Should the school board elect or appoint its new member?
Original post made by Emily Atwood, another community, on Mar 15, 2007
The school board is looking for someone to fill the school board seat left by president Juanita Haugen, who died March 5. At their regular meeting March 13, the board discussed the possibilities of appointing or electing its new member.
Clerk Pat Kernan was first appointed to the board in September 1996 and elected in November 1997. Member Jim Ott was appointed in May 2006 when Gloria Fredette resigned in April 2006. No one chose to run when the terms of Kernan and Ott were coming to an end, so the two regained their seats without an election.
Yet there was a lot of interest in the board when Steve Pulido resigned to take on an Alameda County Supreme Court judgeship. Nine board hopefuls applied, and Chris Grant was appointed in February after two weeks of interviews by a community panel and the board.
With Haugen's replacement, the board would have two of its members appointed and two re-elected by default.
Trustee Kris Weaver, re-elected in 2003, thought the $150,000 spent on a special election would be better used in the classroom. With Haugen's, Weaver's and Grant's terms all ending November 2008, the board wondered if the process was worth it.
They put off the decision until the March 27 meeting, saying they wanted feedback from the public regarding this issue.
Which would you support, a special election or an appointment?