In a recent letter (Feb. 11), Norm Archer asserted that to infer that the true motive behind the Regional School Unit 21 recall lies in bigotry is “lazy.”

Lazy, or just obvious?

As I have observed the evolution of the recall, I have marveled at the level of contortion that recall proponents have performed to create an intellectually reasonable platform. It has become less a discussion and more a game of Whac-a-Mole.

First it was teachers leaving in droves, even though RSU 21 has a competitive retention rate.

Then it was runaway spending by the targeted board member, who is not on the board’s Finance Committee.

There was an attempt to stir up indignation about salaries, despite the 92 percent satisfaction rate with the contract. (Was it the hot dogs? I suspect otherwise.)

Now it’s COVID and masks.

Meanwhile, we have heard all about the inexperience of our superintendent, her lack of transparency (before her first review?) and the coded “unfit for the position.”

A truly solid thesis should not be this hard to follow.

What has remained consistent throughout all of this obfuscation: Despite these fallacies, the one board member who is being targeted is the one who is openly gay. And although her predecessors demonstrated significant incompetence, the superintendent who is being vilified is the first one in our district’s history who is Black.

Whether we are referencing William of Ockham or Sherlock Holmes, the intellectual technique is the same: The most straightforward explanation is probably the correct one. That’s not laziness. That’s logic.

Merideth C. Norris
Kennebunk

Copy the Story Link