An endorsement of partisan politics

Last month, the Daily Herald invited the eight U-46 Board of Education candidates to a group interview purportedly to gain insights on important issues so that its readers would benefit from an objective assessment of each candidate's relevant expertise and leadership traits. In a recent editorial, the newspaper published its endorsement of four candidates and criticism of four others. Unfortunately, the only winner was partisan politics stemming from an astonishingly weak effort to provide its readers with a credible basis to cast their important votes in this designated nonpartisan election. Their effort begs the question, why weren't readers told how any of these candidates will be thoughtful and innovative leaders that citizens should support?

Instead, the Daily Herald chose to further polarize the candidates into two camps - one group that would invest in student educational opportunities and the other that would represent the best interests of taxpayers.

Hard as it is to believe, why shouldn't students, parents and taxpayers expect both outcomes? What a lost opportunity that the Daily Herald forfeited by merely assigning simplistic labels and dumping a rich pool of candidates into two shallow buckets. It was a colossal waste of time for these eight enthusiastic and dedicated citizens that were assigned with a perspective that was essentially scripted beforehand. I am a school board member for U-46 and from my direct knowledge of this group, each has a unique background and skill set that was worth exploring and sharing.

Apparently, the Daily Herald editors feel their readers need to have the district's complex issues, 39,000 students and $560 million budget neatly packaged into emotional generalities and their elected officials consigned with predefined roles and choreographed expectations set by the district.

Phil A. Costello

Bartlett