School Board bill = half a loaf

Sometimes I actually think someone reads this blog.  Witness this article about Delegate Frank Turner's bill, which would how the School Board be elected by district, in staggered elections (wow!  whoever thought of THAT idea???).  Additionally, two members of the seven-member board would be appointed by the County Executive for single, four-year terms.  The appointed members would be intended to allow for the board to be more representative of the gerographic and ethnic diversity of Howard County.

I kind of like this bill, but at the same time, it concerns me a bit. To wit:

I am totally down with the staggered elections by district deal.  Sure, I'd love to see the Council grow by two members and have seven districts for both Council and board, but I'll take what I can get!

I am, however, not down at this point with the concept of the two appointed mebers.  Of course these members would be appointed by the Executive and confirmed by the Council, which SHOULD create a natural check and balance in the system.  But what if it doesn't?  Could the Executive not use those appointments as political tools, to ensure that at the very least, 29% of the board would agree with the Executive's policies and politics?  Should only two of the remaining five board members be of the same ideology, which is almost a certainly, this would virtually ensure that in perpetuity, the Executive could control the ideology of the School Board.  I don't think such is the point of having an elected School Board in the first place, is it?

This bill is going to be fascinating to watch.  The first opportunity to hear public comment should occur in November at the delegation's local hearing for prefiled legislation.  Should be fun!

Comments

[cindy vaillancourt (current boe)]

Just FYI, The Board of Education seats are already staggered, 3 open during presidential election years and 4 open during gubernatorial election years. Also- if the seats are to be elected by district, then there would no longer be an argument for appointments to serve a "geographical diversity" goal, would they? I happen to think 2 at large elected seats will help balance out the possibility that district representatives will be too parochial.

[Marshmallow Man]

Thank you, Cindy! Nice to have a board member weigh in.

I am fully aware that the Board elections are staggered currently.

The concept of having two at-large seats is interesting.

[cindy vaillancourt (current boe)]

One of Mr. Turner's comments in support of making the two seats that might otherwise be elected "at-large" appointed is that given the additional expense of running a county wide race, no one will run at-large. I beg to differ. First, I would run at-large because I would not want to be limited to issues in "my district" --- particularly since my biggest concerns are systemic. Second, these campaigns are getting more and more expensive it is true--- but the bottom line is a candidate pretty much spends as much money as the can raise (or choose to spend themselves. I have never heard a candidate say they have spent all the money they can figure out how to spend.