making schools all in person would force families to look at other options while we are still in a pandemic.

01-25-2021

Kiley Chihak []

To force 100% inperson learning is beyond ridiculous in the middle of a global pandemic. Especially one in which Iowan's have refused to mitigate properly. This takes away not only local control for school districts, but also choice for parents. This is a blatant ploy by the right to take away local control, which is ironically against their party platform, only when it is convenient for them. It will also force parents who have been diligent about online schooling to unenroll their children and homeschool, thus accomplishing another republican agenda item: less funding for schools. We will not be allowed to complain about the "brain drain" in this state when we continually underfund and under support our schools. We will get exactly what we deserve: Uneducated populace that will become poorer and sicker, thus requiring even MORE of your precious tax dollars. These kinds of tone deaf decisions have effects for years to come. "Iowa Nice" is over if this is that path we insist on taking.

01-25-2021

Sarah Outterson-Murphy []

I oppose this bill because it is not safe. I am a teacher, and no one in my school has been vaccinated yet except the nurse. Students are getting sick every day and students have lost relatives to Covid. I do recognize that some students need to be in person. I believe that any high school student who is failing courses should be allowed to come in person for the spring semester. We would be able to maintain social distancing with those additional students, and in fact, we are currently making changes to allow that to happen. But that does NOT mean 1600 students suddenly back in the building all together, which is what this bill would require us to allow.

01-25-2021

Anita Christensen []

Indianola Community Schools have offered in person learning with a remote option since the start of school. All schools began with a 90 minute early release so teachers could work with remote learners. With the start of second semester, the elementary schools have moved to full time. Masks were required from the start for 612 grades with the requirement being added for elementary in November. This seems to have worked well for our district. I get the importance of being in person but letting each district figure out what works for them is the best. What works for Urbandale isn't the same as what will work for Pleasantville. I agree and support opening all schools when we have figured out how to make it safe for all staff and students which may include vaccinations and masks. I also think with some forward thinking, we can speed up the timeline and make this happen for our students and families.

01-25-2021

James Dostal []

This bill is chasing bad policy directed by the Governor of the state of Iowa. In a pandemic is there really rationale thought here? While I could go on and on about the shortsightedness of this possible legislation the reality is members in the Iowa General Assembly will be responsible for additional sickness and possible death for our students, our school workforce, and our community.

01-25-2021

Sarah Ohms []

Members of the Senate Education Committee,My name is Sarah Ohms and when I ended last school year and started this one, I was an interventionist at Stowe Elementary within DMPS. When DMPS was forced to reopen hybrid, I had to flex in mere days into being a third grade classroom teacher for the first time ever to ensure teh safety of my students, their families, and colleagues. I am opposed to SSB 1064 requiring students and staff to return to 100% in person learning. I request that you carefully examine the science and data around when it will be appropriate to reopen. Especially when we dont have community spread under control and vaccine availability is scarce and just beginning.The lack of a statewide mask mandate, and mask mandates for schools, has put us in this position. Schools will need more support for PPE and safe mitigation strategies in light of the more contagious and deadly strain that is starting to spread. The increase number of bodies in a building and not guaranteeing proper social distancing, is highly irresponsible. Iowa schools need increased funding for safe and effective education when in person is reasonable again. Any and all school policy should support the overall health and wellbeing of our children, their families, our community, all while creating a safe environment for educators and school staff. The focus on overall health should also address the behavioral and mental health needs of all parties

01-25-2021

Amanda Kilgore []

Please support SSB 1064 and give families the option to send their children back to school fulltime. Many children and families are struggling and the hybrid model is not addressing those struggles. Elementary children in particular should not be kept from having the option to attend fulltime when schools have done an incredible job of implementing safety measures and maintaining classroom cohorts. We should have been prioritizing having our youngest learners safely in the classroom this entire time. When I've had my children in a daycare center setting that is structured the same as an elementary cohort (but with 40 kids instead of 25) safely for 10 months it's hard to accept the narrative that a more controlled environment at school can't be done safely. There have been zero complaints about the safety of daycare center employees who have served these kids facetoface since day one and taken on the role of helping teach on hybrid days. Our youngest learners need fulltime school and I urge you to pass this bill and give parents that option.

01-25-2021

Leah Howard []

Vote NO on this bill. Return local control to local superintendents and school boards who know their schools best. Our schools are not equipped to mitigate Covid19 at full capacity. We cannot social distance 30 teenagers in one classroom! Teachers are not yet vaccinated, and children will not likely be vaccinated until late this year or even until early next year. This bill will drive up community spread of Covid19, and it will result in sick teachers and sick kids.

01-25-2021

Heather Schmedinghoff []

I oppose this bill. This is an over reach of power. 1. It ignores the fact that we are living in a pandemic which is not impacting all areas of the state equally. 2. It is yet another unfunded mandate. Sure parents want schools open but schools have not been provided the resources to socially distance or provide PPE for their employees. That is shameful. I am a parent. I have taken a leave of absence from my work to keep my children at home. Our school district is providing full time face to face instruction. For our family we made the choice to keep our children involved in their grandparents lives right now instead of putting them in school situation where we would have to isolate from family. I completely understand not all families can do this, but to expect schools to open with out the necessary precautions is negligence. We know what is needed to protect school. If face to face school is the priority then fund it and give teachers and staff the necessary equipment they need. You would be out raged if you went to the doctor and found out they were sewing their own PPE at home from there own supplies and money. You should be equally out raged to know that is the situation schools are in. I have sewn masks for my kids school and donated even while I keep my kids home doing virtual. We should be applauding the good work that was done last spring, last summer and has continued to happen into the 20202021 school year. Teachers have work endless hours engaging students in new and different ways. This should be applauded and rewardedThe governor asked schools to make a plan. Schools then went to the hard work of including parents, staff, community health officials and administration in the process of developing a plan that would work for their district. If parents want to complain and whine about their kid not getting to go to school while others are they need to examine their motives and ask themselves if they volunteered to be part of the process in developing plans. This bill disregards local control. It insults the hard work the stake holders in each district did this summer to develop safe plans with the resources they have. Teachers should be applauded and rewarded for the extra hours they put in last spring, this summer and continue to put in this school year. They are working tirelessly to make sure students are learning. They should be applauded and rewarded not stabbed in the back.

01-25-2021

Julie Schnebbe [Cedar Rapids Community School District]

I am opposed to this bill. In a state which has done very little to combat the spread of COVID19 until things were far out of hand, forcing schools to go fully in person is reckless and has the potential to be very dangerous to students, staff, and ultimately the community. This is a decision which should absolutely be left up to the school boards within our state. They are able to look at the numbers of students in classrooms and determine the best method for providing education within a global pandemic. Until staff are given the chance to be vaccinated, they should not be forced to work in classrooms where social distancing cannot be ensured. Additionally, Iowa's positivity rate continues to hover at 30%. Why is bringing that number down not this legislature's number one priority?

01-25-2021

Dennis Wulf [Citizen]

I am increasingly disappointed with the intrusions on local control by Iowa state government. A true slap in the face for school boards, parents and sudents. This blatent attempt to reward political supporters at the expense of public schools must be opposed at all levels.

01-25-2021

Alyssa Tauber []

I oppose this bill. School districts should get to chose what is best for the safety of their staff and students. Hybrid or all online learning may not be perfect, but staff getting sick, not having enough subs, and children having to be isolated in their classrooms are also disruptive for student's learning. Let school districts decide.

01-25-2021

Katherine Craven []

Requiring schools to offer in person instruction without the proper safeguards in place is irresponsible. This should not be required until all teachers have an opportunity to be vaccinated. Leave decisions up to local districts who know what is best for their students and staff.

01-25-2021

Brian Crawford []

To Bring a bill like this for consideration during a Pandemic is stupid. Rep Sinclair who is the Chair for this bill. What are you thinking, I thought the point of social distancing was to limit the virus spread. Your bill would not only increase the cases, and possible deaths, of our students, and staff. Not well thought out, and stupid. I oppose this bill.

01-25-2021

Mallory Oliver []

First, I will say that I vehemently oppose this bill. It is completely irresponsible for the legislature to pass a bill requiring inperson learning during this school year when the entire world is in the throes of a pandemic. It is plain to see that our Governor does not take the death of 4478 Iowans as seriously as she should so it is up to the legislature to do so. Inperson learning before all teachers and school staff have been vaccinated will add to that death toll. The legislature has proposed the implementation of a committee to try to find out why Iowa teachers are leaving our state. Well, if this bill is passed, it would be number one on the list of that committee's findings. No one, teachers or staff should be forced to go to work in an environment that endangers their health. Iowa will really be short of teachers when a large portion of them die from unnecessary exposure. Furthermore, the state should not be taking these decisions away from school boards who know their schools and communities much better than the state.

01-25-2021

Molly Parrott []

I strongly oppose SSB 1064. While I agree that students need to be in school once it is safe to do so, this is a matter of local control and each superintendent/school board knowing what's best for their respective districts. It is safe for some districts to be 100% in person right now, but for others it's not. The vaccine is in sight for teachers; why put them at risk when they will have access to it in the near future? Please do not put the health and welfare of educators in danger at this time and please trust in local administrators to know what's best for their school communities. Thank you.

01-25-2021

Rachel Matel []

This bill will prevent students, like myself, from attending school inperson. I have attended the online program the first two trimesters and was considering making a switch to a hybrid model learning to finish the year. Now, there would be no way to social distance in my school so COVID19 would spread quickly, further endangering the lives of students/faculty and their families. Recently Hills Elementary had to shut down the entire school because COVID19 cases were so high. As of right now, every fifth grade student at Lucas Elementary is quarantined for two weeks. The hybrid model isnt even keeping everyone safe, so how would you expect full time learning to?

01-25-2021

Christine Maas []

I do not support this bill. On this issue, local control is best. If you absolutely will not allow school boards to make the decision which is best for their school, at least allow them adequate time to adjust to the new mandates. Trust your professional educators to do what is best for students. Educators will, if given the chance, do what is best for their students. That is why they went into education in the first place.

01-25-2021

Stella Vondra []

I do not support this bill. Teachers and students have not been vaccinated yet and COVID numbers are still high. Being inside a school with hundreds of people is not safe for anyone, and as a student, I'm worried about the very real possibility that I could get COVID and bring it back to my parents.

01-25-2021

Rachel Carney [Clear Creek Amana Community School District]

I strongly oppose this bill. Local control should be taken into affect here, and districts should be able to make the decision which is best for their district and students. This also doesn't allow districts adequate time to adjust to ensure the safety of our students and educators. In addition, Johnson county educators has yet to be vaccinated, which coupled with this bill, could increase the cases of COVID in our district. This bill will directly impact the health and safety of individuals in the school system in Iowa. It comes down to trusting your professional educators to do what is best for students.

01-25-2021

Brice Jensen []

I oppose this bill (SSB1064). It creates a dangerous environment for students, teachers, and staff due to COVID19. Also, providing for student and staff safety should be the responsibility of local school boards, not the legislature.

01-25-2021

Stacy Hauschildt []

I teach and many students get knocked out from covid then the students around them are quarantined. I do not feel safe teaching 2530 students in class without ability to social distance whatsoever. I do not feel comfortable putting my students in that environment either.

01-25-2021

Evan schulte [Clear Creek Amana High School]

I do not support the passage of this bill. Local control, let school districts and their communities decide what is best for them.With the new strains of the virus becoming more prevalent and more contagious, this seems like a disaster for local schools and communities that could be avoided.Teachers are not even offered vaccinations until the end of Feb at the earliest

01-25-2021

Traci Eckenrod []

Please do not pass this bill right now. Why would you not wait until we can all be vaccinated and this virus is under control? Please consider the safety of the teachers and staff who have not had the opportunity to have the vaccine yet; many of whom are in high risk categories. Things are tough enough right now and if you change how we do things now before this virus is under control, you will be placing our students and staff in additional undue danger. Districts know best what is appropriate for their students and staff. You afford them local control for safety during weather events; please let them do their jobs and decide what is best for their current situations and community spread.

01-25-2021

Tony Brack [Science Teacher]

Please use common sense when starting and enforcing your laws. This is a matter of life and death for those students and staff who have no idea how COVID will act in their body. CDC says 6ft apart and your bill will clearly go against that safety protocol. We all want to do our job, but in a safe manner for everyone. No vaccine yet for schools, new variants, and now with packing more students in a classroom the virus will have a chance to mutate even more. The mutations could lead to a high mortality rate. This matters to me, please make it matter to you!

01-25-2021

Cam Stockman [CCACD]

These decisions should be left to the local school board. A onesize fits all solution doesnt work in this scenario. The model we are using at our HS is working fine, while minimizing risk. This bill would increase risk, confusion, and contempt for government overreach.

01-25-2021

Matthew McIver []

This is a classic example of government overreach, combined with an unfunded mandate. Local control is a hallmark of Iowa, and American, education. School boards and administrators should be allowed to make the decisions that best fit their communities and circumstances. The governor should stop trying to seize control from duly elected school boards accountable to their own communities.

01-25-2021

Deborah Adams []

Im against this bill. Iowas proud tradition of local control of public schools is being discarded and the safety of teachers, staff, pupils and their families disregarded. Let each community decide how to handle education in the pandemic according to its need.

01-25-2021

Kaitlin Hatcher []

As an educator, I have had to fight to be recognized as a professional as have many before me to get this PROFESSION the support and respect it deserves. If you can trust schools to educate students that are the future of society you should be able to trust each individual district to make the right decisions for their staff and students regarding the safety of all at the school. Do not undermine our right to make these decisions. Unless you spend every day in a specific school, you do not understand the community of that school or that district, and therefore, you do not have the right to make life altering decisions for us. Until you walk in our shoes everyday please do not take away our right to do what is best for our students.

01-25-2021

Shannon Reisinger []

I strongly disagree with this proposal. We can't in good faith keep saying that Iowa offers local control when we don't allow local decisions. I have been in small districts and large districts. Class sizes vary greatly between the different sized schools. In larger schools you cannot keep socially distant in any parts of the school buildings when at full capacity. If the infection rates are down it's because the mitigation strategies are working for the most part. Why would you change things if the protocols in place and the school's current educational plan are doing a pretty good job? Once you bring back all students contact tracing goes out the window. If a student has been in a full classroom and is diagnosed then everyone in that classroom is in jeopardy of being in quarantine. If the student is in a school with an 8 period day with class sizes of 25 or more you could have 200 students out of school. That's not counting staff and the other students they had been with at lunch, on the school bus or before and after school. This is a terrible idea and should't be forced upon schools. Normalcy won't return until all students and staff have had the vaccine.

01-25-2021

Kelsey Hampton []

I encourage the subcommittee to vote "No" on SSB 1064. Forcing school districts to pivot from their teaching measures which have been working for students, staff, and administration at this point in the year is an incredible overreach of government control. Control of school schedules should be left to school boards and local districts, who can make the best choices for their staff and students. Forcing schools to shift to unsafe measures compromises the safety of students and staff, and also the future of education in Iowa. Teachers and school staff forced into situations against CDC guidelines for COVID safety measures will get sick or leave the field. I urge the subcommittee to leave school control to local governance and focus instead on how to best support our schools, staff, and students in this once in a lifetime global pandemic.

01-25-2021

Trechiondria Lathan [ICCSD]

Why are you taking away local control from the school board? As a Black teacher in a predominantly white school, this is a slap in the face. Does this make me feel like my Black life matters? No. We know that teachers, students, and families are not vaccinated, this virus is still mutating, and the pandemic is still happening. What we need is mental health support and grace during this trying time. It is extremely unethical to put the health of educators, children, and families at risk. This narrative about how kids need to be in school is being used to compromise the health and safety of students and staff.

01-25-2021

Trechiondria Lathan [ICCSD]

01-25-2021

Ann Gao []

I strongly oppose this bill because it represents governmental overreach that disrespects our elected school boards. In addition, this bill fails to address factors that make 100% inperson learning irresponsible and/or outright dangerous:Multiple school districts, like the ICCSD, have stated that social distancing with 100% inperson learning is impossible. Many teachers have yet to be vaccinated in my district. And finally, to meet the draconian timeline proposed, secondary schools will have to reshuffle staffing in the middle of a term, a nearly impossible feat.

01-26-2021

Andrea Greiner [parent of two elementary school students]

I do not support this bill. I think that school districts should be deciding what learning model they want to use, based on the needs of the district. I do not think the legislature should mandate learning models for school districts. This is an overreach of government and an example of micromanaging the education system. Let the education leaders decide what is best together with parents, NOT the legislature.

01-27-2021

Linda Randall []

I am a grandmother of a 1st grader and 5th grader that attends an elementary school in North Liberty. The children are currently in the Hybrid model. I will be upfront regarding how the Iowa City School District has handled the situation. The current model being used has been disruptive to the children! Their ability to learn and and the level of teaching is a disgrace to the ICCSCD. For the morning meeting, while on zoom, the 5th grader plays a game of "What am I thinking of?" and the class tries guessing what the teacher is thinking of. This is a disgrace to a supposedly top notch school system. There is no continuity in the schedule. She may/may not have math, Soc. Studies or Science. She has consistently completed her work by 9:30 10:00 a.m. The 1st grader has math, reading, Soc. Studies, and is completed with the assigned subjects by 10:3011:00. The girls of course can read, practice math, etc. but that is by no means a substitution for being in class and learning. I am a retired professional from UIHC, and have had 2 children graduate from the ICCSD. I in fact worked for the District for 7 years. I was once very proud to say ICCSD was the best in the state, however, the district has fell behind and I can no longer make that statement. I live in Tiffin, and have watched all of the school districts around me hold in school teaching: i.e. Clear Creek, Williamsburg, Solon, MidPrairie, West Branch, Tipton. They have had in the most part a very successful school year. I have conversed with a professional that works at ACT, and they state, "With the testing we are seeing, it would be advisable for all of the ICCSD students repeat their current school year. I would be remiss if I did not share these ideas and complaints. I use to live in the Iowa City area, and I would resent paying even 1 cent in taxes for the school district. You most likely have sensed how upsetting this has been Number 1, to the children of this district. It has been a travesty.

01-27-2021

Jennifer Bleil []

This is a difficult time / decision and there will be many differing opinions. While I would like to keep local control, I am not confident that my school district is listening to the concerns of all parents. I have emailed the district several times and have yet to receive a response. This has been the same for many of my friends and neighbors.

01-25-2021

Sarah Ohms []

When examining the CDC guidelines for reopening schools (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019ncov/downloads/community/schoolschildcare/indicatorsthresholdstable.pdf) it is clear that Iowa is not safe enough yet!!!! Dr. Redfield's comments, regarding reopening schools, was from July of 2020, in which the metrics examined were quite different and we still did not have much research around this virus. I am including the CDC indicators for safely reopening schools for you to cross reference with Iowa's metrics. You will clearly see that we are falling in moderate to high risk of transmission within our school settings, as community spread is rampant and it has been left to each school to decide what PPE measures they would like to adopt. Some countries and states have been able to successfully reopen schools but only after community spread was controlled. It is crucial that we use science and data to drive our decisions, especially ones affecting such large populations.

Attachment