The “comment” section still seems broken. Not sure what is going on, but they appear to have technical difficulties. So here is what I typed up but could not post.
“Leaders say”? Who? “Research shows…..”
I would posit that the “issue” of the school name is indeed a trivial matter at the root. What is much more significant is the dialog surrounding said rumors, “unnecessary controversy” and proposals. It is how these conversations are happening versus how they should have been handled from the get-go back when Arlene Blank brought up the possibility in June 2010 and Culver is reported to have made a promise to the staff. The really important, and very healthy, discussions should have started *then*.
Instead what we have now is no small amount of mud-slinging which deteriorates relationships. And it doesn’t help that the public news media is taking part in the food fight.
It is good that broader discussions between groups (ie, the PTA and the Board President, the staff, etc) are finally taking place. It seems to me that discussions between those who disagree can be very helpful for all involved in terms of maturing as a community and learning to value and respect different opinions. That is what I long for. People are important and their thoughts have value.
As an aside, I am amused that WCIA picked up on Sue Grey joining the PTA next week. I am thinking they have someone reading the Carrie Busey PTA facebook page, which was only posted last night. I don’t think Unit 4 has made such a public announcement, yet.