Who should take over school ‘blueprint’?

To the editor:

County Schools Superintendent Dwight Jones says he’s left us with a blueprint. Specifically, “We have left a blueprint behind to guide the work further, with the board’s support.” Have mercy. Indeed a blueprint was left behind, more like left out, somewhere way back when.

Many of us sympathize with Mr. Jones, as we have had to deal with the difficult task of caring for an ailing parent. Most of us do not have the luxury of departing a $358,000-a-year job for which we signed a contract, with virtually no notice.

Ordinary folk are required to travel to see a parent or move our parent close to us, where we work and have obligations.

Now Jones has left the ball in the School Board’s court and it’s only with their “support” that CCSD will continue to achieve the gigantic leaps of which we’ve stood in awe, these past two years.

Problem is, the School Board’s job is to lead, not to support a school czar or act as a consultant firm.

Speaking of consultants, a bit of the blueprint Jones leaves behind is the $250,000 a year consultant he found so necessary to hire because no one else in our little ol’ valley has the ability this educational genius possesses. Why don’t we just appoint this guru Superintendent — we’ll save a million dollars in no time!

We need to tell our support Board to fix this mess by hiring someone qualified, experienced and who will be paid for performance. What a concept. Or does that only work for teachers, principals and schools?

On second thought, we need to go to the source and request the union to fix this mess -- they seem to be the entity truly in charge. Wait, their chief’s salary is in the $400,000-to-$500,000 range, so that won’t help us.

Ah, I’ve got it: home schooling is outperforming our schools (by light years); maybe we should hire some home schooling moms and dads to run the district.

MONTEREY BROOKMAN

LAS VEGAS

All tax, no cut

To the editor:

In response to Walter Wegst’s letter, “Where are her cuts?” Mr. Wegst wanted to know where U.S. Rep. Dina Titus and the Obama Administration cuts to the budget were.

As we are all aware, President Obama has demanded a “balanced” approach to cutting the deficit. This year that deficit is projected to be about $900 billion, so let us take a look at President Obama’s solution.

First of all, with a balanced approach, he increased the tax on the rich at the beginning of the year by $60 billion. He wants them to pay even more than that, despite the fact that the rich even before the latest tax increase have the highest tax burden since 1979, according to the Tax Policy Center as reported in the Review-Journal on March 4.

Using the balanced approach, he has indeed come up with a long list of cuts. The total of these cuts is about $1.1 billion. So a $900 billion deficit will be controlled by a $60 billion increase in taxes on the rich/luckiest members of our taxpaying society and a $1.1 billion cut in spending.

Does this sound “balanced” to you? Does this look like real progress in getting our deficit under control?

JOHN SEVERSON

HENDERSON