Teachers union is again after Dunn

As most people know, it's been 30 months since Mike Dunn committed what, in the teachers union's eyes, was the crime of the century: He asked for feedback for when vacation should start.

Why now, two and a half years later, does this union come forward and file a frivolous lawsuit against Dunn? Why would it spend its members' hardearned dues for such a thing when I'm sure there are other more important ways to expend those dollars? Did the rank and file have an opinion?

Employing some basic analytic and critical examination skills, I wondered and pondered why this was coming to a proverbial head now. And then it hit me: we're getting closer to "silly season"- - Election Day.

What better way to wage war than by proxy. This led me to California Form 460; the forms that candidates must file that show the source of their campaign funds. My conclusion was that there are now more reasons to effect positive change on the school board with the removal of Ms. Didio and Ms. Beaubien. If the bulk of your support comes from one source, it stands to reason that your loyalty will be to that source and that she or he will have the greatest access to you. California Form 460 tells the tale. In the case of Didio, of the $7,820 raised in 2004, $3,250 or 32 percent came from developers and unions.

For Beaubien, the numbers are even more staggering: of the total amount of $6,408 raised in 2004, $3,250 or 50.7 percent came from unions.

Given the level and quality of responses many have received from these two as well as many of their decisions and this data, I know I stopped wondering just who they truly represent.

I also stopped wondering why the union was wasting its member's dues in its pursuit of Dunn. Almost forgotten are Dunn's union contributions: $0.

Do you still wonder?

Paul Kessler Thousand Oaks