Plum student government aims to help those in need
The senior girls won the DiSilvio-Kerns Trophy and bragging rights with a score of 20-14 at last month's 23rd annual powder puff game at Plum Senior High School.
Student government sponsors the friendly flag-football event each year as its biggest fundraiser. The event raised $4,392 this year, said Lynda Frazetta, student government sponsor and American history teacher at the high school.
“The coaches do a great job of working everyone into the game,” added Frazetta, who helped to coordinate the event.
Proceeds benefit The Plum Food Pantry, the Sunny Carney Carcinoid Cancer Fund and the Carolyn Nonnenberg Scholarship Fund. Nonnenberg was an English teacher at the school who recently died after suffering from cancer.
About 150 junior and senior girls competed in the powder puff game.
“It's very popular,” said Mitchell Trenz, 18, Student Council president.
Each grade assembles a team, which includes all girls who want to play, he said.
Many students and staff members supported the game off the field as well, Frazetta said. The chamber choir sang the national anthem, the band played for the crowd, and the Air Force Junior ROTC cadets performed flag and color presentations. The concessions were run by the PTSA.
“The event involves so many people,” Frazetta said.
While the powder puff game is student government's biggest fundraiser for the community, student leaders seek opportunities to help communities in need.
Last year, after the tsunami in Japan, the students folded thousands of origami cranes for a charity that donated money for disaster relief.
Frazetta incorporated that service project into her class lesson on World War II.
“These are awesome kids who work really hard. They go above and beyond,” she said.
Mandy Fields Yokim is a freelance writer for Trib Total Media.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.