Parents for Privacy candidates have one issue only

A letter by Terri Paulson recently published contained this line: "Salvatore failed to mention the one and only thing Parents for Privacy does ... to advocate for the restoration of bodily privacy to students in the locker rooms of District 211 ..."

Ms. Paulson's letter confirms my worst fears about this coming school board election. It's an express concession to a critical fact of the Parents for Privacy campaign: This is a single-issue platform they are running on. The only issue that this group cares about is bathroom access. Their campaign website pays lip service to being "Watchdogs for our property taxes" but beyond that is vague, offering little in terms of concrete, measurable targets to shoot for.

Don't be fooled; this is about trying to push back on a notion of gender that this "grass-roots" group does not agree with, part of a broader culture war in our country.

Our school board does not exist to act as a political forum. Our school board exists to provide our kids the best possible education while extracting the most value from our taxpayer dollars, something the board has consistently succeeded in doing.

Change can be a compelling narrative device, but is change really what we need with our school board?

Candidates Klimkowicz, Lefevre and Yung bring with them dozens of years of school board service and experience. Our district attracts the best teachers in the state and has first-class facilities equipped with the latest technology. Labor negotiations can be difficult and messy, but our kids have never missed a single day of school due to a labor dispute in D211.

Our school district is the envy of the state. Klimkowicz, Lefevre and Yung have my trust and my vote on April 4.

Trent Rehusch

Hoffman Estates