Explore more of our great network. Explore more sites.

Top Ad

Sign up for the Daily North Shore Email


  1. Absolutely NO to Bennett Lasko. He is least worthy candidate of the 9 running. Why didn’t he submit his candidacy to the 112 Caucus for endorsement? Just didn’t feel it at the time? We need to elect informed candidates who’ve been all in from the time the referendum was defeated. Moving Forward supporters Art Kessler & Dan Jenks reached out immediately to the CARE group to work on ways for both viewpoints to find common ground for a referendum that can be supported by the community. You may not have agreed with their position on the referendum, but they earned my respect as being stand up, open minded people willing to work with others with different viewpoints. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for Mr. Lasko.. Just recently he had the gall to accuse CARE of “tricking” him into submitting his candidate statement solely for the purpose of not endorsing him. He parsed/stated the submission was merely for informational purposes – not for the purpose of seeking an endorsement. OMG. Does he really think people are that stupid? He is a divider – not a uniter.
    As a leader of the Moving 112 Forward group, Mr. Lasko was a rude and uninformed embarrassment in the debates leading up to the referendum vote. I attended the debate at Ravinia Nursery School where young parents literally walked out on him at the conclusion of debate when he had “just one more thing I want to say”. They spontaneously yelled No in unison and walked out. True story.

    • Dear notobdr3

      I am not looking to get trashed here, but who are you? It’s fine if you disagree, but why must you say such divisive and ugly things about a person who has spent nearly a thousand hours of his time in volunteer service? That person is my spouse and I am proud of the work he has done toward solving these difficult problems. And do you not know that nearly a hundred other people, volunteers, administrators and subject experts were involved in developing the last referendum and collectively decided it was their best proposal to go on the ballot given the competing objectives? They could only put one proposal on the ballot and it failed—just like many referenda do. The citizens have clearly spoken and nobody intends to bring that proposal back. Your mischaracterizations and statements omit context and serve little other than to bring out the pitchforks. Pitchforks will only drive our community into further disarray. We need civility if we are ever going to get the community united around a solution that puts HP back on the map as a place where young families want to raise their children.

      • I don’t know who notobdr3 is. It doesn’t matter because his/her comments hit the mark. I’d rather read true, anonymous comments than false comments from a named person. With all due respect to Bennett Lasko’s hours of service, Lasko tried and failed to find a solution to D112’s problems. When I heard he was running for school board I was actually offended because he ought to have had the humility to recognize that it’s time to let someone else tackle the district’s problems. A thousand hours is a lot of hours to have devoted to the wrong answer. As for mischaracterizations. . . . notobdr3 should be credited not scolded for exposing Lasko’s false suggestions about CARE’s endorsement process. His mischaracterization of the endorsement process he freely participated in only further fanned the flames of animosity between YES and NO voters on sounding board and elsewhere. It divided rather than united, plain and simple. The only pitchforks in this instance are pitchforks of his own making. We need candidates who can bring fresh eyes to the district’s problems and who are committed to bringing people together. That’s why I’m voting for Hirsh, Ross, Brunk, and Campbell. These are all smart, civil, respectful people, who aren’t out to browbeat their “enemies.”

  2. Absolutely not. Voting for Lasko is analogous to voting for incumbent Jane Mordini. His favorite phrase from some of the debates and public comments I heard during the run-up to the referendum was “I just don’t see . . . .” In other words, he just didn’t see how ANY alternative to the $198 mm referendum was possible. Maybe that’s because he played such a critical role in devising the single middle school plan. Take a look at his long email trail with the architectural subcommittee, the D112 board, and Bregy if you have any questions about the key role he played. We need fresh perspectives, new ideas, and flexible minds working on D112’s problems, not the minds of the people who worked on the problem for years and came up with the $198 mm referendum as their answer. Sidenote: the author of Lasko’s endorsement, Ms. Sher, also endorsed and strongly argued for BDR3 in our local papers a few months ago. I cannot credit the candidate endorsement of anyone who pushed for such a bad plan for our community.

  3. No Thanks. As I recall Ms. Sher and Lasko were big supporters of the silly referendum. I say vote for someone else. This guy is wrong for HP.

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Daily North Shore encourages comments, but we have specific guidelines that you can find here. A general principle is: Do not state anything in a comment that you would not say in public and do not state anything about another person that you would not say to his or her face.

Post comment mobile ad section