It is as if winning the public sentiment would change the actual amount of money the School District has available to pay its employees. If one side chooses to deceive the public to bolster its case, is it necessary for the other to counter with even more deception? 

      Example: Some of us remember that the School Board has twice previously approved one-time District reimbursement of teachers’ co-payments. Yet now, these co-payments, deducted from their paychecks, have resurfaced after being magically transformed into "a percentage of wage equivalency."

This is a blatant manipulation of terms  that tries to emphasis the School District’s past fairness and generosity in dealing with its employees.

 

    I’m sure a majority of our teachers probably feel as if they’re lost in some sort of Limboland, and they are becoming  frustrated with both sides of this District-Union stalemate.

     From more than three hundred and fifty teachers in the District, the Teachers Union could only muster twenty-two percent  participation in approving the contract three years ago. Only thirty-three percent of teachers turned out to reject the District’s latest offer.  

     These low numbers only show that the Union does not have the support of a majority of the District teachers, just a small fraction

     Not only do these seemingly lost teachers have to pay their court-ordered dues to a union they don’t support, but the School District continues to recognize and negotiate with the Union even though it cannot show it represents a majority when it comes to important votes.

 

    The teachers’ union does not represent me. But the School Board does. The Board was elected to represent the public’s interest in overseeing District business. Answering deception with even more deception is not the way I want to be represented. I don’t think the public wants it either.

     When our School District puts out information, I want it to be timely. I don’t want to have to analyze the syntax for hidden truth or meaning. 

     Why does the School Board think it has to justify being fiscally responsible by trying to deceive the community and those of us who actually pay the bills?

     Is it because of the past costly coziness among some Board members and their  continued lack of public responsibility the last two years in accounting for the District cost of their benefits? 

     By the results of the last election, it has taken a toll.

     The School Board has lost some credibility with the community. The continued use istrict word-play by the School District in its public bickering with the Teachers Union cannot help the School Board in rebuilding its public trust.

     Answering deception with even more deception will get us nowhere.