At the Nestucca Valley School District Townhalls held in the fall of 2023, Superintendent Wharton communicated that she was feeling more comfortable coming out [in public] since COVID. While some may find the belatedness of this comment shocking, I believe this remark is indictive of the mindset of government entities that were directly involved with enforcing COVID lockdowns. Having attended countless public meetings of governing bodies over the last 3 years I have personally witnessed the “Zoom” mind virus that plagued public servants.

What do I mean by “Zoom” mind virus? It is a psychopathy that infected public servants during COVID lockdowns who were able to “meet” behind their screens while allowing them speak their unreasonable fears and neo-Marxist theories into public policy with no or minimal public input. These decisions had the potential power to affect the free citizens within their jurisdictions in the intimate details of their lives. Similar to the symptoms of those experiencing “long COVID,” those infected with the “Zoom” mind virus had difficulties returning to their pre-COVID state. The difference being that many did not want to return to their pre-“Zoom” mind virus limited powers: The lure and deception of their real (and imagined) power over others had become their modus operandi.

So what kinds of decisions were made by Superintendent Wharton and the Nestucca Valley School Board during COVID?

1. The adoption of race-based policies. As communicated in previous blogs I have the nerdy habit of reading policies. I have read numerous company policy books, proposed government policies, and many draft legislation bills. I have written policies in private spheres. Policies are foundational and set the tone for every entity. However, when I read “JHH Student Suicide Prevention” (https://policy.osba.org/nestucca/J/JHH%20D1.PDF) I was confronted with the true intent behind DEI initiatives: Division, Exclusion and Isolation. I could not have described that as such at the time, but this definition was given to me by a fellow rural Oregonian and describes perfectly the environment DEI policies create.                           Why do I categorize this policy as a DEI initiative? The policy clearly defines “Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and other minority gender identity and sexual orientation, Native American, Black, Latinx, and Asian students” as part of a specific high-risk identities besides the obvious students (mentally ill, “substance” abusers, “homeless,” or those “bereaved by suicide”). There is no evidence cited for these special categories and the various potential issues. The danger of focusing on a student’s perceived identity by staff versus actual student behavior should be self-evident.
2. The advent of “identity” focused programs. In reality, there were probably multiple “identity” focused programs introduced during this time period. Public school officials rarely see the need to announce to non-school employed adults they are starting a Gay-Straight Alliance or Hispanics ONLY club. Most adults recognize these clubs as subversive to traditional morals (and parents), anti-American and unnecessarily divisive. However, Nestucca Valley School District was so proud of the Diverse Pathways Educators Program that is was introduced by the school counselor, Sharman Ensminger during a Zoom only attendance board meeting in late spring 2021. This program, a mentor program to recruit “diverse” teachers from the current student body, was presented as limited to those who are “racially and/or linguistically diverse.” Here is the current link on the Northwest ESD for that program: https://www.nwresd.org/departments/instructional-services/professional-learning/diverse-educator-pathways Here is one of the slides presented at the meeting by Ensminger concerning this program.          

As late as spring this program was still being advertised at Nestucca. This flier came from the May 2023 Nestucca High School newspaper :

When this DEP program was created I attempted to get all involved to explain who was eligible for this program. I left multiple messages with the Northwest ESD program managers, and only got a response after calling upper management in Northwest ESD. No one would ever confirm whether “whites” or English only speakers would be admitted. Although the Nestucca Valley School District later insisted everyone could apply.

3. Identity based appointees to the school board. Of course, the ultimate triumph of DEI initiatives is to put them in practice by hiring “diverse” candidates. As a majority white community, the elected school board members have been white and married with kids. However, when school board chair, Evan Carver resigned in September 2021 an opportunity arose to appoint a board member. Board meetings were in flux between in person and Zoom attendance only. Indeed, with the introduction of the Delta version of COVID, Oregon went back into mask requirements in all public buildings. This also was a signal to Nestucca School board to retreat back to Zoom meetings. Therefore, when the school began to advertise the application for the open board position only four people applied, and very few people noticed.

The applicants were three parents of school aged children, including myself, and Linda Fielder. Linda Fielder had relocated from the Portland are to the district only a few years ago. She had very limited experience with children, was a advocate and member of the LGBTQ community, and according to multiple reports was a longtime friend of Superintendent Wharton’s spouse. While Fielder presented as a gentle and thoughtful candidate, but she was neither a parent nor an established community member. Furthermore, one of the other parent candidates, Doug Keller, was a retired naval captain. All of us paled compared to both Keller’s resume and his dignified demeanor. Who did Nestucca Valley School District choose to appoint? Linda Fielder. Fielder proved herself by maintaining the status of quo of the school board. The status quo of Nestucca Valley School Board since 2016 had been don’t ask questions and vote yes on everything brought before the board by the superintendent.

4. Labeling parents as “threatening” and calling the police to board meetings. In late August 2021, Secretary of Education Merrick Garland announced that parents attending school board meetings were “domestic terrorist threats (Camera, 2021–see pdf link below). Whatever went on behind the scenes between national, state, and local schoolboard associations, Nestucca Valley School District was already accusing parents of being “threatening ” prior to Garland’s letter to the FBI and public announcement. https://www.congress.gov/117/meeting/house/114235/documents/HHRG-117-GO00-20211116-SD004.pdf

In fact, it was after the August 2021 Nestucca Valley School District labeled me “physically threatening.” How was I “physically threatening”? That was never explained to me. As I replied to the Chair, I am a middle-aged, 5’2, 110 lb. woman: No one finds me threatening. I certainly never made threats to the board or the Superintendent. I did refuse to wear a mask to this meeting for several reasons. There actually was no mask mandate in effect until later that week, because for some reason Oregon thought mask mandates were so effective that they announced them about a week in advance of requiring them. However, about half of the attendants were also not wearing masks to this meeting. Interestingly, I was the only one who received a growled yell to put on a mask. Every person that attended the meeting, except the school board members, identified Superintendent Wharton as the one who yelled, “Put on a mask,” at me as I turned my back to her.

In February 2022 several other parents were also identified as a threat because we insisted on attending the board meeting in-person. This meeting was to decide if students would continue to be forced to wear masks in school and whether part-time employees and volunteers would be allowed COVID vaccine exemptions. The school refused to hold an in-person meeting, so the parents attended outside. The school called the police to “keep the peace.” The officer assigned knew most of us. He told us that the sheriff’s department had only agreed to send him to ensure the parents were treated well. He left for the majority of the meeting, but returned when the board members left the building, at the request of the school administration. No one had threatened anyone, unless you term a potential recall of the board members a threat. But it wasn’t a threat it was a promise.