Editor, The News:
As a parent of children in the New Castle schools, I felt the need to respond to the letter submitted by Steph Naderinski.
The only part of the letter that I agree with is that school board members serve a very important role. Beyond that, she fails to provide the thoughts of a progressive thinker.
Non-progressive thinkers were satisfied with outdated facilities. A progressive approach to education and financial management has resulted in a state-of-the-art school with no burden on the taxpayers.
The uniform policy was a progressive step; other schools are now implementing similar dress guidelines. Never was the policy declared unconstitutional; the legal proceedings resulted in minor changes to the original policy.
The non-progressive approach of former board members enabled former administrators to abuse school travel. The progressive approach of the current board placed a hold on all district travel.
The progressive thinker realizes that the notion of favoritism in the hiring practices has surfaced during elections for the past 35 years. The progressive thinker also realizes that the district is staffed with people of exceptional educational talent.
The progressive leadership of the board refused to tolerate a disruptive citizen. Non-progressive individuals call the board president a bully for maintaining order at a school board meeting.
It is absurd to believe that the full appraised value of Ben Franklin would be realized. It’s much more progressive to work with a community agency that provides early education to future students.
Any progressive person would agree with drug testing. It’s hard to imagine anyone finding fault in such a noble approach to a problem that touches all walks of life.
You must ask yourself: Is the district better today than it was four years ago? The answer is clearly, yes.
Editor, The News: