The Problem with Fitchburg Schools

So, a mayoral candidate climbed up onto the stoop of the Save Fitchburg Mansion and knocked on the door last night. I let Mrs. Save Fitchburg take the lead, because I'm going to hear plenty from everyone in the next 26 days.

First, a little background on Mrs. Save Fitchburg: She's been covering local and state government as a reporter since the early 1990s. She knows how things work and what is and isn't a good answer. I know this is shocking to every try to understand, but she's even better than I am.

So, Mrs. Save Fitchburg threw out a rather vague question of "what are going to do for the School Department?" Considering the SF Spawn were desperately trying to get their grubby hands on some campaign handouts, it was obvious this is an important issue at SF Mansion.

Let's just say the answer ... Well, forget pleasantries. The answer stunk. I didn't say anything, but knew the rambling, off-balance, grasping-at-straws answer immediately wasn't resonating with Mrs. Save Fitchburg. The candidate took a big step back in Mrs. SF's eyes, and rightfully so. Not only did his answer leave a lot to be desired, but the campaign aide slowly creeping the truck forward as a way to move the candidate along was noticed and also not appreciated by Mrs. SF (I noticed, too, by the way. Not too slick, right there).

Anyway, all this got me to thinking: Why isn't the school system in play this election?

I think part of it is that most voters are concentrated on the financial situation. Fair enough. But I can't believe the only two-kid family in the city lives at SF Mansion. There's one across the SF street, in fact, but their kids to private school. I don't know their motivation, but that might be a damning indictment on the city's schools.

Add to the importance young families put on education the $44 million price tag that the School Department wears. If you're so worried about finances, shouldn't there be some acknowledgement of the department that makes up half the city budget?

In his Pride oped last week, Ted DeSalvatore didn't mention the city schools (outside of cleaning up behind B.F. Brown). In his Pride oped this week (sneak peek everyone!) Tom Donnelly doesn't mention the city's schools. On her website, under the issues front page, there is no mention of schools by Lisa Wong. In short, the candidates are giving the issue the cold shoulder, and no one is taking any leadership on the issue.

Part of it is that it's not on most voters' radar screen, but the candidate who knocked on the door last night should have had a better answer prepared. Isn't there a "what questions might we get asked and what should the answer be" session or two involved in a campaign? And to not even mention the school system in 800-word opeds and issue web pages is just neglectful.

Honestly, I'm not sure the candidates know much at all about the city schools. Based on a quote from DeSalvatore earlier this year, he admitted as much. Based on last night's conversation, I think one more candidate fits that category. Considering the money involved and the importance of schools in the city, it's just sad the lack of knowledge about the school system.

If a candidate or a campaign is reading this, here's a helpful hint: This issue will come up next Friday. It will also be a question or two in some form during at least one of the debates. If you come knocking on the door at SF Mansion, it will likely come up there, too. You've been notified. Please have a good answer. Despite what you might think, the schools are important and in play this fall.