Amendment 3 would have disastrous impact on local school districts

To the editor:

I commend Rex Sinquefield for using his fortune to fund local charitable causes as well as his effort to make St. Louis the chess capital of the world.

Amendment 3, the proposed ballot issue that represents Mr. Sinquefield’s attempt to change the way public schools evaluate teachers, reveals a less praiseworthy side to his philanthropy.

The ballot language of Amendment 3 supports the view that it is an unfunded mandate whose financial implications for school districts, as well as its effects on district autonomy, would be disastrous.

Most would agree that the issue of teacher evaluation is worthy of debate, but restricting local control in addressing this issue is not the answer.

We need to ensure that our school boards have the flexibility they need to address issues unique to their school districts rather than relying on a “one-size-fits-all” approach to educating our children. Voters in the Lindbergh School District especially have a responsibility to protect our award-winning schools from bad legislation.

Our students are too valuable an asset to be used as pawns on Mr. Sinquefield’s political chessboard. Please join me in voting “no” on Amendment 3 this Nov. 4.