School Board Election-Where Are They Now?

[Scott Meeson]

Back in December of 2008, we had sixteen applicants(?) interested in serving the remaining three years of Charles Geiger’s term. Flash-forward to April of 2011, we have three seats on the school board to be contested and we only have four candidates, three of which are incumbents. I’m not completely sure that our newest candidate, Emma Petrie-Barcelona, was one of those applicants back in 2008.

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_boe/en-US/2011_School_Board_Offices.PDF

I’m hoping that we can add more of choice to this year’s pool of school board candidates. Plus, it sure wouldn’t hurt to hear the ideas and philosophies of a broader range of candidates.

Scott Meeson

[Bryan Schwegler]

I thought Beebe was retiring? This is really unfortunate.

Wonder if it's time to start thinking about term limits for Board of Ed posts.

[Jim O'Bryan]

I thought Beebe was retiring? This is really unfortunate.

Wonder if it's time to start thinking about term limits for Board of Ed posts.

Bryan

I understand the call for term limits, but if a person can convince a majority to vote for
them, shouldn't that be the rule? I just hope we do not see a repeat of someone running
that immediately decides they should step down, and someone needs to be appointed.

State Senator Michael Skindell said yesterday, Get out and run early and hard. Me personally
I am more than a little dismayed that so many of our appointed elected officials in Citty Hall
seem it is more important to announce their run for re-election, than actually
accomplishing anything first. Makes me wonder, is it more of the same, or is it the
dedication we truly need?

I would think on the school level, there are really only two seats in play, maybe only one,
that of Kamkutis. If Linda runs, she has a ton of support, and Matthew Markling is becoming
a folk hero of sorts for his continued push for accountability in elected officials, and transparency
in all agencies using tax dollars including schools and city hall.

FWIW

[Bryan Schwegler]

Bryan

I understand the call for term limits, but if a person can convince a majority to vote for
them, shouldn't that be the rule?

I would agree with you if it weren't for the reality of the way most local, and even state, elections are won. Most voters don't pay enough attention to who is actually running or what they stand for anyway. Most vote on a name they recognize, especially if that name has been on the ballot since they dug up the foundations of the board of education building.

I don't care how wonderful you were 30 years ago, if you've been in the same post for long enough, it's time for a change. Every one and every thing needs new life at times. Sometimes those in the position don't see that, which is unfortunate, and even less fortunate is the fact that most local voters don't pay enough attention to realize it either.

[marklingm]

Back in December of 2008, we had sixteen applicants(?) interested in serving the remaining three years of Charles Geiger’s term. Flash-forward to April of 2011, we have three seats on the school board to be contested and we only have four candidates, three of which are incumbents. I’m not completely sure that our newest candidate, Emma Petrie-Barcelona, was one of those applicants back in 2008.

Scott,

From http://lakewoodobserver.com/deck/viewtopic.php?t=7566:

From Ed Favre, School Board President 2009

"We are very pleased with the number and quality of applicants for the vacancy on the Board. The good news is that sixteen (16) Lakewoodites have answered the call to service and have offered their time and effort. Unfortunately, we can pick only one for the opening. However, we cannot let such talent go, so we will be asking all to become involved District initiatives this year."

Kevin Aylward
Ronald Ciancutti
John Farina
William George
Diane Helbig
Kenneth Jones
John Kamkutis
Brian Kvasnicka
Frederick Leick
Martin Lowell
Gary Romes
Ryan Salo
Kirsten Senger
Tessa Smith
John Sweo
John Zappala

In Lakewood Observer Volume 5 Issue 1, read comments and bios on all of the candidates.

Matt

[Stan Austin]

Scott--- I think you'll find that in the very near future REAL candidates, those who are willing to present their credentials to the Lakewood voters will come forth.
I think for these very important Board of Education positions, voters should look for aspirants who are willing, eager to go door to door and engage with the parents and taxpayers of the Lakewood City School District.
Look for a candidate who has kids in the Lakewood schools.
Look for a candidate who has already demonstrated leadership abilities - identifying problems and figuring out a way to deal with them.
And, look for a candidate who absolutely respects the past service of Lakewood School Board Members and is looking to meeting the challenge of this generation's parents as they educate today's students for the future.
Stan Austin

[marklingm]

Scott,

There are more people who pulled petitions than are listed on the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections' website. Some candidates decided to pull petitions anonymously.

Matt

[Scott Meeson]

Scott,

There are more people who pulled petitions than are listed on the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections' website. Some candidates decided to pull petitions anonymously.

Matt

[Betsy Voinovich]

Scott,

There are more people who pulled petitions than are listed on the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections' website. Some candidates decided to pull petitions anonymously.

Matt

Hi Scott,

I don’t think someone pulling petitions anonymously puts him or her (or the community) in the Twilight Zone.

If I am considering running for School Board, but I’m not sure, and I know there’s a deadline by which I must pull petitions, I might pull the petitions, so I have them, in case I decide to run.

I can discuss with my friends, family, community members, how they feel about it: test the waters anonymously, so to speak, while I make my decision.

Otherwise, pulling my petitions becomes an unofficial announcement that I’m running—or thinking of running.

And then everyone will know I decided not to, if I don’t actually run. And then potential voters might think that I figured out that people wouldn’t vote for me, or that it was too much work, or any other reason anybody could come up with, and that’s why I decided not to run, and those “reasons” might hurt me with voters, during the next election cycle, when I do want to run.

When in fact, it might just be that I figured out that with three small children in school, and a couple of freelance jobs on different sides of Cleveland, this just isn’t the time for me to run, or maybe I want EVEN LONGER to make up my mind.
And that would be my business.

It would only be the business of the voters or the public, once I decided to run.

Now if I was already on the School Board, like Matt is, it would be a little odd—though I don’t think it would take me all the way to the Twilight Zone-- if I pulled my petitions anonymously. A lot of people are surprised that incumbents have to pull petitions at all, since presumably, they already did it once. I mean except for the people that were appointed.

I’m glad you’re bringing this up now, early, when there’s plenty of time to talk about this, and plenty of time to get to know the candidates, whoever they might turn out to be.

Betsy Voinovich

[Scott Meeson]

Bill Call adds his name to the list. Thank you!

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_boe/en-US/2011_School_Board_Offices.PDF


Scott

[Bill Call]

Bill Call adds his name to the list. Thank you!

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_boe/en-US/2011_School_Board_Offices.PDF


Scott

I thought about it a lot before I made the decision.

Lakewood Schools are not going to be bailed out by the State or Federal government. We will get nowhere by expecting the supreme court to order someone else to pay for our schools. That means we are on our own.

Which begs the questions: How best to provide an adequate education, to serve the students and families of Lakewood, to offer fairness and equity to teachers and school board employees in a way that won't increase property taxes to astronomical levels?

In a month or so I'll start a listening tour. During the first half of the campaign I hope to keep my mouth shut and ears open.

Let the games begin!

[Bryan Schwegler]

Look for a candidate who has kids in the Lakewood schools.

Stan, great list of things to look for, but I do have to question the one about having kids in the Lakewood schools being a pre-requisite.

I guess one distinction I would make is if they have school-age children and choose to send them to private schools rather than Lakewood schools...maybe there's something to look for there. But I'm not so sure someone who doesn't have children, or whose children are no longer or not old enough for school age should necessarily be cast aside as a credible candidate.

I'm going to guess there's a fairly large percentage of people in the city who pay taxes that support the schools who don't have children. I see no reason that particular demographic wouldn't deserve representation on the BoE, or that a candidate from that pool is any more or less valid than any other candidate. They have just as much a stake in the system as any other taxpayer in the city of Lakewood.

But I'd also say that having a person without a direct tie to the schools via children actively in the system can add a little bit of a different perspective to an otherwise homogeneous group which is often a good thing.

[Stan Austin]

Bryan---- all very good points that you made. In fact I would say that a majority of those who will be voting for school board candidates will not have children in the public schools. And, Lakewood is quite fortunate in that we do support education as a public good, a public requisite, a cornerstone of a civilized life and that this support translates into direct involvement with kids' and adults' education.
That having been said, I have noticed a sharper intensity of interest along with the day to day experience of kids in school on the part of parents who do actually have kids in school as compared to others who don't. I think this extra intensity of interest can bring to the Board a very needed viewpoint.
Stan

[Bryan Schwegler]

Good points on intensity Stan but I would venture to say we have some of those great parents on the board already. I can think of a few great examples I've seen post here recenly.

[Will Brown]

I think these litmus tests are often misplaced.

For example, I wouldn't vote for someone just because they have children in the system.

There is a natural tendency among parents to try to look out for their kids, often at the expense of other kids. A typical parent on the board might be inclined to see that his own child did well, and that the school offered what he felt was best for his child, just as an administrator or teacher might cut a child a break to curry favor with a board member.

I'm not saying all parents act like that, but quite a few do. I recall being a coach in youth hockey. Most of the coaches were parents. I once looked around the rink at winterhurst and every parent, save me, was timing how much ice each child got, apparently to document how the coach was favoring his own son. On the other hand, an elderly man at another rink was a fine coach, despite having no children in the program. I would rather have had my son be on another parent's team so I would not have to worry about showing favoritism, but the realities were, with practices a 5 or 6 in the morning, you try to minimize the days you have to go to the rink, so you have your child on your own team. Since I was so concerned with fairness, my son complained that I wasn't paying him enough attention, but accepted my explanation.

I would not automatically vote against a candidate who had children in another school system. As a parent involved with another system, he might have insights and ideas from that system that could benefit ours. A parent who wants a religious education for his children should not be excluded from sitting on the board. A parent who wants to send his child to a prep school for a better chance at getting into a "better" college could function well as a board member, and might move the board to improve our own system. Restricting the board to a PTA-like organization is a bit like inbreeding; you would have no one to broaden the gene pool, so to speak, with outside experience.

As for favoring someone with a history of getting things done, the board is a legislative body, not an executive body. I would look for someone with a history of being on boards or groups that have worked together well and gotten things done as a group.

About the only type of person I would exclude would be a teacher, not that I think they are incapable, but that they would be put in a position that would clash with their own employment. I would have no objection to a capable candidate who was a teacher in another system, as there would be far less chance of a conflict of interest.