By a majority vote, the board could effect these reforms immediatley. The first is to do away with annual elections. Not only does the frquency reduce voter turnout, it costs the district $300,000 a year. The second is to change the election date to November, which not only reduces costs but substantially increases voter participation. The Legislature changed the election law to allow for the change. For more, read Chamber president Jim Oberwetter’s recent letter here.
Simple as these reforms are, they could meet big resistance. The system was designed to minimize voter turnout so that incumbents could more easily be re-elected. So what if annual elections meant that the board was focused more on itself than the students? The board was there to protect patronage, not to foster education.
But that was then. This is now — with the exception of Carla Ranger. (Hi, Carla! How will you vote on these?)Â
