The Right Thing In School Talks
On July 21, the Carroll County Board of Education has to make a decision whether to accept, to reject or to change the recommendation of Seymour Strongin, who arbitrated the Carroll Association of School Employees (CASE) impasse.
After negotiations came to a standstill between the board's team and CASE negotiators, the board's team called the talks at an impasse. Mr. Strongin was accepted by both sides as the arbitrator to resolve the dispute. . . .
Frustrated with the non-negotiable position of the board's team to resolve the issue of seniority in mediation, Mr. Strongin reviewed the facts and issued his recommendations. His recommendations favored CASE's last position on April 6, before negotiations were declared at impasse.
CASE has accepted the recommendations of the arbitrator because it believes that is the intent of the state law to bring these matters to a close peacefully with the assistance of a neutral third party. CASE had to accept the recommendations of this same arbitrator the last time negotiations were at impasse although it did not like all the recommendations. . . .
Parents, children, interested citizens and school employees are looking to the Board of Education to do the right thing. We need to put these negotiations behind us. . . . The board can take a major step in this direction by voting to accept all the recommendations of arbitrator Strongin.
The writer is president of the Carroll Association of School Employees.
Editorial Wasn't Fair To Congressman Bartlett
You wrote an editorial June 29 regarding the "Rocky Rookie Run" of Congressman Roscoe Bartlett. In it, you made note of his remarks about Asian-Americans, as well as his decision not to "sign a letter from the Maryland delegation requesting federal funds to help pay the costs of clean-up after the Blizzard of '93." If I may, I would like to correct you. . . .
First, Mr. Bartlett's quote had to do with a lack of Americans with Anglo-Saxon names on the list of state scholarship winners. His concern was that these individuals should emulate Asians in their work and study habits. But, as usual, your paper didn't report this to the readers. It's no wonder Les Kinsolving calls your paper, "Blight for All!"
Second, in regards to the snow removal, Mr. Bartlett's feelings were that it might cost the taxpayers millions of more dollars than it was worth. Again, you purposely ignored to report this. In addition, would Paul Sarbanes or Barbara Mikulski vote against this? No, because they don't care about their constituents. Their goal is to spend their taxpayers' funds into oblivion. . . .
I read your recent editorial about Congressman Roscoe Bartlett with an overwhelming sense of disbelief. I find it impossible to believe you are discussing the man I know, either regarding Ros coe or Tim Woodford.
Roscoe Bartlett ran for this seat on the Republican side when few others (and none of his current potential Republican challengers) would lift a finger to help. Even the famed Larry Hogan only helped on Bartlett's campaign after the primary. They were all so smug in their tacit support of Beverly Byron. Dr. Bartlett did us all proud. He ran a hard campaign and came through the winner. As far as I am concerned, he is still a winner.
Part and parcel of his success has been his loyalty to the man many of us credit with that victory: Tim Woodford. Tim was there for and with Roscoe from Day One and he never wavered in that support. Tim's background as a manager was and is excellent. To brand him as an individual with, as you put it, "no management skills" is, at the very best, a shabby treatment of a very fine Republican and human being.
I am not privy to whom you consider to be the Republican supporters whose counsel Roscoe has rejected but my advice to him would be for him to keep on as he is going. . . . I feel ill every time I re-read your editorial. It is such a nasty piece with a very vindictive feel to it. You have done a disservice to two fine men and I believe you have embarrassed yourself in front of your readers by being so narrow-minded and uninformed. Shame on you.
Richard A. Monroe