Letter to the editor: Schlaugh, Caldwell proven leaders in Plum | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Schlaugh, Caldwell proven leaders in Plum

Letter-writer Megan Reck claims claims her family moved to Plum with the hope that her kids would be able to attend quality schools (“Changes needed on Plum school board,” May 14, TribLIVE). Well, at least partially due to Steve Schlauch and Sue Caldwell’s leadership on the Plum School Board, we now have an outstanding new administration from high-performing school districts to put the focus back on the students’ education.

If not for Schlauch and Caldwell’s leadership, we may still have the previous failed administration here at Plum that was involved with the teacher sex scandal. Due to Schlauch’s leadership as finance chair and Caldwell’s support, we went from a $5 million deficit to a balanced budget with no tax increase for 2019-20. This all happened without taking instructional time from the students and meeting all administrative regulations for staffing set by the previous board.

Caldwell and Schlauch are also partially responsible for establishing a school police force and increasing security to protect our students.

Schlauch and Caldwell are proven reformers and leaders that we can trust to do what is right for our students to help make Plum one of the best school districts in the region.

Patricia Cook


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.