As the campaign comes to a close (don’t forget to vote on Tuesday!),  I would like to mention a couple of things that relate not to this campaign or even the current school board, but that bear consideration for the future.  Those two topics are term limits and district elections.

Can someone be on the same board/council for too long?  I think so; I have a self-imposed  maximum two terms on the school board.   Should I be fortunate enough to be re-elected, this would be my last term.  I may, under very compelling circumstances, be persuaded to run for  a third term, but I can’t think of any at the moment that would convince me.  Three terms teeters on the edge of too many.  For me, four terms  is too long for anyone, no matter how good a job they do or how much I like them.  Considering our terms are four years, one could get a child all the way through their school career in three terms and that’s plenty.  You start to lose steam and gain cynicism after three terms of service, and I think it’s better to allow new blood, fresh ideas and people with more optimism come in and take their turn.  Experience is a benefit, especially in challenging times, but sometimes enough is truly enough.

On the topic of district elections, I think it is an idea whose time has come for Modesto City Schools.  Geographically, our district is very large, extending outside the city limits of Modesto into Salida, Riverbank and Empire.  The sheer size of the area candidates have to cover is overwhelming to some and the costs of running a campaign have become astronomical, especially for a position like school board.  Just the cost of mailing literature to all the registered voters in the district mounts into the thousands of dollars, and most of those mailings are targeted and don’t include all the registered voters candidates would like to reach.  Trying to walk and talk to all those voters is impossible and most candidates want to talk to as many voters as they can.  It must also be mentioned that historically, while our school board has the best record of member diversity, the size of the district and cost of a campaign probably does discourage people from running.  District elections could pare down the geographical scope and cost of running for school board and potentially allow people who do not have unlimited financial resources to be truly competitive.  Whether they admit it or not, all candidates run because they want to win and money should not be the reason someone is or is not elected.

As important as cost and diversity are, the other argument for moving to district elections is the increased accountability of the members to the public.  It would be much easier for the voting public to hold their district representative accountable for their attendance, participation and accessibility than the current system allows.  Members could conceivably hold district town-hall style meetings at a district facility to get a better idea of what the public thinks about their schools.  It would also allow the faculty and staff within each district’s boundaries to have a specific board member with whom to express their concerns as well as their delights, allowing  stronger personal relationships with board members.  It certainly aligns with the district structure of academic learning communities and the philosophy of building stronger relationships contained in the strategic plan.

There are many other reasons to consider and promote these two issues and the discussion of district elections goes hand-in-hand with the idea of consolidating smaller districts into our own, but that is the subject of another blog.  If re-elected (and possibly even if I’m not), I will pursue and promoted these two very important issues along with the other challenges we will face.

Finally, I would like to thank those of you who continue to read and share this blog with others.  I hope you have voted, or will vote, on Tuesday and the outcome will be the best for the children in the Modesto City School district.

Advertisement