Letter to the Editor of the Wrightstown Spirit
(Published March 2025)
Doubtless you are aware of controversy surrounding the Wrightstown Community School District’s Board of Education, the upcoming election to fill two board seats, and the attempted recall of the board’s chair. You’re also likely confused by claims and counterclaims. Rather than try to sort out all the charges into proper baskets at this time, let’s step back and gain some perspective.
I’ve attended multiple Board meetings over the past few years, and have noticed a pattern which may help you reach a satisfactory conclusion regarding the evident controversy.
Board members seem to fall roughly into two categories, either servants of the administration or servants of the people. Both claim to be “for the children,” as certainly all school boards should be. However, their approaches are diametrically different.
The servants of the administration recognize they are elected by the citizens of the district, but are committed to supporting the school’s administrative team to the degree that they are little more than a rubber stamp in the hands of the superintendent. They see their job as supporting, not questioning, the proposals of the administrator. Few questions are to be asked, and certainly no information is to be laid on the table that questions the wisdom of the superintendent’s initiatives. They quietly roll their eyes and unprofessionally interrupt those who do their homework, ask too many questions, or propose alternatives. They tend to focus on making administrators happy.
Those board members who see themselves as servants of the people who elected them are eager to work with the Superintendent and staff, but with an ear to community sensibilities. They recognize a different chain of command: the people on top, then the board, and then the hired administrator. This in no way suggests that the administrator is unimportant, that their recommendations and input are of no importance, or that the relationship must be adversarial. Nor does this recognized chain of command suggest in any way that the successful education of the children is not the focus. Indeed, this viewpoint enables good education.
These board members also recognize their responsibility to keep indoctrination out of the schools. Wokism, DEI, secretive and required sex-ed programs, critical race theory, boys in girls’ sports and showers — all these are not Wrightstown values.
Turnout for the statewide Spring Primary on February 18 was reported to be about 10%. The stakes were high, and apparently most voters didn’t care. If you really believe “it’s for the children,” vote on April 1. The education of our children and the future of our community rests on an informed and involved electorate.
Incumbent Jeff Nelson and newcomer Amber Cox have a sound understanding of the board’s proper role, and are poised to be active, informed, and involved members of the Wrightstown Community School District Board of Education.
A recent Spirit opinion piece on a related topic calls for further comment. Writer Kimberly Denkins addressed three school-related subjects, the second of which was “OUR CHILDREN.” Although she spent nearly 300 words on the subject, she left readers confused, possibly intentionally. No, Ms. Denkins, the purpose of Title IX, a 1972 Act of Congress, was not to “make accommodations for ALL children.” The language is clear: Title IX prohibits sex discrimination in education programs, ensuring equal access and treatment for both male and female students in school. One must force a contemporary and corrupted ideology on the Act to conclude that boys can compete in women’s sports and enter women’s locker rooms.
Ron Zahn
Wrightstown