Lincoln Daily News
welcomes letters of appreciation, information and
opinion on matters pertaining to the community.
Controversial issues:
As a
community we need to be able to talk openly about
matters that affect the quality of our lives. The
most effective and least offensive manner to get
your point across is to stick to the issue
and refrain from commenting on another person's
opinion. Letters that deviate from focusing on the
issue may be rejected or edited and marked as such.
.
Submit a letter to the editor online |
You may also send your letters by e-mail to
ldneditor@lincolndailynews.com
or by U.S. postal mail:
Letters to the Editor
Lincoln Daily News
601 Keokuk St.
Lincoln, IL 62656
Letters must include the writer's
name, telephone number, and postal address or e-mail address (we
will not publish address or phone number information).
Lincoln Daily News reserves the right to edit letters to
reduce their size or to correct obvious errors.
Lincoln Daily News reserves the right to reject any letter for
any reason. Lincoln Daily News will publish as
many acceptable letters as space allows.
|
 To the editor:Your article on Nov. 28 concerning truancy
correctly points out that there was a group of us in attendance at
the city ordinance committee meeting on Tuesday evening, and that we
proposed revisions. I'd like to respond to the objections of Mr.
Bates that are recorded in your article. (See
article.)
1. Yes, it is true that we feel that no official should be
authorized to issue a citation for an offense that is in one's past
(certainly not for a single act of truancy). We're not firm on
exactly what the statute of limitations should be -- 30 days was our
suggestion. We wish there could have been some interaction on that.
At any rate, we don't see how such would "seriously dilute" what the
city would like to do.
2. No, we have not changed the definition of a truant whatsoever.
And no, we are not saying that a student's name needs to be on a
list from the regional superintendent's office. As was pointed out
in the meeting, each individual school keeps records of all
unexcused absences and our proposed revision allows for that:
"identified by the (ROE) or school administration as having
been absent..."
In other words, we've merely suggested that it is school
officials and not police officers that should be making the
determination of who is to be regarded as truant (something school
officials do as a matter of routine).
3. Does our proposal make students in private or parochial
schools not subject to compulsory attendance? That phrase,
"compulsory attendance," is in the heading of Article 26 of the
Illinois School Code (on which the city's proposed ordinance is
based). The very first exemption is: "Any child attending a private
or parochial school where children are taught the branches of
education..." and so forth. In other words, it wasn't our idea. It
is noteworthy that after this exemption is stated in the Illinois
School Code, there is only mention of public schools.
[to top of second column in this letter]
 |
 Are we suggesting that private and parochial children need not be
in school? Of course not! It is just that students enrolled in
private and parochial schools aren't covered under the public school
code. Further, there are other ways to address this matter with
regard to nonpublic schools. I'm told there are laws on the books
(that are enforced) regarding educational neglect and so forth.
Also, we recognize that there are parochial and private schools
that wish to submit themselves to the ROE's truancy services and are
doing so. Our proposal makes provision for this.
4. Yes, we are aware of the way in which the city of Rockford has
phrased their truancy ordinance. We're also aware that Rockford has
a daytime curfew ordinance alongside of it. We wonder if it is most
appropriate for a city the size of Lincoln to pattern our ordinance
after a large urban center. I've been to Rockford. I know people who
have lived in Rockford. Lincoln is no Rockford!
Are we supportive of efforts to fight truancy? We certainly are,
and as I said in Tuesday night's meeting, we should be focusing our
energy on all students who are entering into a pattern of truancy,
and not just those who are likely to create some kind of a
disturbance in the community.
For those who wish to read the particulars of our proposal, I am
submitting an attachment (our suggestions are in bold print).
(Alternative ordinance
proposal)
Very sincerely,
Ron Denlinger
on behalf of a group of concerned citizens who oppose a daytime
curfew as a means of combating truancy
[Posted
November 30, 2007]
Click here to send a note to the editor
about this letter.
Past related articles:
|
