Welcome back readers! Today we hope to summarize and fact check the information shared at Meet the Candidates!

We also want to be very clear, we are not endorsing any candidates, and we are not involved in any BOE campaign. We are simply sharing information through the lens of what is important to us, which is ensuring quality public education FOR ALL.  We are including and discussing answers that specifically have to do with that mission, as well as correcting any misinformation shared. Blog commentary is in YELLOW. 

All 6 candidates participated in this event.  You can watch the entire event here. 

We have ordered all candidates as shown on ballot:

Education. Respect. Growth ticket consisting of –  Kim Hopkins, Andrew Schlam, Mirna Hernandez 

Education First ticket consisting of Kathy Purcell (incumbent), Dave Faulkner, Caityln Barba. 

You can read their bios here 

Intros begin at 17:40

• Questions – 
• What is your vision for education in this community? What is your philosophy for a public education?  (27:15)
• Could you state your slogan and explain what your slogan means to you and what your slogan looks like in practice.  (31:35)
• How would you address the budget with recent funding cuts? What things would you consider essential, and what offerings or programs would you consider cutting?  (37:35)
• Question: How do you define parental rights in regards to public education, and if elected how will you serve the interests of all students?  (44:00)
• What meaningful and noticeable changes have occurred as a result of the repeal of policy 5756 on LGBTQ+ transgender, and various gender expressing students and how has the repeal changed day-to-day practice at the school? (51:05)
• How will you as a board of education member respond to laws and mandates while adhering to the code of ethics that do not align with your religious political or personal beliefs. Please also discuss your view on opt-in versus opt-out. (56:55)
• Would you feel comfortable opposing professional development recommendations that have been approved by the department head, principal and superintendent. What do you think is the role of board members with regard to reviewing and approving professional development, and has it changed over the last year or so?  (1:05:55)
• Do you believe there is an increasing rate of resignations among teachers and staff,  and if so why do you believe this has been happening and what would be your plan to resolve this or minimize it if you were elected? (1:13:58
• As a school board member how would you ensure the needs of special education students are being met? (1:19:51)
• Do you support teaching social emotional learning in the curriculum in our schools,  why or why not?  (1:25:15)
• Closings (1:32:15)

The main topics we have focused on are: Parental rights, Policy 5756, ethics/personal beliefs/opt in vs opt out, training/professional development, teacher retention,  and special education.

Parental Rights:

Mirna stated that to her, parental rights involve being engaged in children’s education, knowing what they’re taught, and participating in school activities like board meetings, conferences, and PTA events. She stated that board members create policies that comply with federal and state laws and apply equally to all students. She stated that she can’t dictate how educators teach or how the superintendent manages their responsibilities; her role is to provide guidance within legal and ethical boundaries. Mirna previously said “Public education is meant to be inclusive for all, for the benefit of all.”

Andrew stated “so I’m not quite clear when parents didn’t have rights. Quite honestly, you always have the right to engage with your students’ teachers, with the staff, with the administration. If the teacher’s solutions aren’t sufficient, you always have the opportunity to engage with your Board of Education and ask questions and make recommendations.  I think that we hire a superintendent to implement the vision that we set. We are not the teachers in the classrooms. We are not the hired experts that are engaging with the students.  We have a curriculum that is selected. They follow that curriculum, and as a parent you’re allowed to be as engaged as you want to be in conversation with your teachers. Unfortunately, sometimes that may mean getting answers that you don’t like. That doesn’t mean that everybody has to have the same answers as you, for education to be available for all.”

This is a great example of explaining how the parental rights term has been made into an issue that doesn’t truly exist, parents have always had rights to direct the upbringing of their children. They do not have a right to impose their personal beliefs on other children through the public school system.

Kathy mentioned that a previous speaker said that parents can always go to teachers, but reported that at one point, teachers were prevented from going to parents. She stated that communication must go between both the parents and the teachers and the teachers to the parents. She then reported that her concern is “that we are now focused on ALL the children. We can’t use that statement that much anymore, because it’s not all about the children, it’s about, children are being obstructed by other children, when they want to get their own ways and using bathrooms inappropriately, males being with female sports. It’s not about all the children any longer. So that’s my, that’s my big concern is we’re kind of going in the wrong direction if that’s where we’re going to be going. “

First, teachers are not prevented from speaking to parents. What it appears she is referring to is policy 5756, which was rescinded. This policy did allow for teachers not to “out” a trans or gender nonconforming child to an unsafe home. It in no way prevented teachers from speaking to parents.  This has been clarified many times, even by the Attorney General who said this “To be clear, the State has always respected the rights of parents and agrees that parents should be involved in important decisions regarding their children —and any characterizations to the contrary are flatly incorrect. As the Superior Court correctly recognized, the State is “not targeting parental rights.” Indeed, the State has never sought and never will seek a “ban” on parental notification. All our lawsuits seek to do is to reinstate the same policies these districts found acceptable with little protest for years. Put simply, we can both keep parents informed about their children’s development and protect the civil rights of our most vulnerable students. Our laws require nothing less.”

This policy has been a hot topic in Roxbury, since last year, after locals claimed that people supporting 5767 wanted to “keep secrets.” To be clear, no one wants secrets between the school and parents, they simply want children not to be outed to unsafe homes. Rescinding the policy also does not change state law, which remains the same.  So, teachers are still prevented from forcibly outing a child who reports being unsafe at home.  Kathy also seems to claim that trans students are trying to “get their own way” and using bathrooms inappropriately. Again, the law against discrimination has existed for some time, and trans students have been able and continue to be able to use bathrooms of their gender identity.   This had not been controversial until M4L started claiming inappropriate things were happening with no proof.  

Dave emphasized the importance of parental rights, focusing on educational transparency and rebuilding trust in the Roxbury public school system. He stated that parents should have the authority to raise their children as they see fit, without being undermined by excessive policies or ideologies. The speaker advocates for a stable curriculum that remains unaffected by current societal pressures and stresses the need to avoid controversial issues, referencing the “Saga of Sage” as a cautionary example.

The Saga of Sage seems to reference a story about a trans child in Virginia, who ran away and was then a victim of sex trafficking. A quick google search shows that this child was born a female, named Sage, and requested to be called Draco and identified as a boy. Their guardian refused to use their preferred name and pronoun, and was upset the school did not notify them.  The guardian at some point lost custody of the child, and since child protective service records are confidential, there is no way to know the details of that case.  LGBTQ children are at higher risk of being trafficked.  Cultural biases, homophobia, sex and gender discrimination, and social stigma make LGBTQ youth more vulnerable to exploitation, especially when they are not supported in their homes, and seek connections elsewhere.

Policy 5756

The question was in regard to how the repeal of policy 5767 affected day to day practice in the school.

Kim acknowledged the repeal of a mandate aimed at guiding teachers and administrators in supporting students with gender differences and stated that it is regrettable that this guidance has been removed, as it was intended to promote respect for all students.

Dave reported that he was unclear on any immediate effects on children, noting it was only in practice for a few years. He stated that he visited board members to make sure it was not enacted. Dave talked about the importance of treating others with respect, emphasizing the golden rule of treating people how one wants to be treated. He advocated against bullying and harassment, asserting that everyone, regardless of their differences, deserves equal protection under the law. 

This seemed contradictory, as Dave seemed to say that he advocated against this policy, but then stated that everyone deserves equal protection under the law, which is what this policy does – summarize that law for staff. 

Mirna reported that she recalled students expressing concerns at a Board of Education meeting about feeling less safe to talk to trusted adults. Mirna reported concern that teachers lack the necessary guidance to support students who reach out. She emphasized the importance of having clear rules and implementation within any organization.

If you would like to read the summary of testimony of the many residents and students who spoke AGAINST the repeal of 5756, click here. It has also been statistically proven that hate crimes have increased by 4 times in states that have enacted anti LGBTQ laws.

Andrew: “So we took 47 or so page law, meaning not optional, that we wrote three pages worth of guidance, so teachers would know how to interpret it, and by repealing that,  we took away the three pages,  and the guidance,  with that we took away the dignity and respect of the community that depends on that guidance for their safety and for their inclusion and our community. In terms of anything meaningful, nothing in a positive way changed, other than a certain demographic feels like they had a victory. ”

Kathy stated that she is “not really privy to who it personally is affecting in the school district,” but stated that “we have a duty to protect all children no matter what the circumstance is. It is the responsibility of the school to make sure that every student is safe and we can’t just take specific groups of people and think that they’re more important than anyone else who is having trouble in the home environment. As far as teachers having no guidance, I’m not really sure that these teachers have memorized the policy to begin with, they would have to go and look at it, so they also have people in the district that can help them to decide what decisions they should be making, and if they don’t know what decision to make then they shouldn’t be making them.”

Kathy seems to agree we have a duty to protect all children, but has regularly suggested that does not include trans students. She has previously seemed to suggest that she does seem to believe that any child could be unsafe in their home, even after hearing students speak about this at several meetings. She made claims of teachers “leading” students down a wrong path at a prior board meeting. See her statement here. 

Ethics/personal beliefs/Opt in vs Opt out

Read the BOE Code of Ethics here. 

Dave stated that laws should be followed, “just” laws should be followed. He stated that people should not be bullied, but that he does not believe “boys should be in girls’ bathrooms.  I don’t think boys should compete against women, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t protect them. They are obviously in a state of whatever it is where they need to be protected and guided as well.” He stated that his personal beliefs only guide him as far as where someone else’s rights start and that he won’t push his ideology on others, but that he will use his moral compass to guide him how to vote. He is an advocate of “opt-in”

Suggesting that only “just” laws should be followed is concerning. As a reminder BOE members swear by a code of ethics, to abide by all state and federal laws. So while Dave may not agree with the laws against discrimination that protect trans students, as a board member he is bound by those laws.  Should someone want to change the laws, they would lobby for those changes in Trenton, not in the BOE.

Dave is pro opt in, which as we discussed is a violation of state law. He also claims that “they are trying to teach sexual things to children as young as second grade.”  There is no factual basis for this claim. The health standards for NJ (click here to view) include that students are taught proper terminology for body parts at that age. That is not sexual or inappropriate. Professionals agree its protective against sexual abuse. Students also learn about gender stereotypes (examples – boys can have long hair, girls can be doctors). To clarify, the standards at that age do NOT include discussing gender identify, simply stereotypes about gender. Again, parents are able to opt out. 

Kim stated that a board member has a strict ethical duty to follow laws, and do what’s best for students and the town, they were for opt out. 

Kathy stated that there was a time when they were told something was a law, and it was not, and “we voted in the wrong direction at that time” She stated that people should opt in because “ if they were aware of what they’re about to hear, their parents would want them to be opting in or out.”

So, Kathy said they were told it was a law, and it was not. We assume she’s speaking about the policy being mandatory versus non mandatory. The law against discrimination IS mandatory as it is state law.  Kathy has also spoken before about wishing to allow the district to opt in to sex ed, as opposed to the opt out.   This has been clarified to her before by the board attorney that is not possible and violates state law. We were quite surprised she doubled down on that after it was explained to her recently. You can see that conversation between Kathy, superintendent, and BOE attorney here. 

The School Ethics Commision has reported “if the board refuses to implement the NJSLS for Comprehensive Health and Physical Education, or has changed the application of N.J.S.A. 18A:35-4.7 from “opt-out” to “opt-in,” the board, as a public body, would be violating both the NJSLS and N.J.S.A. 18A:35-4.7, and there could be resulting consequences.”

Parents have always had the option to opt out of any part of instruction in health, family life education, or sex education is in conflict with his or her conscience or sincerely held moral or religious beliefs. 

In regard to ethics, Kathy said at last year’s BOE retreat, “I am voting in my conscience for the side I want to vote with, “and when reminded that the code of ethics requires BOE members to uphold all laws, rules and regulations, Kathy responded, “yeah, we know the rules. But we don’t WANT those rules.” Between those statements, and her bringing up wanting to implement an opt in when she has already been informed it is not possible, it is very concerning that there could be ethical violations coming, if they haven’t happened already. 

Andrew discussed that laws need to be followed. Laws are changed in Trenton, not at the local BOE.  He stated, “ In terms of my ethics, I happen to be of a Jewish faith. I’m not going to tell people they can’t have a bacon cheeseburger because my faith says don’t have bacon cheeseburgers. My personal beliefs do not override what is the best of students in a community, end of story.”  He is for an opt out. 

After MTC, the local chair of M4L made an Instagram video about Andew’s response, stating that political ideologies are being pushed in schools and seemed to compare it to Andrew’s child being forced to eat burgers.   First it seems important to mention that the original quote was about cheeseburgers, and seemingly about keeping kosher, not about hamburgers themselves. Also, as we have mentioned MANY times, parents can opt out. It is not a political ideology to simply admit that different types of people exist, such as having an example of a child having two moms used in a word problem. In regard to the allegation that these topics are being pushed into other subjects, we have yet to see an example in Roxbury of this happening and would be more than happy to learn more if it is indeed an issue. 

Mirna stated that opt out is mandated by law, and explained it’s not the role of the BOE to change state law. She discussed the complications of an opt in, comparing it to the waiver sent out about bus drop offs.”  I vote according to any oath that I take as I always have as an attorney. You stick to your oath and if you can’t take it, then don’t take the oath. “

Training/Professional Development

Kathy stated that there are “red flags” and that they need to know the reason staff were going.  

We are unsure what Kathy’s “red flags” are, but they seem to be anything involving social emotional learning, gender, equity, or librarians. We would wonder what research she has done on these training to determine that they are not “appropriate.” As it was mentioned, these trainings have been approved by the principal, department head, and superintendent. We have a post about the votes against trainings here, where you can see more information about each training that was voted against.

Andrew clarified that the department head, the principal, and superintendent have approved the training prior to it going to the BOE for approval. He stated that BOE has no role in getting into the “minutia of how to develop the staff that the superintendent recommends to hire. We set a vision. We hire a superintendent to engage the right resources and continue their development, making sure they are armed to be prepared in the classroom effectively.  I think it becomes a question of can we afford it at that level, absolutely we have to say can we afford it. Do we think it’s appropriate for them? That’s not a question a board member should be answering. Again, the department head said it was necessary, the principal said it was necessary, and the superintendent said it was necessary. “ 

Dave agreed with Andrew and stated that he trusts the superintendent’s judgment.  “They’ve already vetted these and it’s not necessarily my role to squash that. I’m not going to rubber stamp anything, but I think it’s definitely if it’s within the budget I will go with what is paramount to the best for the community.”

Mirna agreed with Andrew and mentioned that Roxbury teachers are not the best paid in the area. “They are required to meet a certain number of professional development hours every two years. If we don’t, if we deny them that and they’re not getting paid, they’re not going to stay,” she stated that requiring teachers to submit explanations for their interested in the professional development is “antagonism to teachers, and I think that’s unfair, and it’s if it’s based on a board member’s personal belief that something shouldn’t be in school, but has been approved by three layers, I think that’s outside of the purview of the board.”

Kim agreed that it was not the job of the BOE, and that the BOE oversees the management, she agreed teachers need their continuing education. She stated that she would not be afraid to express an opinion should she come across something that did seem inappropriate, but had a hard time thinking of a situation where that would happen. 

Kathy then asked for a rebuttal: “So my rebuttal is educators should not be taking courses politically charged, and we have the opportunity to vote Yes or No which means to me, if I disagree, I can vote no, because they are slipping in some courses that are politically charged, and I’m against it and that’s how I feel and I’m going to vote no every time I can figure out what they’re actually going to. If  you want to be educated on that,  take your own time out,  and get educated.”

We are unsure what of the training listed here are “politically charged,” and why she suggests they are being “slipped in” as if in some nefarious way. 

Reminder, Kathy has voted against a special education teacher taking a training on working with special needs children, against a Social Studies Teacher to attend a training about the history of gender and sexuality in colonialism (that’s not about “gender ideology”), and against our HS librarian to attend the NJ Library Association Conference. 

Mirna also rebutted and mentioned that  there has been a large increase in the number of no votes for training since last year. She stated that “the board is a nonpartisan entity, so any judgment about what is political and what is not political is wrong for the board to express, and wrong to vote on whether something is against the politics of somebody on the board, it is a nonpartisan body, and if you have three professionals who have said yes, the board should not say no.”

Teacher Retention

Mirna stated that there has been an increase in teacher resignations in Roxbury compared to last year, alongside ongoing retirements. She discussed that the district’s pay rates are lower than those in other areas, and there’s a sense of antagonism towards teachers from the school board, particularly regarding support for their continuing education.  She suggested providing teachers with more resources and hiring additional paraprofessionals, as current staff are stretched thin. “So, we need to invest in teachers, and we need to give them the resources that will make them feel like they are a valued part of the schools.  “

Dave stated that teachers deserve significantly higher pay for their essential work, as many often spend their own money on supplies, which is unfortunate. He stated that he  believes we should increase their salaries and hire more paraprofessionals to support them.

Kim agreed that she noticed an increase in teacher departures in recent years, seemingly due to non-competitive salaries compared to neighboring districts and burnout from the stress of changes during COVID. As teachers leave, class sizes have grown, and there’s been insufficient paraprofessional support, which adds pressure on remaining teachers. To address this, we need to improve salaries and ensure teachers receive the necessary training and support.

Kathy stated that she has participated in two rounds of employee contract negotiations that were ratified quickly, likely the fastest in Roxbury’s history, and the outcomes were well-received. “Roxbury teachers aren’t always just looking for money. They love taking care of the students. They love the Roxbury district and there’s so many other reasons that people are leaving, and we actually requested after we wanted that to be questioned,  that they have exit interviews, and we are now doing exit interviews and it’s up to the people that are leaving,  they can either go to their principal or they can go to HR and they can discuss what the problems are and rarely is it any serious problems of why they’re leaving this District.”

Caitlyn agreed with Kathy and Dave, and stated that it is important to discover why they’re leaving, to determine how better to support them.   

Andrew stated that this topic was meaningful to him, as he comes from a family of educators.  “We’re not in it to get rich. It’s not about the money. It’s about respect. It’s about being treated nicely, respectfully, with dignity. It’s not about publicly disparaging teachers in just loathsome ways, and I can tell you that if you were to read about yourself in a negative light on a regular basis in your town’s local Facebook groups, you may not want to show up for work either. It’s not an easy job and you know coming from a world of stakeholder management, you’ve got stakeholders expectations ranging from every perspective. You’ve got to satisfy all of your bosses, the kids, their parents, the people that employ you. You don’t need it from the community not supporting the teachers.”

We agree that there has been a significant increase in public disparaging of teachers, sadly by BOE members themselves. It’s important to mention, that the code of ethics that BOE members swear to uphold, includes supporting and protecting district staff in proper performance of their duties, so publicly disparaging school employees is a violation of that oath. 

Special education

Kathy stated that the district has faced challenges in special services, that Dr. Santora, who has a strong background in this area, along with a new director and an assistant director, are focused on developing new programs and filling aid positions to retain students in our district. 

“I think it’s up to the parents to come and speak to this to the problems that they’re having, so everything gets improved because Dr. Santora has opened it up to the public and parents are not responding as well as they should.  It was what they were looking for years ago was communication. We now have communication and people aren’t showing up. “

Kim stated that as a mother of a special needs child, she understands the importance of good communication among teachers, parents, and administrators. She reported a positive relationship with teachers, but stated that teachers need more support, particularly with full-time paraprofessionals in the classroom. Kin stated that having an additional adult significantly helps keep special needs students focused. Kim expressed hope that the new director of special services will have a positive impact. 

Caitlyn agreed with what Kathy and Kim mentioned, and stated that as a former paraprofessional, she understands the critical importance of having support in the classroom.

Mirna discussed the importance of teachers receiving adequate resources, including teaching materials and support staff for special needs students. When it comes to communicating with parents, we must recognize their busy schedules, often working multiple jobs. Expecting them to attend evening programs isn’t always realistic. Effective communication should include outreach, simplified language, and regular newsletters from special education programs. It’s unfair to place the burden on parents, especially since many are already overwhelmed by the demands of having a child with special needs.

Andrew agreed with Kim and Mirna. 

Dave clarified that it’s not primarily the parents’ responsibility to attend events; rather, it’s about being invited to engage in the solution and the overall system. After hearing the new director and assistant director discuss their backgrounds and goals, he reported  feeling optimistic about the direction of special education in our district and believes we’re headed in a positive direction.

Mirna rebutted and clarified that she was not criticizing Dr. Santora’s efforts, which she stated are commendable. She stated that in her conversations with parents of special education students, many are unaware of the new director. The outreach needs to be more targeted and focused on their needs, as there is a lot happening. It’s not that parents aren’t trying; it’s about ensuring they are informed and engaged.

Social Emotional Learning

Kim stated that she believes social-emotional learning (SEL) is beneficial in the classroom, as it complements what parents teach at home. It’s essential for young children to learn how to process their feelings and recognize their emotional states, which aids in better decision-making. Additionally, SEL can help prevent bullying by encouraging connections among students and fostering empathy, helping them understand that their peers have feelings too.

Dave stated that he viewed SEL as a double-edged sword. While I strongly support teaching children emotional intelligence and how to regulate their emotions and treat others with respect, he cautioned against giving excessive attention to negative feelings.  He suggested that focusing too much on sadness or anger, we may inadvertently encourage those emotions by giving them attention. It’s important to teach kids to recognize their feelings but also to move past the negative ones. He stated that it’s a “slippery slope” and needs to be heavily regulated to make sure “it doesn’t go in the wrong direction.”

We have not seen this in practice, unsure if other parents feel that negative emotions are getting more attention and therefore being positively reinforced. 

Mirna stated that her experience with SEL was that it plays a crucial role in helping students regulate their emotions, communicate effectively, and develop respect for themselves, their classmates, and their community. SEL also fosters resilience, as not every child arrives at school having a good day. She stated that teachers can’t focus solely on one student in a crowded classroom, so SEL lessons provide students with tools they can use throughout their lives. The goal is to equip all children to apply these skills beyond that one bad day, and throughout their life. 

Caitlyn stated that she has not  reviewed the SEL  curriculum, but  believes it’s important to reinforce values like kindness, empathy, respect, and sharing, which my son is learning in kindergarten. She stated that she had not looked into it enough to give a lengthy opinion, but that she felt these traits are important to instill in the classroom.

Andrew stated that there’s a noticeable decline in civility without SEL training. He stated that SEL helps individuals articulate difficult feelings and prepares them to understand and respond to others. He reported that as an adult educator, he emphasizes emotional intelligence in his classes on building effective teams and strong leaders. He reported that he has asked adult students if they wish they had learned more about regulating their emotions and understanding others during childhood, and not one has said they wouldn’t have benefited from such training. Many stated that they would have been better prepared for a diverse workforce if they had learned these skills earlier in life.

Kathy stated that she is not “a fully enthusiastic person to the extreme of social emotional learning.” She stated that she recognizes that it is important for younger students struggling with their emotions, but stated that she thinks a lot of that is the parents’ issue. She suggested that some challenges could be addressed outside the classroom rather than relying solely on school to provide solutions, while “hearing all the easy ways to get out of feeling poorly and badly.  Some people just, you need some people being tougher than others is probably easier than other people who are very emotional, but I I don’t like the extreme of any behavior being addressed during school.” 

We found this response confusing. What are “easy ways to get out of feeling poorly” and should the school ignore behaviors in school? We have heard from countless parents and staff that behavior is a huge issue in our schools, suggesting that behaviors should not be addressed at school, and that SEL should potentially not be used in schools is concerning, for students, parents, and staff. 

Now for endorsements

Purcell, Faulkner and Barba denied that they are endorsed by Mom for Liberty, but reportedly sought the endorsement of the Roxbury Parental Rights in Education group.  Interestingly, that group was created by our local Morris County M4L chairperson and another local M4L member, who were both sued by the high school librarian who alleges that they defamed her, when they said rather horrid things about her at the March 2023 BOE meeting. While the Morris M4L county chapter itself did not endorse this slate, the Morris County M4L chair did endorse the slate in a TapInto Letter to the editor. 

The Morris County M4L has also admitted to running BOE campaigns for the past two elections, to “flip” the Roxbury school board to like-minded members. Read more about M4L locally, here.

Their slate also regularly referenced being proponents of “Back to Basics” which was the slogan of last year’s campaign, admittedly run by Morris County M4L chair. It’s also a term used by the M4L national as well.)

Hopkins, Schlam, Hernandez have received no formal endorsements beyond two TapInto articles written by Roxbury locals. 

In terms of ELEC filings, the Hopkins slate reported only donations from candidates and locals. 

The Purcell slate had donations from candidates, one local and a large donation from Elect Common Sense, which is the Political Action Committee created by Bill Spadea. Bill Spadea endorsed the Back to Basics slate last year, and that campaign claimed it was not a political endorsement, since he was not running for office. This year he has announced that he will be running for governor and has a clear party affiliation. As a reminder, our Board of Education is supposed to be non-partisan.

Reminder – Early voting started on October 26, click here to find early voting locations.