Letters to the Editor

School district: Consultant wasted money

Regarding your article “School Communication Found Lacking” (Feb 25) I was left with two questions.

The results of the communications audit were: (1) similar to existing perceptions, (2) contained no surprises, and (3) “just validated what we already knew.”

If that is true why did the school board blow $8,000 hiring a consultant?

The audit showed that: (1) the district needs to send out a more consistent message, (2) the district needs to improve communications with non-teaching staff, (3) the district needs a consistent mission statement, (4) the district should develop a “key communicator” network to disseminate information to the public, and (5) the web page should be updated. Aren’t these all things that the superintendent should take care of as a part of his normal duties?

In other words, why does the board hire consultants to tell them what they already know and seek to hire new staff to perform functions that should be routine?

Gary Pursel

Oak Harbor

We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Read the latest Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Sep 17 edition online now. Browse the archives.