Chris Lind is moving forward

To the editor:

In June 2007, I was fired by Independent School District 719 after five years of service. At the time, I was employed as a campus supervisor. My duties included security, truancy and emergency-procedure drills. Over time, I developed a rapport with the students, many of whom solicited my advice on various school-related and personal matters.

In time, my role expanded because of the positive relationships I built with students and the administration. I was asked to participate in events outside of my specific job description, including monitoring student sections at games, dances and other events. I monitored and advised various clubs, including the Prior Lake Bible Club and Fellowship of Christian Athletes. The administration encouraged and rewarded my participation in these endeavors. In June of 2006, I was nominated for high school paraprofessional of the year.

In August 2006, I was advised that a “parent” had complained about a discussion I had with a Prior Lake High School “student.” It was alleged that the “student’s” parents were uncomfortable because our discussion involved decisions regarding sexual abstinence and orientation. In fact, I simply reinforced his values and decisions he made on his own. But more importantly, the “student” was not a student. The young man was a 19-year-old former student who had graduated from PLHS. As a result of this alleged incident I received a written reprimand containing many directives.

In December 2006, a student approached me to ask advice about his bisexual girlfriend. I addressed his questions for about two minutes. There were no other conversations. A janitor was present. He reported the conversation to administration. I received a written reprimand, stating that I could not discuss “… your position on premarital relationships and abstinence.” The administration attempted to control my behavior outside school. The written reprimand of Jan. 3, 2007 included the following statement: “These conversations include conversations on and off School District property as well as conversations both during and outside of your work hours.” I was then suspended for three days.

In addition, I was reprimanded for a humorous statement made to a lesbian student and an off-campus discussion with a group of students. The student was not offended. In fact, she defended me to the administration and at my attorney’s request provided a statement supporting me.

I was terminated on June 18, 2007. This, despite the fact that no student or parent has ever complained of my conduct involving any Prior Lake High School student, either on or off campus (other than the parent of the adult former student).

In November 2007 the citizens of Prior Lake and Savage elected me to the School Board. My campaign focused on fiscal responsibility.

Although my attorney, David Thompson, has advised me to move forward with a lawsuit, I have decided not to do so. I choose to forgive those who have wronged me and move on. My family and the community have been through enough.

Chris Lind

Savage

Questionnaire is misleading

To the editor:

I just got off the phone from doing a survey for the Prior Lake-Savage Area School District. I have to say I was very disappointed with how the questions were written.

They were very biased, and their wording is likely to give the false impression that the vast majority of people answering are willing to support proposals that they voted down last year.

It’s difficult to provide exact examples, but a question that kept coming up was this: “Would I support an increase over the existing levy?” With only “yes” or “no” as possible answers, do you see the problem? If I say “no,” I give the impression that I won’t give a cent more to the district than what they currently have, and that is not true. I’m willing to pay more in taxes, just not as much as was asked for last year. If I say “yes,” I feel like I’m opening the door for the school district to ask for anything they like, and I’m not willing to do that.

Why wasn’t I asked if I would support a levy increase that was less than, equal to or greater than the one proposed last year? That, at least, would be an honest question that could be answered honestly.

As for the future, I’m willing to have an increase in the current levy provided it’s a reasonable (as in not as much as was asked for last year) amount. But the way these questions were worded, I could not give an outright “yes” answer.

There were other questions with similar problems that effectively trapped you into giving answers that could easily be used to justify the same type of over-the-top proposal that was voted down last year. I’m very concerned about how the results of the survey could be used as evidence this fall for support of new levy and bond proposals.

If you get the call, think very carefully how you answer. You might be saying “yes” to something you said “no” to last year.

Jeff Peterson

Prior Lake

Longer walks aren’t safe

To the editor:

This day and age, things are much different than when I was a child and walked to school.How many children have been taken from public places, let alone being approached by strangers? How many times on the news do we hear about kids being flashed and things I don’t even want to think about?

I really don’t think that it is in the schools’ right to risk the welfare of our children. I wouldn’t walk in the dark for a mile and a half, let alone have my 13-year-old child do it. I pay my taxes and support the schools, and I do not believe that they in any way have a right to risk my child being hurt or taken from me, because someone cannot manage the money that is given to them.

If money has been a problem, then why do we keep building town houses to overpopulate the city and then build more and more schools? We need to stop and look at what this city has become. We have more and more people jammed into the community because of greed from the city. Now those of us who have been long-time residents keep being pushed to keep giving more. The city is the one allowing this to happen, and they need to fix the problems they have created.

Are the city and school willing to risk being taken to court by families when something happens to their child?

I have more than one child in school and have never been as disappointed and disgusted with the schools or the city as I am at this.

Angela Aegerter

Prior Lake

Be wary of personal politics

To the editor:

We are currently hearing quite a bit about a certain candidate for the U.S. Senate here in Minnesota and his woes concerning his business taxes. I’d like to express my opinion that this is a bit unfortunate, distracts from the issues debates and only serves to add to the side of politics that turn most people off.

Albert Einstein was reported to have once said, “The hardest thing to understand is the United States income tax system.” Those words are even more true today. I can name a dozen people who got caught in the Alternative Minimum Tax shell game in the last few years. I heard from one constituent who took a deduction that was perfectly allowed one year, disallowed the next, then was stuck with a tax bill plus back interest. In fact, Sara and I were recently stung when we were informed, contrary to what we both remember being told, that the property taxes on an investment property were not being escrowed. We are now working with the local government to get caught up.

When we make personal issues such as these the subject of campaign rhetoric, we almost guarantee that many good and excellently qualified people will simply not run for office. That is to our detriment. We also ensure that the primary issues facing a senator end up taking a back seat. Yet it is critical that we know where these hopefuls stand on issues such as abortion, taxation, second amendment rights and national security. I think all candidates at every level should commit to keeping the “politics of personal destruction” out of this year’s campaigns.

Mark Buesgens

State Representative, 35B 

Health care system needs reform

To the editor:

Our family spent the better part of February fighting colds, strep throat, and the flu - we got pretty familiar with the doctor's office. From throat swabs to chest X-rays to prescriptions, we saw it all. It's times like last February when, as a father, I am most thankful for having quality, affordable health care coverage.

Unfortunately, too many Minnesotans don't feel that same level of comfort. Working families have been squeezed by rising health care costs and many small businesses can no longer afford to offer their employees a competitive benefit package.In fact, one in five Minnesotans (about 1 million people) spend more than 10 percent of their annual income on health care. Twenty-five percent of that group (about 250,000 Minnesotans) spends more than a quarter of their income for health care. Some 460,000 Minnesotans, including 30,000 kids, have no coverage at all.T

here's something wrong with this picture. That's why the Minnesota Legislature has been working with Gov. Tim Pawlenty, health practitioners, the insurance industry, and health policy experts over the last 10 months, closely examining the monumental problems facing our health care system and crafting solutions to do something about it. We put those solutions into a nation-leading health care reform package (HF 3391) that recently passed on the House floor. The bill tackles rising health care costs at their core by focusing health care efforts in Minnesota on quality outcomes and preventative care. 

Eighty percent of all health care costs in our state come from the 20 percent of Minnesotans who are suffering from chronic illnesses including heart disease and diabetes. The proposed reforms will reduce costs by helping us prevent these chronic illnesses, and it will help us reduce the cost of treating them by providing doctors and patients with a better model of care and lower administrative costs.

Under this bill, 96 percent of Minnesotans would have health care coverage by 2011. The bill will also promote cost-effective, high quality health care, reduce administrative costs, promote public health, and create a more transparent payment system to help patients be better consumers.

It is clear that the status quo on health care is not working - for families or businesses. With this legislation, Minnesota would set a national standard for health care reform in our country. But more importantly, it would put our state on track for a healthier, more affordable future.

Will Morgan

State Representative, 40A