LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[April 27th, 2005] Pompom Pilot

I was disappointed in your cover story profiling Portland Public Schools Superintendent Vicki Phillips ["Vicki's Vision: Can a former Kentucky cheerleading coach save Portland schools?" April 13, 2005]. The merits of coaching cheerleading aside, Nick Budnick's decision to highlight this short stint from early in Phillips career-the emphasis presumably implying dubious experience for the tough leadership position she's taken on-while sidebarring her significant professional accomplishments, seems telling.

If the superintendent were a man, would Budnick have led with the facts of a coaching stint, divorce and childlessness? Would the reporting have detailed the superintendent's "aggressive" hairstyle, the absence of plaques and awards on his wall in favor of bright watercolors in his "cute" house? A quick review of WW coverage of past superintendents suggests otherwise.

Don't get me wrong: I finished your cover story having learned some valuable things about Phillips' strategy to save Portland schools, as well as parents' and colleagues' reactions. But I would happily have forgone knowing the color of Phillips' convertible, the "tone" of her hairstyle, and the look and feel of her living room in favor of more about her rationale for certain unpopular decisions or some analysis of alternative approaches.

The sexist slant of this reporting aside, surely the critical educational issues facing our city and the professional merits of our superintendent demand more of WW's attention.

Jennifer Allen
Northeast Thompson Street

Elementary Subtraction

In your article on Portland Public Schools Superintendent Vicki Phillips, you inferred [sic] that four schools were closed due to their underenrollment: "Some schools operate at only one-third capacity. As a result, Phillips has closed down four elementary schools...."

Our school, Edwards Elementary, which is one of those four, does not have low enrollment. Our building is fully utilized. We were sacrificed for the sake of other schools' performance and enrollment problems. Our exceptional program, extremely low per-student cost, superior modern facility and stable enrollment did not save us from the arbitrary ax of Dr. Phillips. In six years, when total district enrollment is expected to drop even further, Phillips will be sorry that she closed the efficient, effective and perfectly sized Edwards.

Cathy Hastie
Southeast 37th Avenue

What's in Store

Several embarrassingly clueless letters recently accused WW of trying to suppress Fred Meyer's and QFC's freedom of speech because WW criticized those stores' promotional displays of the Left Behind novels. Since when is writing an article criticizing some businesses' promotional choices equivalent to actively suppressing those businesses' ability to make that choice? It is not, and therefore the letter writers' criticisms are invalid and illogical.

This series of books, as WW pointed out in its original "Rogue of the Week" column [March 30, 2005] about the stores' displays, celebrates an Armageddon scenario in which everyone who is not a Christian fundamentalist gets kept out of heaven to experience hell and slaughter and Antichrist rule on earth. Would these writers also attack WW if it criticized a store's promotion of a book written by a Klansman who expresses glee at the idea of all blacks going to hell? I'm so glad those writers are ignoring all of the real injustice and censorship in the world and instead are choosing to use their freedom of speech to stick up for the poor, downtrodden, disenfranchised right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who obviously have never tried to condemn or oppress anyone.

All WW did was criticize the stores' choices as to how to use their freedom of speech. The writers, in turn, criticized WW's choice of how to use its freedom of speech. In which case I might ask the writers (using their own logic) why they are so intent on not letting WW have any freedom of speech.

Tom Soppe
Southeast Harold Street