To the Editor-

This year’s school board election will determine whether we want to go back to the days of budgeting by referenda, or continue on the more constructive path our current administration, school board and taxpayers have adopted. No referendum in years. No large tax increases. No major program losses. We hired a Superintendent who had the difficult job of transitioning employees from “bargaining” to handbooks. While contentious, these have been years of steady fiscal progress.

We have several current members, not up for election, who want nothing more than to get rid of Dr. Weninger. We have three candidates who stated they, too, would not renew his contract. How open-minded and fair is that? They have not attended a single board meeting, as members, and can come to that conclusion? The fact two of these prejudiced candidates hail from the same zip code as the two most obstructive members of the board, is quite telling. The third Attila-hater, the perpetual school board candidate, has also prejudged the matter.

Mr. Presley and Ms. Baker told the LOWV’s audience they would not prejudge Dr. Weninger’s employment. Ms. Baker, an attorney, would bring some seriously-needed professionalism and class to a rambunctious board. Mr. Presley has been here, before, and still deserves high marks for asking the SPAEA to consider contract negotiations, mid-contract. That took guts. Ms. Scott is often the voice of calm during contentious arguments. She is also very involved within the school community. Mr. Larson provides much-needed balance to the disarray caused by the wannabe detectives/administrators/principals/HVAC contractors/architects/DA’s on the board.

This year’s election is a very serious matter. If you remember the days where, “We need $25 million or education will die,” please seriously consider which candidates will most certainly lead us down that path, and elect those who will see that it never happens, again.

Dave Dailey, Plover