To the editor: GM teachers support Act 152, board members, superintendent who resigned

We, a group of Green Mountain teachers, are in support of   Vermont Act 152, the board members who voted to support the law, and our  superintendent, who has since announced her resignation.

As employees of the district, we felt that it was important to remind our school and this community that we are bigger than the members who voted to break the law last night. Just because they represent this school, they do not represent the majority of its employees.

We work to develop a school community that is inclusive for all, work that has become more challenging over the last few years. The action taken last night by the majority of the board members, in addition to being illegal, directly contradicts the work we are trying to do.

These members have already pushed away reputable teachers and administrators and their actions last night will continue to harm our school community.

We believe our school is the keystone of our community and we hope the board will someday soon walk its halls and witness the real issues facing Green Mountain. We are certain this will not be our last action regarding this matter but believed a reactionary statement was important.

Brett Mastrangelo
and 21 teachers at
Green Mountain Union High

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Filed Under: CommentaryLetters to the Editor

About the Author:

RSSComments (5)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. MARY WATKINS says:

    Three things I am curious about.

    Are the alumni and community members who approached the board in FAVOR of keeping the Chieftan name ACTUALLY on the voter registration rolls of the towns of the GMUSD?

    How is this verified and who is responsible for verifying the legitimacy of a petition and the people signing in support of a petition?

    Are online petitions ever acceptable to initiate discussion and voting on school boards?

  2. Thank you! Don’t let these bullies silence you! We need more educators to speak up.

  3. Evan Parks says:

    Why keep an offensive, divisive, mascot, when there are so many easy choices which are not?

    Why do so many white people think that they can dictate to other races what isn’t racist? There is no shortage of indigenous people who clearly have stated again and again, for many years, that this thoughtless stereotype is harmful to them.

    Choosing a new mascot that is not a divisive, harmful, racist, caricature, harms nobody.

    Choosing to keep a mascot that clearly is a divisive, harmful, racist, caricature, absolutely does.

  4. T Perry says:

    THIS alum supports keeping the name and rebranding it. You say you’re “working to create a community that is inclusive for all.” Let’s be honest, what you mean is “inclusive for those who think a certain way” or conform to your way of thinking, not those who support the Chieftain name with rebranding. Those ppl are not included, and rebranding not considered. Those of us who support keeping our name and celebrating the vast number of cultures it can include have been called racist, dumb, uneducated, criminals, and more. Very inclusive. Very tolerant. There are far more pressing matters that should be whipping teachers and admin up enough to write letters. How about the bullying problem that continues unaddressed and unchecked? Parents who had no choice but to pull their kids out because faculty could not protect them or even follow a safety plan that the school wrote. Teachers that need weekly reminding of IEPs and 504s. You preach inclusivity but exclude. How about this: I challenge you to FIND, SUPPORT AND CELEBRATE the many, many diverse cultures with chiefs and chieftains and educate yourself on the incusivity and pride the name can represent.

  5. Stu Lindberg says:

    Why have a local democratically elected school board if they are not allowed to represent anyone except tyrannical politicians? Are our neighbors who we elect to represent our interests supposed to be a rubber stamp for out of touch elites in the corrupt halls of power?