September 25, 2006
Monday

Like a previous writer, I am disturbed by the item on the School Board agenda which calls for consideration of extending the superintendent's contract beyond 2008. I have no problem with our school board giving the superintendent another contract if they feel that a satisfactory job has been done. However, since the need to act on a contract does not exist at this time, I sense an end-run happening - is this déjà vu?

Apparently someone is afraid that certain board members will not be present following the coming election and feels as though the only way to achieve the objective of keeping Mr. Martin as superintendent is to set it up before the new board sits. Why is it that our board cannot plan in advance for things like moving the entire Schoenbar population into appropriate temporary housing (I was there and we did not know where or how we were to be moved and housed until just before school started) but can advance plan in order to safekeep a position for the superintendent?

The theory is that the will of the people is reflected in an election. If certain current board members are not re-elected, then the public is saying that they want someone else to make important decisions for our community's schools. By trying to make an untimely decision about the superintendent, this board is denying the next board the opportunity to represent the community in a very important matter. Shame on you if that is your intention. And shame on me if I ignore such shenanigans.

Terri Robbins
Ketchikan, AK - USA



About: "Teacher in Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District since 1990. "

 

Send A Letter -------Read Letters

E-mail the Editor at editor@sitnews.us

Sitnews
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska