Dear Editor:
Upon reading the October 5th Letter to the Editor, as submitted by Jamie Begin, I felt compelled to comment.
At the beginning of his Letter to the Editor, Mr. Begin admits to personally knowing five of the eight candidates currently competing for a seat on the Chelsea School Board, while dividing the eight running candidates into two distinct “camps”, consisting or four candidates each. Toward the end of his letter, it becomes clear that he favors four candidates in particular.
While certainly his prerogative, in the absence of knowing his association with the fifth candidate that he makes it a point to acknowledge, in reading his letter, one might conclude that Mr. Begin has some type of personal issue with the fifth candidate, and thus, potentially the true motivation behind his “Letter to the Editor”?
Why does this matter? I hope to shed some light on the relevance in my comments that follow.
As the writer points out, a seat on the School Board is traditionally non-partisan in nature, although I agree with the writer that what were once viewed as “non-partisan” roles are now seemingly driven by politics. When a community member decides to step up and selflessly run for one of these elected roles, they are often times are advised to “hide their political views” for fear of retribution or potential loss of votes – this has certainly been the case for candidates whose views may lean to the conservative side.
Unless they are an Independent, I think it is safe to assume that all candidates will have a political affiliation, and while I don’t believe politics should guide their candidacy, in a non-partisan role, nor do I believe a candidate should start out their campaign by hiding or casting aside their political views, or should they be unjustly shamed for such. Honesty and integrity should be paramount in guiding their campaigns.
Additionally, the writer suggests that the act of advocating for all children and for parental rights is “political in nature”. Mr. Begin fails to realize that parents have been advocating for their children for years, both in and outside the home – way before our town, our state, and/or our nation fell prey to political polarization. While entitled to his opinions, perhaps the writer should avoid labeling such acts as political displays, but rather, simply being a good, responsible, and caring parent.
In his letter, Mr. Begin attempts to speak on behalf of the four candidates whom he does not support by wrongfully implying that they aim to discredit educators, limit instruction, and oppose uncomfortable discussions. His attempt to disparage the candidates by twisting their views to align with the message he hopes to convey is unacceptable. From day one, Julie Mallie, Ross Greenstein, Tom Golding, and John Piatt have advocated for transparency, parental involvement, parental choice, opt in and opt out options, returning the focus to academics, and the establishment of safe and age-appropriate guidelines when it comes to controversial materials currently found in our school libraries.
The writer makes a plea to the community to “Ask the Tough Questions”, however, falls short defining what these questions might look like. One of the Most Important Questions we can ask of any of the candidates is that “If elected, are you capable of making sound recommendations and decisions for the betterment of our schools, our children, and our educators based on factual data and critical input from all concerned parties, without letting politics and personal views guide those decisions?” Whether it be for a seat on the School Board, City Council, or other elected office – the best candidate is one that will be open to having conversations with people from all sides of the equation, even with those whose opinions and values may not align and then using those discussions productively as it relates to deciding what is best for our children and our tax paying community.
Furthermore, the writer seems to support those that are running their campaigns “essentially on a platform of keeping the status quo” and whose primary focus seem to be on advocating for gender related issues, safeguarding books in our school libraries that depict incest, pornography, and pedophilia, promoting sexuality in our schools, and supporting marginalized groups vs. advocating for all students alike – marginalized, as well as non-marginalized. As I write this paragraph, I recall a recent story from a Chelsea parent whose child was ridiculed and bullied in a Fitness class because the child was required to stand on a scale in front of his or her classmates to be weighed.
Sadly, all types of children can be the victims of bullying – will it become a prerequisite that a child must be a member of a “marginalized” group in order to receive the support and protection that he or she deserves? Additionally, it is a well-known fact that Chelsea scores continue to decline, enrollment is down, academics are taking a back seat, while our community and our schools continue to be polarized and divided. This being said…why would we be okay with “maintaining the status quo” in our schools?
Every community member is encouraged to do their own research and make an informed decision before going to the polls. Whether it be a “Letter to the Editor” or a seat on the local School Board, both should be guided by factual data vs biased speculation or personal vendettas. With respect to the local School Board election, all candidates and voters alike should set politics aside and be putting our youth and academics foremost, void of pushing divisive agendas. We must remember that while adults hold the voting rights, it’s our children who either reap the benefits of the outcome or suffer the consequences. It is not about the adults, it is about the kids and supporting the teachers who we put our trust in to teach our children how to survive and function in our world of today.
My research tells me that Juli Mallie, Ross Greenstein, Tom Golding, and John Piatt understand and respect the fact that there won’t always be one answer or one solution that fits all families and they also understand that what one parent views as “appropriate guidelines” may differ from the next. But it is my opinion that they will work tirelessly with all parents, community members, and educators alike to develop and customize appropriate curriculum choices that take into consideration individual family morals and values whenever possible.
Each voter, whether it be a parent with school age children or children that will be eventually attending Chelsea Schools, and/or a tax paying community member (both are eligible to vote on November 8th for our local School Board) must do diligence in asking the important questions in order to make an informed and responsible voting choice.
Thank you to all of the candidates who have stepped up to run and much success in their respective campaigns.
Lauren Hughes
Chelsea
