In light of the less-than-stellar performance by the school board and officials Tuesday, I would like to call attention to a blog post from April 29, after the election but before the organization meeting. The point of the post was that due to changing the election and other factors, the new board would be relatively lacking in experience. I held out hope that the new president and vice president would have qualities that would foster collegiality and adherence to state education law at all times while the board gains experience. It is still a hope, but the six members present Tuesday as well as officials got off track enough on Human Resource resolutions that the board secretary will have to listen to the tape to figure out the votes.
Every year, three board members are normally elected to three-year terms, creating an overlap of longevity. Of the six present Tuesday, two had only served since May 3, following the April 19 election, and one since Jan. 1 as a result of the Nov. 3, 2015 general election. Others had nine months, 15 months, 18 months of service. Some past boards have had the benefit of members with years or even decades of experience.
Too bad the voting process faltered when so many people were already in a state of nerves over their job status. The board and the administration must do better.