LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
LETTER ON REGION 1 CONFLICT WAS FULL OF MISINFORMATION
The magnitude of the misinformation, or even disinformation, of John Mauer’s May 31 letter regarding the request of the Region 1 Board of Education to the superintendent, assistant superintendent and business manager to consider reopening contract negotiations, requires immediate correction.
Mr. Mauer claimed the Region 1 board didn’t have the authority to take such action because the All Boards Committee had that authority.
The All Boards Committee is a committee of the chairmen of the local boards of education established by the Region 1 Board of Education. To state that a committee of the Region 1 board has such authority is utter nonsense.
While the committee might have been given certain tasks to carry out through a series of policies, it has absolutely no legal authority or power to act, only to recommend. The statutes reserve action for the Board of Education.
In fact, there is no provision for the Board of Education delegating its statutory requirements to a committee. No one should be under the mistaken impression that what Mr. Mauer has stated regarding the authority of the All Boards Committee vs. the authority of the Region 1 Board of Education is accurate. It’s not.
Mr. Mauer also mentions the lawsuit filed against Superintendent Patricia Chamberlain and insists any “responsible board should stand behind her (the superintendent) while the legal process plays out;” and that because the board “did not do so demonstrates a complete lack of integrity.” He then proceeded to claim the “board failed its test of moral character.”
I am no fan of most of the actions of the majority of this Board of Education, but Mr. Mauer’s assessment is not only unreasonable, but also dangerous.
I can’t imagine the board’s attorney wouldn’t recommend complete neutrality and non-involvement from the board as this suit works it way through the judicial system. To do what Mr. Mauer suggests, it seems to me, would cause the plaintiff to consider including the board as a defendant in the action, putting it in an untenable and likely costly position.
Further, it is the actions of all members of the Board of Education that determine its reputation, so it would only seem reasonable that Mr. Mauer should call for the resignations of all members rather than targeting just one.
Lastly, Mr. Mauer seems to delight in slamming board member Gale C. Toensing at every turn, but he really should check the minutes of the meeting because it wasn’t Mrs. Toensing who made the motion to ask the administrators to consider reopening their contracts; it was Marilyn Yerks. That is not to say it should make a bit of difference who made this very reasonable motion.
Patricia Allyn Mechare