In defense of teachers

Editor: I have a few points of clarification I’d like to make in response to Steve Mann’s column “Delicate Dance of Returning to School.”

First, when Mann observes, “Many teachers fear getting infected and will vote no on the proposal,” where exactly has he encountered that argument? Nowhere in his column does he interview a teacher, ask a union official or administer a survey to arrive at this conclusion. To characterize teachers as fearful and reluctant to return without any type of corroboration is flimsy journalism at best.

In fact, the only person Mann does interview for this portion of his column is trustee Ron Heberle. Heberle indicates, “that the district has been negotiating with labor groups non-stop, meeting weekly with them.” When did this happen? No one on LEA’s negotiation team has met weekly with the district. There certainly has been a real need to hammer out agreements since March, but the teachers have been continually frustrated by delay after delay on the part of the district. No one has met weekly. That’s simply not true.

When Mann further asserts that, “There are reports that major disagreements exist within the teacher group,” where did this information originate? It’s unclear if this was Mr. Heberle’s assessment. Or was it just idle gossip? Again, this is an uncorroborated, speculative remark that doesn’t offer anything in terms of reporting, but only serves to malign teachers.

And, boy, are we tired of being maligned!

Mann also has Heberle reporting that LUSD has spent “$30 million — $1,000 per student” of taxpayer money on PPE. Where is the accounting for this? That’s an enormous chunk of federal funding, and the teachers were unaware that a cost breakdown of the PPE had been published. We are taxpayers too, and $1,000 per student sounds steep. We’d like to see that balance sheet.

We know that the News-Sentinel has provided fair, balanced, factual information regarding the pandemic and schools in the past, and we are hopeful that the teachers’ perspectives will continue to be important enough to include in future articles and editorials as well.

JEN CASSEL AP Literature, AP Art History Instructor, Tokay High School

Time to transition

Editor: President-elect Joseph R. Biden, despite the intransigence of President Donald J. Trump, is moving with deliberate speed to set up the administration which will come into being at noon on Jan. 20, 2021.

In the Nov. 12 edition of the News-Sentinel, Ms. Marie England posed a pertinent question: “What is Mr. Biden’s insistence that President Trump concedes (sic) now about?”

The short answer is that absent the president’s recognition he has lost, many essential actions for transition to a new regime are hindered.

While the government has funds to support the changeover process, they have been frozen. Meetings between current public officials and their incoming counterparts are not happening. Vital briefings on international threats to the country aren’t occurring.

President Trump is throwing a childish fit of pique. He can’t change the results, no matter how many lawsuits or demands for recounts he levies.

Trump’s actions endanger the safety of the nation.

Some of us will have parties on Inauguration day. Champagne is optional; Mr. Biden is more a beer kind of guy. Trump’s followers will probably mount mock funerals.

A Gospel song urges, “People, get ready — there’s a train acomin’ .... ” Indeed so, and its destination is a more hopeful, productive, healthy future for the United States of America.

Those alone are good reasons to rush preparations for departure on Inauguration Day. LANGE WINCKLER

Lodi