Reader questions superintendent's ability to lead
To the editor:
On the last Friday before the (school) bond referendum, Superintendent Wells pulled all voting-age seniors from class in the high school to deliver his power-point presentation regarding the virtues of the bond issue. First he gave them doughnuts and drinks. Why is this important? There are ethical violations with a superintendent of a school district using his position to promote a bond issue on school grounds with school-age students. It is called intimidation.
I contacted several former and current superintendents to ask them if they find this ethical. They all came to the same conclusion, it would be unethical and they would not do it.
It is also my understanding that this incident has been turned over to Megan Tooker at the Iowa Ethics and Campaign disclosure in Des Moines. Mr. Wells had the opportunity to explain his actions to Simon Conway on his WHO Radio show in Des Moines but declined.
So here we are. We have a superintendent who misled the district on his education specialist degree. For the first time in school history, the teachers delivered a 99 to 3 vote of no confidence in the acting superintendent. And now the largest bond failure in Mt. Pleasant School history — 70 percent of the voters said they do not agree with the bond referendum. I believe this vote was more about the integrity of the superintendent and the non actions of the board than the needs of our district.
In conclusion, I feel the leadership and integrity of the superintendent have been compromised, creating a situation no longer effective in executing the duties of his job. Therefore, I believe it is the duty of the board to ask for the resignation of Superintendent Wells.