Claims are off the mark

To the editor,

The York County Superior Court ruling rejecting RSU 21’s injunction is a significant win for Kennebunk and Kennebunkport, taxpayers and the integrity of our school district. Kennebunk’s town charter should be rewritten to clarify that RSU directors are beholden to voters and subject to recall. But that’s a post-election conversation.

We will gain more insight on this at the March 2 hearing in York County Superior Court, the appropriate forum to present evidence supporting the affidavit claims. It would be a disservice to attempt to do so in 180 seconds at a school board meeting or in 250 words via editorial. But I will take this opportunity to address the allegations that this recall is motivated by racism and homophobia. These claims are both repugnant and lazy. Nothing could be further than the truth.

Quite simply, a diverse group of parents, grandparents and taxpayers spent two years engaging the school board in writing and in public sessions, in one-on-one meetings with Dr. Cooper, as I have twice, and by way of multiple FOIA requests. When it became clear that these inquiries were insufficiently answered or, in many cases, completely ignored, a group of Kennebunk residents sought the guidance of the town charter, the town clerk, and the town manager, and followed their explicit instructions to mount a recall of the two people directly accountable for this failing board.

And now, thanks to the judge’s ruling, the people of Kennebunk will have their opportunity to be heard in an election.

Norm Archer
Kennebunk

Question for residents

To the editor,

I am writing to ask a question of this community. Based on the public statements made by two community members in two recent select board meetings, voters were literally tricked into signing the recall petitions for RSU 21 board members. Not one voter, but several.

One voter was made aware of this within the signature challenge deadline, challenged his own signature, and it was not removed from the petition. Not only were these community members not offered the provably false reasons on the petitions themselves to read, but some were offered a flyer of more false points. Points that stated they were signing to increase teacher pay. There is no truth to this.

In fact, there is no truth to any of this. The affidavit, according to the town charter is supposed to contain facts. In fact, the affidavit for this petition is based on multiple falsehoods. The town of Kennebunk let that go. There are petition circulators who were legally required to sign a notarized oath that they had the signers read the petition and witness their signature. This did not happen. The town of Kennebunk let that go.

Are we OK with this? Do we really want a cause that relied on subversive messaging and tactics to not only exist in our community, but continue through it like a wrecking ball?

I am not OK with this. It needs to stop.

Leslie Trentalange
Kennebunk

Thanks to the select board

To the editor,

Last week a letter to the editor authored by me ran that mentioned the town not answering citizen’s challenges regarding the recall process. While that statement was true at the time of writing, due to the nature of lag time between submission, print, and distribution of the Kennebunk Post, this statement is no longer accurate.

At the select board meeting on Feb. 8, Ms. Burns, the town of Kennebunk attorney, was hosted by the select board to openly answer questions asked by citizens of the town, including myself.

I applaud the board for facilitating this open exchange and thank Burns for her willingness to participate. I want to recognize the leadership exemplified by board chair Blake Baldwin when he was willing to change the agenda mid-flight to ensure questions were answered before a formal vote by the board. Thank you to our select board for facilitating the conversation.

Chris Babcock
Kennebunk

Watching recall with incredulity

To the editor,

I’ve watched this recall effort of a dedicated RSU 21 school board member, and my emotions have evolved from surprise to incredulity. That it has been allowed to proceed to an actual March 29 vote, after all the valid legal issues that have been raised against it, is unbelievable. As a longtime resident of Kennebunk, I’ve seen many skirmishes, but this? Why advocate for the recall of someone with whom you disagree (because we all know that the accusations are provably invalid) a mere three months before a new election? Why not just run an opposing candidate in the June election? It’s beyond irresponsible; it feels mean, and one can only guess the reasons behind it.

Our district has had five superintendents and acting superintendents since 2019. Clearly, some things needed to change; I can attest to that from personal experience. Important and substantive policies were not being followed. Strategic decision-making was not based on data. Our kids’ best interests were not always at the forefront. And, as the painful Rosa Slack incident made clear, staff were neither respected nor treated lawfully, and students saw this clearly.

It feels like those pushing this recall movement fear forward progress on modern HR approaches designed to strengthen, protect and support staff; on empowering our teachers as education professionals to shape the curriculum they teach (including sensitive issues); and especially on diversity, equity and inclusion. As a parent, I was thrilled to see Tim Stentiford, Art LeBlanc and Dr. Cooper as effective change agents. This school board and this administration are tackling the work that needs to be done, while some recall proponents are representative of prior leadership that got our district into trouble in the first place. Progress and change are often hard, but always necessary.

Please join me in voting no for the recall on March 29 (or by absentee ballot beforehand).

Karen L. Gervasoni

Kennebunk

Copy the Story Link

Comments are not available on this story.