Trending
Alpena deserves to ask a serious question: How much of this are we expected to tolerate from an elected school board member?
Monica Dziesinski was facing a citizen-led recall effort over her conduct and decisions as a member of the Alpena Public Schools Board of Education. Rather than simply allowing voters to have their say, she hired a downstate law firm that challenged recall petition signatures on technical legal grounds.But this goes beyond fighting a recall.
I know that personally.
After I publicly criticized Dziesinski's actions as an elected official and encouraged community members to make their voices heard, an attorney representing her sent me a cease-and-desist letter threatening potential legal action over my speech.
Think about what that means.
An elected official--someone who voluntarily sought public office and exercises power over our public schools--responded to criticism from a constituent by having an attorney threaten that citizen with litigation.
Criticism comes with public office. So does disagreement. So does scrutiny. Citizens should not have to wonder whether criticizing an elected representative will result in a letter from an attorney arriving in their mailbox.
And now, when thousands of local residents have participated in the democratic recall process, lawyers have been brought in to challenge whether their signatures can be counted.
Whether every challenged signature satisfied Michigan election law is for the proper officials and courts to determine. But the larger pattern troubles me deeply: constituents speak, and lawyers answer.
School board members are supposed to serve their community--not intimidate their critics or make residents afraid to participate in it.
You don’t have to agree with me about Monica Dziesinski. You don’t even have to support the recall.
But, every Alpena resident should care about the principle at stake.
Our elected officials should answer citizens with accountability--not attorneys.
Molly Stepanski
Posen, MI