Below are my answers to a questionnaire sent out by the local newspaper The Call several weeks ago. I appreciate the newspaper’s staff interest in the candidates’ views on diverse topics in order to help the public become more informed prior to election day April 2. I provide below my full answers so that the public can be fully informed of my views.
WHAT ISSUE DO YOU CONSIDER THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IN THIS RACE AND WHY?
I have never seen so many significant changes being made to an academic institution’s focus than what is happening in the Lindbergh Schools District. Two events from 2020 catalyzed much change that had already begun in the District. The Covid-pandemic shut-down of schools and society, something that had not occurred since the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic. And correspondingly, the death of George Floyd resulting in our society’s reexamination of race relations and systemic injustices. The effects of these two events are still reverberating in our society, not least of which in public K-12 education.
My concern is that the rush to remedy real and perceived short-comings in society has resulted in unwarranted pressure on K-12 public schools. Schools are no longer considered by some to be institutions of education focused on reading, writing, arithmetic, development of critical thinking skills, and sundry other topics, but rather some view schools as agents of social change. I am well aware of our country’s checkered past and that public schools have taught material that was/is biased, prejudiced, historically inaccurate, and unacceptable by today’s norms. These need to be remedied.
I am concerned, however, with the headlong rush to implement a whole host of new ideas, new pilot programs, new ways of testing, new teaching methodologies, and new foci. Such rapid changes can cause unintended consequences. The rapid changes in education, including those in Lindbergh, have mimicked those occurring more broadly in our post-COVID society – the defund police movement, the non-prosecution of crimes such as shoplifting and the discarding of ACT and SAT entrance exams to colleges and universities to name a few of the changes. Unfortunately, many undesirable unintended consequences have manifested themselves because of these rushed changes. In response, many cities, colleges and universities are now reversing the changes they rushed to implement just a few years ago and returning to more established tried-and-true methods.
I am concerned that Lindbergh will, in a couple of years, realize that what they have recently changed with the best of intentions has actually hindered, or even harmed, a generation of students. I believe a slower, more measured approach to change should be adopted by the District with a laser focus on the education of students. Why discard decades of experience imbued in the Lindbergh district in providing a quality education to so many students? Measured changes are in my opinion the appropriate changes.
OTHER ISSUES YOU PERCEIVE IN YOUR RACE AND YOUR POSITION ON EACH:
I hope my answers on the rest of the questionnaire address this question.
HOW DID YOU VOTE IN THE APRIL 2019 ELECTION ON THE DISTRICT’S $105 MILLION NO-TAX-RATE-INCREASE BOND ISSUE PROPOSITION R?
We moved back into the District in March 2020 after the vote on Prop R 2019. Thus, I was not in the District in 2019 to vote. (An aside: We initially moved to Crestwood in 2004. Moved away in 2014 due to a career change but kept our Crestwood home. Moved back to St. Louis in 2019 and bought a second home in the school district in March 2020.)
WHAT ARE THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES — SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM — FACING LINDBERGH SCHOOLS?
There are multiple challenges facing the District, but I will focus on one in answering this question. Lindbergh must remain fiscally sound to ensure future generations of students will continue to receive a high-quality education. If not, then we might follow Webster Groves lead who is needing to cut experienced teachers to conserve cash flow and keep their district financially sound. We do not want to see Lindbergh District put in a similar position.
Two areas concern me. First the amount of debt incurred by the District over the past five years will be very high, assuming Prop R 2024 passes. I am NOT opposed to most of what has been done or is planning to be done. I am concerned that the increase of our debt during a period of great uncertainty is not prudent. If Prop R 2024 passes and bonds are issued, the current Board of Education members will be committing citizens of this District to $489M in principal and interest payments for 20 years (until 2045). Yes, $489 million based on the planned amortization records the District provided me.
If all goes well and projections of real-estate property values increase 3 to 4% each year for 20 years, then the District will be able to pay off the debt without a tax-rate increase and all the desired work will be done. That would be a good outcome. However, I believe the future is hard to divine right now. Mortgage rates are high, and the real estate market is frozen. These might be transient changes that return to historical long-term trends, but we don’t know that for sure. I favor a more fiscally conservative approach.
What could also negatively impact property values and thus District finances would be a change in the number of families moving into the District. It is my understanding that more children in Lindbergh schools moved here rather than were born in the District. For decades Lindbergh has been a “destination” district for many families, including my family twice. Such emigration helps raise our property values. In 2016 for example, zip code 63126 which is in the Lindbergh District was the 8th hottest real-estate market in the country according to a study by Realtor.com. Yes, 8th in the country. Why? Because families desired their children to be educated in Lindbergh schools. Such demand surely increased our real-estate values, and thus the amount of taxes paid to the District.
What might happen if the District is no longer so desirable to families? Prospective buyers who search on Zillow for homes will currently see lower-than-desired ratings for our schools. For our home, Zillow shows Long Elementary to have a quality rating of 5 on a scale of 10, Truman Middle School is rated 3 out of 10, and Lindbergh High School is rated 7 out of 10. Irrespective of the metrics Zillow’s school-rating vendor uses, the prospective buyer will see low ratings. Similarly, many people look at U.S. News and World Reports’ rankings of schools. Those readers will also see a less-than-desired low rating for the Lindbergh District. For example, Lindbergh High School is rated 16th among St. Louis metro high schools, 25th in Missouri, and 2,531 in the U.S. These publicly available ratings might ultimately slow the tide of emigration, reduce the desirability of our real estate, and result in a slower rise of, or even decline in, tax revenue to pay for our District’s debt. This is what concerns me.
DO YOU SUPPORT LINDBERGH’S STRATEGIC PLAN? HOW IS THE DISTRICT DOING IN FOLLOWING THE PLAN? SHOULD THE DISTRICT FOLLOW THE STRATEGIC PLAN IN THE FUTURE?
The previous five-year plan spanning 2019 to 2024 and the next five-year plan spanning 2024 to 2029, which was just adopted in March 2024, has set the District on a course that differs significantly from previous decades. Although I believe many goals of the Strategic Plans are laudable (how can anyone disagree with “retain, recruit and develop a premier workforce”?), I am concerned the implemented activities will prove less beneficial than expected, perhaps even harmful.
I reserve judgment until I learn more about the implementation details and the expected and unintended outcomes arising from their implementation. I hope to gain insight from many seasoned teachers and principals in the schools to get their first-hand observations. As a Board candidate I have NOT been given access to speak with any teachers or administration in the District beyond those in the central office. If elected, I will seek out the experienced cadre of educators and learn from them. No one knows better how things are working than those on the frontline implementing the policies.
LINDBERGH RESIDENTS SHOWED OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FOR THE DISTRICT IN PROP R IN 2019. WHAT WILL YOU DO AS A BOARD MEMBER TO MAINTAIN THAT GOODWILL BETWEEN THE DISTRICT AND THE COMMUNITY?
Transparency increases trust. Everything associated with Prop R 2019 should be shared with the community regardless of its nature – detailed expenditures, cost overruns, surprises encountered during construction, and so forth. I know from personal experience while renovating a home during the pandemic that construction was very difficult, and costs were skyrocketing. I can only imagine the challenges the District faced in getting all the work completed in a timely fashion. From my perspective, the District did a great job resulting in a beautiful high school!
ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH THE LEADERSHIP OF SUPERINTENDENT TONY LAKE?
I am not qualified to comment on his leadership since I have only spoken with Dr. Lake for a few hours.
IF ADDITIONAL REVENUE IS NEEDED FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, HOW DO YOU PROPOSE OBTAINING THAT REVENUE?
I am a fiscal conservative, and thus would hope to never put the District into a situation where additional unplanned revenue was needed. I would choose to keep the reserves sufficiently funded to handle unexpected exigencies, and not spend them down. I would try to not raise the school’s tax rate unless absolutely needed. I have talked to many senior citizens in the District, who make up approximately 20% of the District’s citizens. Five percent of them live below the poverty level and are afraid of being taxed out of their home. St. Louis County’s tax freeze will not apply to school levies and thus senior citizens’ school taxes will continue to rise.
DO YOU SUPPORT THE DISTRICT’S DECISION TO OFFER 1:1 TECHNOLOGY/LAPTOPS?
I think it was an inevitable decision the District needed to make. Technology is here to stay. I know firsthand with my own high school children that the use of Chromebooks and iPads to the exclusion of physical textbooks is detrimental to their learning, and hinders our awareness of their struggles and progress. Technology and software have created an extra hurdle that we must jump over to be informed. My wife and I buy some of our children’s textbooks rather than rely on them learning solely from their school-provided electronic devices because we believe they learn more effectively from studying from, and marking in, a physical book.
WHAT ISSUES DO YOU BELIEVE THE DISTRICT NEEDS TO ADDRESS IN ITS ACADEMIC PROGRAMS AND OFFERINGS? WHAT CHANGES WOULD YOU RECOMMEND?
I am concerned about the post-2020 rush to embed practices and content into all aspects of the academy that may result in many unwanted, unintended negative consequences. For example, policies have been implemented, or at least encouraged, that strive to create equity among students whose support system or resources at home might prevent them from completing their homework. Consequently, homework is either no longer assigned, or its use is being curtailed, or is not being graded, and/or is done solely at the student’s discretion. This is truly a shame since well-designed age-appropriate homework is a valuable tool in children’s education. I think we should help all students have the resources needed to academically succeed including after-school tutoring, rides home, evening on-line tutoring of homework, and weekend tutoring. These should be walk-in services open to all students. This would improve the learning of students and help all students succeed.
HOW WOULD YOU WORK TO KEEP POLITICS OUT OF THE BOARD’S DECISION-MAKING PROCESS?
In its best expression, politics is the art of finding common-ground solutions that are most beneficial for citizens, or in this case, school districts. I believe the question is alluding to the polarizing partisan politics we see playing out in local, state, and federal elections. There is no place for such divisive, vilifying, winner-takes-all behavior on the Lindbergh school board. Board members need to focus their decisions on what is best for the students’ education, well-being of teachers and staff, and stewardship of taxpayer dollars. I believe a Lindbergh education should focus on the traditionally accepted subject matters of reading, writing, math, history, civics, geography, music, arts, and so forth.
Correspondingly, public schools including Lindbergh should not serve as the agency of non-academic social change that are promoted by any group either internally or externally of the District.
WHAT ARE YOUR AREAS OF CONCERN REGARDING STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN THE DISTRICT? DO YOU HAVE SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT?
Until now the annual end-of-year Missouri MAP scores have been the best indicator of student learning that is available to the public. The MAP scores for English Language Arts and math have been in decline for a number of years even before COVID. In 2023, only 56% of Lindbergh students tested at or above the category of “proficiency” for ELA, Math, and Science (aggregated score). I refer you to several posts entitled student learning on my web page KirschnerForLindbergh.com to see most of the data for the past ten years.
We are being asked with Prop R 2024 to increase our debt spending to $489M over 20 years on physical facilities. That is a lot of money to spend just on buildings! Why not scale back our investment in buildings and spend a tiny fraction of that $489M on resources that directly impact students’ learning? For example, one high-impact, quick-to-implement resource would be to offer after-school tutoring in each elementary building, online tutoring each night, and even weekend tutoring services, if needed. These could be walk-in services available to all families. Provide snacks after school, and transportation home for those who need it. This one resource would be a great way to help all students in our district, help those who do not have sufficient resources at home to thrive academically, allow teachers to renew their use of homework as a valuable teaching tool in their arsenal, and prepare all students to become well educated, thoughtful, and productive citizens in our society. (Note the online tutoring is potentially available already to Lindbergh students via Varsity Tutoring).
WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON CHARTER SCHOOLS?
One driving force behind the discussions of charter schools and vouchers is due to the poor education many students are receiving in public schools. If public schools provide high quality education, the push for alternative school options would diminish or even cease. Lindbergh schools have historically provided high quality education to students. To forestall any discussions about charter schools in our area, the District needs to regain what it has recently lost and resume its leadership role of public education in Missouri.
WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE TO ENSURE THAT THE DISTRICT CONTINUES TO RETAIN TEACHERS?
The District is not having problems attracting and retaining teachers based on what I learned in my recent meeting with Dr. McKenney, Chief Human Resources Officer. The District is trying to remain competitive in salary and benefits by being in the top quartile of metro districts. Experienced teachers are willing to come to the District even though their tenure “clock” must restart. This speaks well of the great workplace environment in Lindbergh schools.
The Missouri State Teachers Association recently reported the results of its 2024 survey of Missouri teachers. One third of the 2,300 teachers who answered the survey said they were often or very often contemplating leaving the profession. Another third of the teachers said they sometimes contemplated leaving their profession. Their top three reasons for contemplating their departure include 1) stress, 2) student behavior, and 3) low pay. It behooves any school district in Missouri, including Lindbergh, to address these three reasons to retain their teachers.
ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH THE DISTRICT’S SECURITY EFFORTS?
It is great that Lindbergh received $300k in grant money last fall 2023 to fund an emergency alert system (Centegix CrisisAlert) and ancillary safety measures (e.g., walkie-talkies, bleeding control kits). I am also pleased the District is improving the security of external entryways for all schools and employing / redeploying additional safety resource officers in the District. We need to invest in keeping our students safe and prevent any tragedies from happening.
WHAT CONCERNS DO YOU HAVE, IF ANY, ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE CRESTWOOD CROSSING DEVELOPMENT ON THE DISTRICT? THE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN 81-HOME SUBDIVISION.
I assume the gist of the question is if I am concerned how the influx of students moving into the development will increase school enrollments. I have heard the District initially opposed the City of Crestwood when this development was first discussed, presumably because of the adverse burden increased enrollment might have on the nearby schools. I do not know at this time how many families ultimately moved into the development so am not aware of changes in student enrollment. However, as a Crestwood taxpayer, I am very pleased the land has finally been developed, thus providing new commercial spaces and generating revenue sources for the city.
SHOULD THE BOARD RELY ON THE ADVICE AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FINANCIAL PROFESSIONALS OF THE DISTRICT’S FINANCE COMMITTEE TO MAKE MAJOR FINANCIAL DECISIONS, INCLUDING WHETHER TO APPROVE SALARY INCREASES AND BUDGETS.
Yes, the Board needs input from financial professionals to make prudent decisions. Such input, however, does not abrogate the Board of its due diligence. It behooves each board member to become very familiar with the District’s financial affairs, and ramifications of the Board’s decisions on the District’s and taxpayers’ finances, presently and into the future.
SHOULD THE DISTRICT DEFICIT SPEND FOR RECURRING EXPENSES LIKE SALARY INCREASES?
Only in unusual circumstances would I support deficit spending to cover recurring expenses. Such spending might be expedient in the short term, but not sustainable in the long term. Yes, unexpected events due arise and spending from a rainy-day fund is warranted, but such spending should be done for the unexpected, and hopefully small, events.
IF FUTURE BUDGET CUTS ARE NEEDED, WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE ELIMINATING FROM THE BUDGET?
The Board should make every effort to prevent the District from being in poor financial shape. I think the District should be conservative in its management of money by passing affordable budgets. If the unexpected happens, I would first look to cut less-critical-role administrators and staff before letting go of the “front-line” teachers and front-line staff (e.g., nurses, maintenance staff).
WHAT IS A SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER’S ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY? HOW DOES THAT ROLE DIFFER FROM THE ROLE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OR ADMINISTRATION?
An effective board member serves as the eyes, ears, and voice of the public regarding the activities of the District’s administration, staff, faculty, and students. A board member has oversight of hiring, finances, curriculum, facilities, and operations. An individual member cannot be expected to know all the details of all matters within the District but should be expected to immerse him or herself in matters as they arise. A good member is one who seeks out information, educates him or herself to make well-informed decisions, ask questions, be willing to illuminate problems as needed, and not be afraid to disagree with others albeit in a respectful civil manner. A board member should not be beholden to any special-interest group. The board will collectively be most effective when comprised of individual members who have diverse experiences, knowledge, and expertise that complement each other.
HOW SHOULD LINDBERGH ADAPT TO POSSIBLE GROWING SCHOOL ENROLLMENT?
I believe the District is projecting a long-term increase in enrollment though that has not been true for the past year or two. In a recent Post-Dispatch story dated 11/29/2023, enrollments have been dropping in roughly 18 of the 28 metro districts, including nearby Webster Groves. Lindbergh has been a destiny district for decades given its strong history of academic excellence. Enrollments will decline if that trend does not continue or more students transfer into private schools, are schooled at home, or more out of the District.
HOW DOES YOUR PERSONAL OR PROFESSIONAL HISTORY INFORM YOUR APPROACH TO THE BOARD?
I refer you to my posts on KirschnerForLindbergh.com regarding my professional background and reasons for running. I am passionate about public education as the path out of poverty, and passage to the American dream. I grew up in a family where my two maternal grandparents and two parents were all elementary public-school educators. My father grew up in extreme poverty during the Great Depression, but with the help of the GI Bill was able to earn a university education. Together my parents instilled in their four children a love for learning. Their dedication to education resulted in their four children becoming a lawyer, a professor of medicine, a professor of geology (me), and a professor of chemistry. What this taught me, and influences my outlook today, is that education is the Great Equalizer in our society and can raise any family out of poverty in one generation, including Lindbergh families.
I taught geology and environmental science for sixteen years at Saint Louis University and worked nine years as a research scientist at Shell Oil in Texas. In both settings, I worked with students graduating from K-12 schools. I observed students who were ill-prepared for university studies or professional work in a highly technical business environment. For the future wellbeing of students and this country, I believe we must strive to educate students better.
HOW SHOULD BOARD MEMBERS MAKE DECISIONS ON ISSUES? DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD ALWAYS FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION, OR THEY SHOULD ALWAYS GO AGAINST THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION?
I believe it is healthy for board members to educate themselves first on the issues to be addressed, and then collectively engage in substantive, civil discussions. Such discussions are productive when people have divergent views that results in vigorous debate. By doing so, the board will identify the core issue(s) that need to be examined, and discard or ignore the surrounding chaff. I do not believe the board should always follow the recommendations of the Administration. That would be unhealthy.
One reason I am running for the Board is what I learned when going through the last three years of Board minutes and watching board meetings on YouTube. There were over 330 line-item votes taken during the regular board meetings I reviewed. For the current sitting board members, there was only one dissenting vote – one person dissented one time on one vote. The rest – 329 votes – were all unanimous. This record of voting shocked me and convinced me that more diverse points of views are needed on the school board.
WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO ADDRESS DIFFERENCES IN OPINION ON THE BOARD, OR BETWEEN THE BOARD AND THE ADMINISTRATION?
It is healthy for people to voice disparate ideas and hold different opinions, be it in relationships or the functioning of educational boards. Uniformity of ideas breeds complacency and oftentimes poorly thought-out decisions. To address differences, people need to behave civilly, focus on the factual issues being discussed, and restrain from maligning others or questioning their motives. We have lost the art of civil discourse in our society, and what better place to exemplify good behavior than on school boards of education!
WHAT DO YOU THINK OF EFFORTS TO BAN OR RESTRICT CERTAIN BOOKS FROM SCHOOL LIBRARIES?
I believe free speech and unfettered distribution of books and information are important to our society and thus do not support their restrictions. At the same time, public schools have very limited resources to purchase books and thus the school librarians should purchase books that are educationally beneficial to students and aligned with classroom instruction. After deciding to run for the school board last fall, I purchased several books from Amazon that were the focal point of discussions last year. The books arrived several days after my purchase. I was disturbed, however, after reviewing the books for many reasons, including the graphic drawings and descriptions of sex that were depicted in one book and the step-by-step instructions on how to join an adult-only meet-up site in the other book.
These books are not banned in our society since I could purchase and receive them in a few days, and because they are available in our three local public libraries. I do question why these books were deemed educationally important to our students, though I understand some parents believe these books can help their own children. In such cases, I think these families should buy their children such books rather than rely on the library of a public school. In my home we have over 2000 books (yes, I counted), several hundred of them were purchased for our children’s benefit.
It will be inevitable, however, that parents have divergent views on books. I believe it is important to find common ground or compromise in such cases. In the books discussed last year, it seemed a reasonable compromise was reached that limited access to the books according to the wishes of parents. In public schools, I believe people need to seek common ground or compromises that meet the needs and desires of the middle 80 to 90% of the citizens.
HOW CAN THE BOARD REMAIN FOCUSED ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?
The Board can remain focused on student achievement by making it a top priority. People normally focus on their priorities!
WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE TO ENSURE ADEQUATE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE DISTRICT AND DISTRICT RESIDENTS?
I believe it is important that the District provides honest, forthright information to citizens via their press releases and in forums regarding the District and not be overly positive or negative with the information and/or headlines. The District’s residents can handle the truth, be it good or bad. We do not want the pride and trust of the citizens to corrode if it appears information is being withheld or not being presented fully. Lindbergh is not receiving the accolades that it has in the past, but that might be ok with most people as long as they know the goal of the District remains focused on providing a quality education.
WHAT WOULD YOU PROPOSE TO IMPROVE THE DISTRICT’S TEST SCORES?
The quality of an education cannot be measured solely by test scores; however, test scores are still important and should not be discounted. I would spend more time on those activities that historically proved beneficial to students’ education. Discarding Lucy Calkins’ curriculum has been a good start. Enough children have been hindered by that curriculum. It would probably be beneficial to return to the historically proven methods that include phonics (e.g., Structured Literacy approach). And a return to age-appropriate, well-designed homework that reinforces what had been covered in class that day or prepares a student for the next-day activities (e.g., reading a book chapter ahead of a class discussion).
DO YOU SUPPORT LINDBERGH’S $150 MILLION NO-TAX-RATE-INCREASE BOND ISSUE PROPOSAL, PROPOSITION R, THAT WILL APPEAR ON THE APRIL 2 BALLOT? WHY OR WHY NOT?
There are multiple capital-improvement needs in the District that should be addressed soon. These needs include the reroofing of Truman Middle School to limit interior water damage, reclaiming the swimming pool space, replacing the HVAC system so that all antiquated classroom AC window units can be removed, and so forth. Numerous other, albeit smaller projects, included in Prop R 2024 should also be done soon.
I think a smaller proposition would have been more prudent at this time to address the much-needed items. In turn, without a clear understanding of future property appraisals in this post-pandemic high-mortgage-rate era, I would have preferred the school board to not include at this time higher priced items such as the construction of three gymnasiums and redevelopment of the Farmer’s Market property. I have seen the need for separate gymnasiums but think a separate prop could have been proposed several years later after completing a lower-cost Prop R 2024. By then we would have a clearer understanding of how quickly property values might increase in the District and the future trend in student enrollments. With my own finances, I am a fiscal conservative keeping expenditures within my means, not maxing out my line of credit, and always having a healthy rainy-day fund. I would similarly handle tax-payer dollars.
I recently made a Sunshine request with the District to gain more information regarding the proposed funding of Prop R 2024. I made this request to know what the total debt amortization schedule for the District would be if Prop R 2024 passed. I received a 5-page amortization schedule for the $150M Prop R 2024 from the District. This schedule can be found on my web site KirschnerForLindbergh.com.
If Prop R 2024 passes the total expenditure on principal and interest for the next 20 years will be ~$489M. This is a lot of money. Although the District can afford this level of payment if property values continue to rise each year at an average rate of 3.5%, but this trend may not continue and cannot be relied on. The debt will have to be paid one way or another. I would have preferred a smaller Prop R this year and another one in 5 years. I know I might be ignorant of important information that necessitated the current Prop R amount, but with the information I currently have, I would have gone with two props. That is why I am voting NO on April 2.
HAVE YOU BEEN ENDORSED BY ANY GROUPS, ORGANIZATIONS, UNIONS, ET CETERA? IF SO, PLEASE LIST THEM.
I did not seek endorsements at the start of my campaign because I did not want to be evaluated primarily as a single-issue candidate and I saw most requests were from single-issue groups. I believe an effective board member is not focused on a single issue but rather one who has the needed skills, knowledge, and expertise to understand and manage the diverse issues facing Lindbergh Schools District.
I did, however, alter my plan by attending a trade-union endorsement meeting because I believe the trades provide an important, albeit often underappreciated, avenue of study and work for many high school students. In retrospect I wished I had not attended, and not because they did not endorse me. The unions’ leaders made their decision about me in less than 10 minutes of interaction after asking only two financial questions – Do you support Prop R 2024? with the implication that they wanted the work to go to union shops. And do you support collective bargaining? I was disheartened that the focus was not on education, though I can only fault my naivete. If I was a trade-union member with children in Lindbergh schools, I would personally be disappointed that the unions leaders’ did not consider the educational views of the candidates before making their endorsements. (Please do not comment on this post.)
CONCLUDING REMARKS:
I appreciate the opportunity to share my views with The Call readers. I hope what is ultimately published accurately reflects my views and those of the other candidates. Informed citizens are the foundation of our democracy and I hope Lindbergh citizens are well informed when they vote on April 2.
Thank you for reading and best wishes.
David Kirschner