grumpybear wrote:I'm an outsider on this topic, no kids, etc. However, I've got one burning question. How does electing school board members by area or some other criteria, make the things better? Maybe I'm being contrarian but I think if you elect school board members by area they will only work for the good of their area. They will fight for money for their schools at the expense of other areas of town. Shouldn't the school board be looking at the entire district and hence be elected from the anywhere? Would "districting" make it any likelier for different opinions to be heard?
The answer here is obvious. We actually want board members who are knowledgeable about what schools in their area need. Running in a geographic area makes board members more responsive to real needs of schools and students in their area, not to the needs of political interests or to Doyle building administration.
No one board member is going to be able to siphon resources away from other schools because the other board members will be watching out for the interest of schools in their area. There are thousands of school districts around the country that have geographical representation on school boards, and favoritism usually is not an issue.
What happens is you get board members who are more attuned to the problems/issues in schools, who are more proactive with administration to help provide answers and solutions, and who work together better with board members to address real issues.