Archive for Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Letter to the editor:

Majority not represented in board’s decision

January 21, 2009

To the editor:

I appreciate the commitment of the school board members who serve in a thankless position, but I am extremely disappointed in the board’s latest decision. We elect members to REPRESENT us. The vote not to renew Dr. Erickson’s contract does not represent the district majority.

Since the announcement of the 4 to 3 intent not to renew his contract, those who deeply care about this school district phoned, wrote letters, signed petitions and appeared in person to tell the board their opinions. It could easily be seen the majority of patrons attending the Jan. 12 board meeting fully supported Dr. Erickson and the renewal of his contract. Instead, the board unanimously voted not to renew his contract, created a temporary part-time position and accepted his retirement in 2010. The compromise thankfully allows retirement but, so does a one-year contract renewal.

In a time of financial restraint and state aid cuts, why create a temporary job spending more money? Was it an attempt to appease the majority or the board members’ conscience? It makes more sense economically, is the decent thing and the desire of the majority of patrons to renew Dr. Erickson’s superintendent contract. This allows the board time to seek a highly qualified candidate to replace him (although a better superintendent won’t be found), allows him to retire, and will save the district money. For 13 years he has proven that he is fully capable of doing the job. While other districts are dropping programs (sports, music) his financial leadership has allowed us to maintain ours. He doesn’t waste money. You won’t find a more passionate, dedicated, qualified individual of integrity. How many highly qualified candidates will be interested in applying when they see the lack of support and loyalty the board gives its superintendent?

The board should reexamine if its decision was done with the best interest of USD 464 in mind or if it was a result of personal issues and agendas. If they are honest with themselves I think they will find they made a mistake that should be immediately corrected with the renewal of Dr. Erickson’s superintendent contract.

Michael Titterington,



Ted_W 9 years, 3 months ago

Mike, You should run for the school board!!


karlyew 9 years, 3 months ago

I agree with Ted_W. Mike you would be a wonderful school board member. You have a lot to offer. Hope you will strongly consider it.


katblu 9 years, 3 months ago

Mike, What makes you think the school board did not represent the district majority? Do you think the majority of the taxpayers want our tax money wasted and given away to fix problems that the superintendent caused or hid from the school board? You said, " he dosen't waste money". How much of the taxpayers money was wasted buying out Mr. Bruns contract? What did it cost for the audit of the central offices? What did the federal law suit cost taxpayers? Sounds like wasted money to me. Mike did you get on and read what happened in our schools? READ the FACTS before you judge the school board.


getagrip 9 years, 3 months ago

The thing about all this is, those individuals who feel the board made the right decision are now content and have moved on. Those who disagree will never be happy and will always believe what they choose to believe. The budget issues that have been discussed are not because of recent events or creating a part-time position to allow someone to retire. I'm not sure how any of you got the idea he was going to retire in one year. If you have watched the board meeting results in the paper, there was never any board action on such an idea. He never submitted a letter stating he intended to resign in 2010. It would have been approved by the board in public session and posted with the rest of the resignations. The budget issues are a result of mis-use of public funds over a period of years, creating postions for friends, and yes, Mike, hiring a teacher who didn't have a teaching license and paying that person a teachers wage. Not only was that a mis-use of funds but I believe against the law. Aren't everyday teachers in the classroom supposed to hold a teaching certificate? And now all this brings just one more thought to you all remember the BTK killer in Wichita? Wasn't he viewed by the community as a good guy, a deacon in his church, and a boy scout leader? How many times has something happened in a community and people are astonished at the person who did it, saying I just didn't think they were capable of that. Sometimes people have two sides, the side they choose to let people see and the side they use to cause harm to others. So while some of you have not seen the bullying side of him, others have and it does exist. Believe what you want.


ManOTongie 9 years, 2 months ago


You are an embarrassment to yourself and this community. By comparing Dr. Erickson with the BTK killer, you have lost all credibility.


getagrip 9 years, 2 months ago

Just saying that people are not always what they appear to be!


Commenting has been disabled for this item.