Management Mania
I was happy to see that Metro was giving more substantial coverage to the ongoing battle over the actions of Superintendent Bob Nuñez and the inept East Side Union High School Board in “Reverse Charges” (MetroNews, Feb. 17),
but I must take issue with something raised in the final paragraphs of the article. The author, Jessica Fromm, states, “East Side Teachers Association, who have officially supported Nuñez since the beginning.” The article later goes on to quote Wendy Stegeman, who is the Political Action Committee head for the ESTA.
Sadly, this is not true at all. The ESTA Executive Board instructed both Wendy Stegeman and Union President Marisa Hanson to not publicly support Nuñez or to take any stand on the issue of the FCMAT investigation. Ms. Stegeman and Ms. Hanson both refused to follow the orders of the Executive Board in public, but when asked by teachers what the union’s position was to be, there was always evasion and a refusal to outline how the Union was to act. These actions made it appear that the union members supported Mr. Nuñez at a time when the public was being told in numerous Mercury News articles that the superintendent has committed some very questionable acts.
No matter if Mr. Nuñez has been cleared of the charges against him, the damage to the public opinion of Mr. Nuñez and anyone who supported him has already been done. This was compounded through the journalistically shaky reporting in the Mercury News and the inappropriate actions of the union leadership. By not standing above this asinine fray and showing that the union could stay out of the silly political one-upmanship being practiced by the East Side Board and the journalistically challenged Mercury News, the union leadership painted its membership as supporters of both Nuñez’s alleged improprieties and the board’s continued managerial psychosis.
Frank Cava
Teacher, Piedmont Hills High School
Anticipazione
Every week, I open Metro anticipating a restaurant review by Stett Holbrook. We discovered a Oaxacan gem, Juquilita, which turned out to be in our own neighborhood. We were fortunate to live just outside of Bologna, Italy, for a year, and I agree with Mr. Holbrook’s statement: “Silicon Valley needs more Italian restaurants willing to break out of the pizza-and-ravioli rut.” Bravo!
Kathleen Hanes
San Jose
Counting
On Jan. 1, the Every Woman Counts program, which provides mammograms to 350,000 underserved women in California each year, closed its doors and will not start screening women again until July. When the program reopens, women under age 50 will not be served. Why? To save a few bucks—just 1/2 of 1 percent—which will have little impact on the state’s massive budget deficit.
While the economic impact of these cuts is insignificant, for the women of this state they may mean the difference between life and death. Screening saves lives. When breast cancer is detected early, the five-year survival rate is 98 percent. We also know that the lack of regular screening leads to late-stage diagnosis when treatment is more expensive and survival is less certain.
This is just the beginning. The governor just announced the likelihood of even more cuts to the state’s screening program for next fiscal year. If that wasn’t bad enough, he is also considering eliminating the state program that provides breast cancer treatment for low-income women. This will leave up to 9,000 women with breast cancer no treatment options. I find this unacceptable.
Our elected leaders face a tough economic situation. I get it. There are no easy choices, and few decisions come without consequences. Yet we also seethe tough choices women who are on the front lines of our troubled economy face when they lose their job, lose their insurance and have to choose between health care and other important needs and obligations. Balancing the budget shouldn’t come at a cost of risking their lives. Why are we turning our backs on women in our state when they need us the most? Every Woman does Count.
Sarah Jolley
Sebastopol
