Forum, June 14: Questioning School District Priorities

Wednesday, June 13, 2018
Questioning School District Priorities

I was very interested to read the article about the McIntyre family’s struggles with the Grantham School District and their attempts to ensure their son receives the proper educational focus on his learning disabilities in an environment that actually serves his needs (“A Search for the Right Choice: Parents, Public Schools Battle Over Private Education,” June 3).

As a Lebanon resident (Lebanon High School Class of 86), I can certify that the Lebanon School District has always been terrible at serving the needs of students outside the core of the bell curve. Whether they be the learning disabled (like my brother and Noah McIntyre) or the intellectually gifted (like myself and a number of others I went to school with), they are treated as problems, square pegs to be rammed into round holes by whatever jackhammer methods are needed. Their needs are not met; all the School District cares about is making sure everyone is very socialistically average.

Now, I know the Croydon Bill isn’t what is claimed in the article. I know because I helped fundraise for the Croydon School Board in its legal battle, and participated in crafting the bill. The Croydon law is specifically about giving parents and students the maximum number of school choices possible to meet their needs. Because schools, after all, are there to educate the kids to excel and reach their potential as productive, intellectually curious citizens, not to serve as job programs for government union workers.

Just where are your priorities, School District officials? If a school isn’t meeting the needs of students, why is taxpayer money being wasted on it if it isn’t doing what it is intended for?

Mike Lorrey


Money Corrupts the Political System

The first battlefield in the political world is one that is often forgotten or neglected. It is not a fight between right and left or between Democrats and Republicans, but the battle between truth and fiction.

In order to debate an issue or to prescribe policy solutions to a given problem, we must first be able to ascertain what the facts of the situation are. Too often both sides of the spectrum cannot even agree on the basic facts of a scenario, with both sides mudding themselves in propaganda or holding the party line because they know how popular it will be with their respective base. We need politicians with the sense to determine the truth, the courage to stand up and fight for it, and the freedom to do something about it.

Our elected officials often give up this freedom before they even take their seats, because they choose to sell their political souls by taking massive amounts of money from corporations and special interest groups. We can no longer afford to elect people to represent us who are beholden to anyone besides the people.

That is why I am proud to be working for Daniel Freilich, who is running for Vermont’s only seat in the U.S. House of Representatives without a single cent of corporate or special interest money. Corporations and special interest groups view the money they give to candidates as an investment, and they expect to see a return on that investment. My college degree is in business management, and let me tell you that a business will not spend a single cent of its money without expecting to see a return. And they have continued spending this money to “support” candidates in increasing amounts, and I can assure you that they would have stopped if it hadn’t provided a massive return. We must get this money out of the system and restore our Democracy before it is too late.

Support candidates who don’t take corporate or special interest money and return our Congress to the people.

Dylan M. Blair


Keep the Focus on Care

I respectfully take issue with the editorial “The Name Game: Selling the Cancer Center’s Soul,” in the June 6 Valley News.

I worked in the Norris Cotton Cancer Center for many years and I was also treated as a patient in the cancer center. Although the history behind the naming of the cancer center is interesting and although U.S. Sen. Norris Cotton and others deserve credit for their vision and the hard work they put into establishing the facility in Hanover back in 1970, the name on the building is almost insignificant in my mind compared with the incredible staff, the remarkable concentration of expertise, and the tender, caring environment within. This will not change regardless of whose name is attached to the building. In fact, one might argue that the care might even be enhanced with a generous infusion of money from a new major benefactor.

In the meantime, let’s stay focused on what is important: the care and the wonderful things that happen within that building.

Ted Fantl