School district: Consultant wasted money


July 3, 2008 · Updated 10:01 PM 

  • 0
  • Print Story
  • Letter/Editor

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

Comment on this story.

COMMENTING RULES: We encourage an open exchange of ideas in our online community, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. In a nutshell, don't say anything you wouldn't want your mother to read. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

So keep your comments:

  • Civil
  • Smart
  • On-topic
  • Free of profanity

We ask that all participants own their words by logging in with their Facebook account. It's a simple process that will take seconds and helps keep our comments free of trolls, cranks, and “drive-by” commenters. We reserve the right to remove comments from anyone using screen names, pseudonyms or false identities. Please refer to our Terms of Use for full detail on participating on our site.

blog comments powered by Disqus