Charlottesville Ballot Now Complete

It was partly a nail biter, with two candidates turning in the last of their paperwork just minutes before the deadline at 7:00 p.m., but when all the petition signatures had been checked and all the notary seals had been stamped, a total of 15 local candidates qualified to be on the ballot in the City of Charlottesville this November.

The five candidates for City Council had been known previously, three Democrats (nominated by convention) and two independents:

David Brown
Holly Edwards
Satyendra Huja

Barbara Haskins
Peter Kleeman

Voters will be asked to select three candidates to serve on City Council from among these five.

For the city's second School Board election, there are four seats to be filled and seven candidates:

Colette Blount
Grant Brownrigg
Llezelle Dugger
Alvin Edwards
Kathleen Galvin
Sean McCord
Lynette Meynig

All except Edwards are first-time candidates.

And in the city's first-ever election for the post of Soil and Water Conservation District Director, there are three candidates for two seats:

Richard Collins
John Conover
John Pfaltz

In that race, Collins and Conover are the incumbents, having previously been appointed by City Council (as was Alvin Edwards on the Charlottesville School Board). Pfaltz was previously a candidate for City Council in 2000.

Also on the ballot will be two unopposed candidates for the Virginia General Assembly, incumbent Delegate David Toscano and state Senator Creigh Deeds.

Maybe I'm Naïve?

The local TV stations -- WVIR Channel 29 and WCAV Channel 19 -- had reports on their 11:00 o'clock news broadcasts about a forum that discussed the referendum for an elected school board in Charlottesville. Neither report has reached the stations' web sites, however, but I did find this blurb on WINA-AM radio's site:

A Thursday night forum brought out the pros and cons of an elected city school board. The issue will be decided by Charlottesville voters on November 8th. Former county supervisor Charles Martin spoke in favor of keeping appointed school boards. Martin says an elected board would cut down on the number of people willing to serve. He says many people don't realize the time and expense that must be devoted to campaigning. Martin also says changing the system could create bad blood between the school board and city council when a board member promises something that the city can't fund. UVA faculty member Jeffrey Rossman supports elected school boards. Rossman says diversity would continue with an elected board. He points out that African- American candidates received the most votes in the city council elections of 1996, 2000 and 2004. Rossman says an elected board would be more responsive to the needs of the community.

WINA continues to note, without details, that the local chapter of the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) has endorsed an elected school board and is urging people to vote "yes" on the referendum.

Fortunately, some details were available through a news release distributed by Citizens for an Elected School Board, the organization led by UVA faculty member Jeffrey Rossman and Charlottesville City Councilor Rob Schilling, announcing the NAACP decision:

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA, October 13, 2005 – The Charlottesville Albemarle Branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has endorsed Charlottesville’s elected school board referendum. Dr. M. Rick Turner, president of the local NAACP, said the endorsement vote was unanimous.

Charlottesville City Councilor Rob Schilling, who helped to coordinate the bipartisan effort behind the referendum, was pleased with the endorsement.

"I'm grateful for the NAACP's thorough consideration of the elected school board referendum and their resulting endorsement," Schilling said. "I appreciate the diligence of the NAACP's membership in familiarizing themselves with the intricacies of this important issue."

Jeffrey Rossman, a University of Virginia professor and the initiator of the referendum petition, sees the endorsement as answering a question raised by some members of the community.

"Many thoughtful individuals have asked me: Is an elected school board in Charlottesville going to be diverse? The endorsement of the referendum by the local chapter of the NAACP suggests to me that the answer is: Yes, an elected board will be diverse. The city's voters are committed to diversity — African-American candidates have consistently been the top vote-getters in recent city council elections — and there are many well-qualified minority candidates who would make excellent school board members," Rossman said. "The residents of Charlottesville can vote in favor of the referendum on November 8th with confidence that our school board will continue to reflect the community it represents."

The elected school board referendum question will appear on Charlottesville’s November 8 general election ballot.

In answer to a question I posed in a previous posting, both candidates for the 57th District House of Delegates race, Tom McCrystal (R) and David Toscano (D), have endorsed elected school boards for Charlottesville, where both of them live and work. As reported by Bob Gibson in the Daily Progress on October 6:

Both candidates in the Nov. 8 election endorsed switching to an elected School Board for Charlottesville.

"It's really, really important," McCrystal said of the success of the Nov. 8 city referendum on the School Board. He said the events of the past year in the city school system have made elected school boards "absolutely critical" and added they should be ward-based.

Toscano, like McCrystal, said he had recently come to favor an elected board. "For a long time I was opposed," he said, "but I’ve changed my mind." The Democrat said he favors electing City Council at large but is not wedded to a particular method of electing the School Board.

McCrystal, by the way, has been endorsed by former New Jersey Governor and federal EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman, who did some campaigning with the state legislative candidate along Charlottesville's downtown mall last month.

Late-breaking: The Daily Progress has a report on last night's elected-school-board forum by James Fernald in this morning's editions. It says, in part:

Rossman noted that 78 percent of Virginia localities have moved to an elected school board and none has switched back. He thinks it would be a good move for Charlottesville. "We have a density here of civic-minded individuals. Call me naïve, but I have deep faith in Charlottesville voters."

Back to School Again

With just about six weeks to go before the November 8 election, proponents of an elected school board in Charlottesville are gearing up for a full-scale campaign to make their case to the voters.

Although the elected-school-board option has succeeded some 105 out 108 attempts when put to Virginia voters as a local referendum, those favoring the shift from an appointed to an elected board are not complacent.

Here's an excerpt from an email circulating among Charlottesville citizens, which apparently originated with City Councilor Rob Schilling, who was elected in 2002 running on a platform that called for an elected school board:

Now that the elected school board referendum has been qualified to be placed on the November ballot, we need your help to get the word out and to make sure that it passes resoundingly!

Here’s what you can do to help:

1. Make a donation to the referendum committee. Checks should be made out to "Citizens for an Elected School Board" or “CFESB” and sent to : CFESB, c/o Rob Schilling, 1406 Holly Road, Charlottesville, VA 22901 (Donations will be used to pay for bumper stickers, yard signs, and ads. We need to raise several thousand dollars - donations in any amount are welcome!)

2. Let me know how many bumper stickers and yard signs you would like, and I will deliver them to you as soon as they are ready.

The debate over an elected school board is already unveiling fissures within the local Democratic party. In an email to George Loper, former City Democratic Committee chairman Lloyd Snook wrote:

If I thought that electing a School Board would assure better decisions, or a better education for our children, my view would be very much different. But I am afraid that what we would actually get would be a greatly elevated level of political activity, with much more speechifying and grandstanding, with no discernible improvement in the quality of education that our children receive. If we elect School Board members, I expect that we will end up with School Board candidates raising and spending thousands of dollars each to get themselves elected, but I doubt very seriously that the electorate will be any better informed when making their choices than the City Councilors who make the selections now.

(Snook's lengthy argument is worth reading as a whole.)

In response, Democratic activist Jeffrey Rossman -- who, along with Councilor Schilling, spearheaded the petition drive to put the school board measure on November's ballot -- wrote:

*Lloyd apparently has less faith in the voters of Charlottesville than I do. I trust the voters of the city -- 72 percent of whom voted for John Kerry -- to choose a diverse group of well-qualified candidates for the school board. A city that repeatedly gives the most votes to African-American city councillors is a city that is committed to diversity. Moreover, creationists and intelligent designers are not going to get far in this blue university town, Lloyd's fears notwithstanding.

*Lloyd and I have very different views about the nature of democratically elected institutions. I believe that such institutions tend to be more responsive, to operate more transparently, and to pursue policies that enjoy public support. These beliefs derive from my years of studying democratic and nondemocratic regimes. For all its faults, the democratic system is more stable and, ultimately, effective.

*Lloyd and I also have different views about the democratic political process, which he dismisses as so much "speechifying and grandstanding." By contrast, I believe that the democratic political process, for all its flaws, trains candidates to think about challenging issues and to communicate with and educate the public. This process is one that our schools and the community at large will benefit from if we transition to an elected school board.

(Again, this short excerpt does not do Rossman's full argument justice, so I recommend visiting loper.org to read the whole thing.)

In the meantime, a current member of the Charlottesville School Board has been musing that the U.S. Department of Justice may not approve the shift from appointed to elected school boards in the preclearance process required by the Voting Rights Act. In an email to the City Attorney, this board member writes:

The preclearance process is intended to prevent any change in voting that constitutes a retrogression in minority voting rights. Given Charlottesville's history of substantial minority representation on the appointed school board, I think that there is a fair argument that any system for electing board members--whether at-large or by election district--would be likely to reduce minority representation on the board and thus would constitute impermissible "retrogression."

This is an odd argument to make. Given that no voters, minority or otherwise, have a chance to elect school board members under the current system, how can that possibly constitute "retrogression in minority voting rights"? This can only be seen as an enhancement of minority voting rights, moving from zero rights to some rights.

We'll see how this all plays out between now and the first week of November. I hope to see a robust -- but civil -- debate throughout the campaign season.

And, by the way, what do our candidates for the House of Delegates in the 57th District think about all this? David Toscano and Tom McCrystal, Charlottesville voters want to know your position on an elected school board.

School Days, School Days (Reprise)

This news release just came across my desk, courtesy of Charlottesville City Councilor Rob Schilling:

CHARLOTTESVILLE ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD REFERENDUM
QUALIFIES FOR NOVEMBER 8 BALLOT

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA, August 9, 2005 – Charlottesville General Registrar Sheri Iachetta has certified a referendum for an Elected School Board for the November 8, 2005, general election ballot. For ballot placement, as required by Virginia State Code, 10 percent of the registered voters in the city of Charlottesville have signed the Petition of Qualified Voters for Referendum.

The certified referendum language will appear on the ballot as follows: “Shall the method of selecting the school board be changed from appointment by the governing body to direct election by the voters?”

Jeffrey Rossman, a University of Virginia professor and the initiator of the referendum petition, applauded the grassroots effort of scores of volunteers who gathered signatures over the past six weeks.

“Thanks to the hard work of our dedicated volunteers, voters will have an opportunity to decide in November if Charlottesville should transition gradually from an appointed to an elected school board,” Rossman said. “Judging from the response to the petition, a majority of Democrats, Independents and Republicans believe that the city should do what 78 percent of other Virginia localities do, and elect its school board.”

City Councilor Rob Schilling, who worked alongside Rossman to coordinate the referendum effort, was pleased with the broad-based community support for an elected school board.

“This is a nonpartisan issue with multipartisan support,” Schilling said. “From Primary Day forward, Democrats, Independents, Libertarians and Republicans have worked side-by-side, knocking on doors and canvassing public gatherings. It’s been our collective experience that over 80 percent of those approached to sign the petition, favored an elected school board for Charlottesville.”

Both Rossman and Schilling look forward to the educational benefits an elected board will bring to Charlottesville.

“Evidence from across the state indicates that elected school boards function well and are responsive to the concerns of the community,” Rossman said. “An elected school board will reflect the priorities of our community, and our community is committed to excellence, fairness and diversity.”

“An elected school board encourages innovation and active public participation in the educational policy process,” Schilling said. “Direct public accountability will help to promote greater achievement for all students in our City schools.”

Resident-volunteers collected over 3,000 signatures in support of Charlottesville’s Elected School Board referendum.

The news release fails to mention that the General Registrar's office stopped counting signatures at the required 2,331 (10 percent of registered voters as of January 1, 2005), which indicated a validity rate of about 85 percent, a remarkable accomplishment for unpaid, volunteer petition circulators. Perhaps this lacuna is best explained by the modesty of the petition organizers, who deserve congratulations for this achievement, especially considering their original aim was to collect the signatures of 10 percent of active voters (or just over 2,100), until they learned the correct number was the higher figure of registered voters.

School Days, School Days

The multipartisan group of Charlottesville residents seeking to put a measure on the ballot that, if approved, would change Charlottesville's school board from an appointed to an elected body, are well on their way toward success.

The group has until August 10 to collect the signatures of 2,332 registered voters. They have so far collected 2,122 valid signatures, with an absolutely amazing -- and amazingly consistent -- validity rate of about 85 percent.

Barring the most adverse circumstances imaginable (or unimaginable), it looks like the referendum will be on the ballot and Charlottesville voters will have a real campaign on their hands between August 10 and November 8.

Be True to Your School

The petition drive to put a measure on the ballot in Charlottesville aimed at changing the method of selecting the school board to popular election rather than appointment by the City Council is humming along.

In order to be placed on the ballot, the petitioners must collect just over 2,300 valid signatures of registered voters (10 percent of those voters registered and on the books on January 1 of this year.) So far they have collected about 1,600 valid signatures, exhibiting an astounding validity rate of 89 percent.

This validity rate is all the more remarkable because the circulators are entirely volunteers -- Democrats, Republicans, and independents -- collecting signatures on their own time.

Even the most proficient of professional signature-gatherers acknowledge that a 50 percent validity rate is good, and a validity rate of 60 to 65 percent is excellent. Batting .890 is a Hall of Fame performance in any league.

The school board petition needs to be completed by the first week of August in order to qualify for the November ballot. At the current rate, it looks like the team will have no trouble getting enough signatures far in advance of the deadline.

Whither the Charlottesville School Board?

This morning's Daily Progress is reporting that Charlottesville's City Council heard last night from citizens about the candidates they support for appointment to three vacant school board seats. WCAV-TV reported last night on its 11 o'clock newscast that the turnout was rather low, considering that voters have no direct role in selecting school board members and their only influence can be exercised through the open hearing process. On-air correspondent Elizabeth Donatelli reported that only "about twenty-five people took advantage of the public hearing and spoke on behalf of their favorite candidates."

The Daily Progress article also notes that the public hearing was oddly timed, given that Charlottesville High School held its commencement exercises on Monday night, leading to an unavoidable conflict for many teachers, parents, and students who are concerned about the future of the School Board and the city school system.

City Council members also discussed, but did not schedule, a second public hearing after councilor Rob Schilling said Charlottesville High School’s graduation on Monday night likely prevented some people from attending the hearing. Schilling also repeated his call for an elected School Board.

“Why are we appointing School Board members instead of letting the public have a real voice in the process by directly electing School Board via a ward- or district-based election process?” Schilling asked. “We can no longer foster the complete lack of direct accountability to the public, which our appointed School Board members currently enjoy.”

I have obtained a copy of Councilor Schilling's complete remarks. Here is what he said at last night's City Council meeting:

I would like to begin my remarks by acknowledging and thanking all of those who came before us this evening. The purpose of a public hearing is to “hear” the public, and I hope that we as a body have heard you.

I am concerned that for some reason, this public hearing was scheduled on the same night and at roughly the same time as the Charlottesville High School graduation ceremony. This scheduling conflict most likely precluded the participation of many interested citizens who are in some way closely affiliated with a CHS graduate. Even our City Manager, Mr. O’Connell, cannot be present here, due to his son’s graduation tonight. Through this scheduling error, we have potentially denied many members of the public an opportunity for public expression. What an unfortunate oversight. Thankfully there is still time to rectify this situation.

In considering the comments that we did hear tonight, I am not entirely certain how they are received by City Council. Will councilors weigh the number and the persuasiveness of the received comments in order to decide whom to appoint to the board? Or, is this hearing merely a “courtesy” to the public, wherein councilors acknowledge comments with a nod, and then go on to appoint whomever they had previously decided to choose?

If it is the latter, then we should make this clear to the public. But, if it is the former, and this council is sincerely considering whom to appoint to the school board based upon comments received from the public, then we must ask ourselves: “Why are we appointing School Board members instead of letting the public have a real voice in the process by directly electing the school board via a ward- or district-based election process?”

If public input is so valuable and is strongly considered in the school board appointment process, why appoint at all? Do we not trust the citizens of this community, the citizens who elected this very body, with the decision of who should run the city schools, as most localities do across the Commonwealth and across the country? Or do we deem only some of our citizens worthy of trust? We should ask: Why is this council so hesitant to relinquish the power of appointment? Are we five that smart, that good, that intuitive?

It is clear, upon reviewing the many comments I’ve received from residents across the political and socio-economic spectrum, that this council, and previous councils have failed the public, in that we have maintained and supported an appointment process that has left the public dissatisfied and that ultimately has harmed some of our most vulnerable citizens: the children of Charlottesville.

We can no longer afford to allow a $60 million dollar organization, entrusted with the futures of our children, to be run by political appointees who may in fact be placed because of patronage rather than qualification. We can no longer foster the complete lack of direct accountability to the public, which our appointed school board members currently enjoy. We can no longer tolerate a failing “underclass” in our Charlottesville City Schools; we require school board members with a strong and workable vision that is clearly communicated and acceptable to the public whom they hope to serve.

And, thus, we can no longer pretend that one private 15-minute interview with council, and four or five two-minute replies at one public forum adequately reveal the qualification or aptitude of any particular candidate for a position on the Charlottesville City School Board. There is simply too much at stake and the citizens of Charlottesville deserve better than this.

A change here is long overdue, as it has become painfully obvious this year that we as a council, do not “know any better” than you, the citizens of this community. There is nothing “magic” about any of us that would allow us to make a school board appointment superior to that any citizen carefully weighing the issues would make, should you have the opportunity to vote for school board members. If we as a council truly value public input as we say we do, then we should truly value public input by letting the public make the decision regarding who is best suited to direct the education of our children. I trust the public, and, as I have often said, I favor an open process wherein the community elects its school board members.

I want to acknowledge Mr. Jeffrey Rossman, a member of the local Democratic Party, for following the courage of his convictions by certifying and circulating a petition that would allow the citizens of Charlottesville to vote on whether they would like to have an elected or an appointed School Board. This is a nonpartisan effort with bipartisan support.

In conclusion, for Council’s consideration, I will now make two brief motions that I believe will address some of the concerns expressed in my preceding statement:

1) In order to allow a voice for the many who were unable to attend tonight due to a scheduling conflict, I move that City Council establish a 2nd public hearing on School Board Applicants, to be held at the next regularly scheduled Council meeting, June 20.

2) In order that the public may have a greater sense of confidence in the School Board appointments ultimately made by this body, I move that City Council hold all upcoming interviews of current potential School Board appointees in an open session meeting wherein the public would be allowed to observe.

It may be noteworthy that local Democratic activist David RePass, who served recently on the City Council-appointed elections task force, has endorsed the idea of an elected school board, despite virulent opposition from most of the local Democratic party establishment and the four Democrats on City Council. RePass wrote to George Loper:

Simply put, the current system of selecting the Charlottesville School Board violates a fundamental principle of democratic governance. The School Board is not accountable to the people. The only way to make it accountable is to elect it.

The bipartisan group of voters and taxpayers who are circulating a petition to put a measure on the ballot in November to change Charlottesville's school board from an appointed to an elected body will be out in force on primary election day, June 14. I have heard reports that there will be a table outside each polling place with petitions to be signed, and each table will be staffed by at least one Republican and at least one Democrat.

Murky 'Shadow Board' Lurks in Charlottesville

Both Charlottesville TV stations had lengthy reports Tuesday night about a "closed door" meeting of City Councilors and School Board members, at which they discussed appointing an advisory body to help in the search for a new school superintendent (a job that taxed the competence of the School Board when they tried to do it a year ago, ending in the recent "resignation" of troubled Superintendent Scottie Griffin, Charlottesville's own thesaurus entry for "Peter Principle").

On WCAV-TV (Channel 19, the CBS affiliate with hundreds of viewers throughout the area) Michael Gorsegner reported:

Tonight, Charlottesville City council members met in a closed door meeting to try and iron out the details of an advisory committee aimed at finding a new superintendent of schools.

* * *

However, not all of the council members were present for the meeting. Councilor Rob Schilling says he opposes the committee because, "this commission would serve as a shadow board whose accountability relationships would be murky, which is not an improvement on our current situation."

This controversy comes at a time where two Charlottesville school board members have announced they will not seek reappointment to their post as well as the beginning of a petition to have school board members elected rather than appointed by the council.

Meanwhile, on WVIR-TV (Channel 29, the market's dominant broadcast news source), Joe Holden put Councilor Rob Schilling closer to the top of the story:

Councilor Rob Schilling was not present, saying the entire process is questionable and stayed away from the proceedings in protest. Rob Schilling says the commission "would only serve as a shadow board, whose accountability would be murky," because of an alleged lack of public input. He says this could further problems with an already embattled school board.

* * *

Missing from Tuesday night's gathering was councilor Rob Schilling who says he's not participating because the commission lacks public input. In an email Schilling wrote, "to introduce another indirect layer of accountability via council appointments is to repeat the problem we experience currently with our appointed school board: no distinct lines of accountability."

School board members have endured pointed criticism following the resignation of superintendent Scottie Griffin.

Mayor David Brown counters Schilling's claims saying the school advisory commission is modeled to include the public in every step.

But in an interview Monday, Schilling explains he wants to take public input a step further by having an elected school board. He stated, "Here you have a school board that's been hung out to dry in this process and taken a lot of criticism and I think if you had direct accountability to voters, you wouldn't be in this position right now."

Prior to Tuesday night's closed-door meeting, Schilling sent a letter outlining his views to members of City Council and of the School Board. Here is the text, in full:

Dear Councilors and School Board members,

I write to you today to alert you that I will not participate in tonight’s closed session City Council meeting—a meeting for the purpose of appointing membership to the Charlottesville Schools Advisory Commission.

Although I could support an advisory commission established to assist the School Board in their superintendent search, I cannot support the process by which this commission came forth, the proposed membership of the commission, or the lack of public involvement in decisions regarding the charge and membership of the commission.

It is my understanding that Mayor Brown and Mrs. Van Yahres jointly conceived of this board, and each later brought the idea to their respective government bodies. I, personally, heard nothing about this proposed Commission until about 11:00 AM on Monday, May 2. At that time, I received a telephone call from the Mayor, informing me that the School Board had put together a proposal, and that they would be holding a press conference at 1:30 PM that day to announce the idea. Mayor Brown stated to me that he would be present for the press conference, and that the purpose of the call was to let me know that event was taking place. Mayor Brown did not solicit my degree of support for the Commission at that time nor was I informed of the specific charge and composition of the Commission.

The topic of the Commission was again raised during our May 2 City Council meeting under “other business.” At that time, I requested a written copy of the proposal. I was told that one did not exist, but that I would receive a copy within the next few days. I also expressed concern that Commission member “categories” had already been established without citizen input. I called for a public process wherein members of the community could submit their names for consideration of inclusion on the Commission, as has been done in most, if not all other task forces and commissions I can recall appointing. I was told that this was not possible because there was a time factor involved and that we needed to appoint Commission members as soon as was practicable.

The next day, I received a press release from the City’s communications department, stating: “the Charlottesville School Board and the City Council are proposing the formation of the Charlottesville Schools Advisory Commission.” This was troubling because, while the press release implied unanimous consent, there had been no substantive group Council discussion regarding particulars of the Commission, no vote of council, and I had not even been asked my opinion of the concept. This press release was sent out to the media and to other interested parties on Monday, May 2, at approximately 2:30 PM, although I (and perhaps all of City Council) did not receive the release until Tuesday, May 3, at 11:10 AM. Upon inquiring about the propriety of such a release without any substantive discussion of the initiative by the entire council, I was told by the City Attorney’s office that the Mayor, through an ‘informal poll’ of council, had obtained “a consensus of council,” and therefore, the wording of the press release was appropriate, if not entirely accurate.

During the subsequent days, I received many questions and comments from concerned constituents regarding this Commission. One inquiry centered on the School Board, and whether in fact that body had voted on the charge and composition of this Commission.

On behalf of constituents, on Friday, May 6, I posed the following question to the School Board, via email:

Did you approve the charge and membership of the council proposed Advisory Commission?

On Saturday, May 7, I received the following reply from Mrs. Van Yahres:

It is my understanding that many Board member approve of the Commission or why would 5 of us appear at a press conference supporting it. I support it. It is a good opportunity to have a group of experienced people give us feedback on superintendents qualification criteria, the search process and possibly review of the final candidates. It would not usurp the responsibility of the Board. [sic]

Although Mrs. Van Yahres’ reply was somewhat unclear, the implication seemed to be that the School Board never specifically voted on the issue. A subsequent conversation with other School Board members confirmed that indeed, no School Board vote regarding the formation or charge of this commission had taken place.

The membership of this commission, as indicated in the city press release, has been established as follows:

• Former School Board Member
• Former Member of City Council
• Representative of the PTO Council
• Current City School Staff Member
• Representative from an organization involved with the low-income community
• City Manager
• Two members of the School Board

I do not believe that the membership of this group, as proposed, gives voice to the wide range of interests that many parties have in the process. Certainly, the categories of Commission membership should have been discussed, debated, and voted upon at open meetings of both the School Board and City Council, prior to the Council making any appointments. The Commission is intended to provide “the core” of public input in the superintendent search process yet, the general makeup of the group could be described as exclusionary, while some proposed positions seem redundant and potentially inappropriate. I am also bothered by the fact that specific names for certain positions seem to have been pre-decided by the drafters of this proposal. I am aware of this, because in private conversations, specific names were being strongly suggested to fill designated spots on the Commission.

Finally, I have heard concerns from constituents and some School Board members, that a Council-appointed commission is inappropriate in this case. Often, governing bodies desiring a task force or commission, themselves appoint the members of those bodies. Virginia State law attributes exclusive authority to local school boards to hire division superintendents, and this Commission’s stated intent is to assist the School Board in its superintendent search and hiring process.

If this Commission is to work directly with the School Board, then its members should be directly appointed by and thus accountable to the School Board. To introduce another indirect layer of accountability via Council appointments is to repeat the problem we experience currently with our appointed School Board: no distinct lines of accountability between the public and subsequent School Board actions and decisions. In effect, this Commission would serve as a “shadow board,” whose accountability relationships would be murky, which is not an improvement on our current situation.

If the majority of School Board desires assistance in their upcoming superintendent search, then they should appropriately decide upon a charge, and name the members to a commission as they have done previously. This should be done; however, only after a public dialogue and a public vote on the charge and composition of such a Commission has taken place. It is questionable to comprise a Commission intended to represent the “core” of public input on the important issue of hiring a division superintendent, without public input on the process of creating the Commission itself, as has been the case.

If the School Board seeks input from Council because it is deemed that Council’s assistance would be valuable, then perhaps a joint, public work session would be in order during which School Board members could seek Councils’ guidance. Certainly a public meeting such as this would be far preferable to, and more appropriate than the private, Closed Session planned for tonight wherein the public is excluded from the discussion.

In conclusion, I regret that I cannot participate in the naming of members to a Commission that reportedly was brought forth by a “consensus” of two governing bodies, because no substantive public discussion or vote of City Council or School Board has taken place. I cannot participate in the naming of a Commission that has the real possibility of increasing School Board accountability problems rather than alleviating them; and I cannot participate in the naming of a Commission that has been determined via a process devoid of significant public input thus far.

I look forward to assisting the School Board in its superintendent search in a manner that is consistent with the goals of transparent government and clear accountability and is fully open to public scrutiny and participation.

Sincerely,


Rob Schilling

Schilling's thorough presentation of his position and civil tone stand in stark contrast to the approach of another local elected official.

The issues raised by Councilor Schilling are far from being settled. Expect them to be in the news for weeks, or even months, to come.