Saturday, January 2, 2016


On Friday Bernice posted on her blog the results of Board of Education elections from 2005 through 2015. The results speak for themselves as justification for the unpublicized vote to shift the date back to April from the   present holding the elections at the same time as the November General elections.

Between 2005 and 2011 before the shift to November with only a rare exceptions the winning candidate(s) received less than 1000 votes.
Using Bernice’s  reports on elections results and dividing the total votes by the number of slots to be filled knowing that not all vacancies were voted for by some doing power voting we can  get the number of voters before  and after the change:
2005-----3234------- 12 candidates for 2 positions.
2010-----2608--------The year of the “Grand Slam”
2012-----4822--------Presidential election
2015-----2192------- off year election, little interest only one slate plus one extra.
These numbers are very suggestive of why an entrenched group wants to change the election date.

When the elections are at the time of the General election almost double the number or more of voters participate. In this   Presidential year the turnout will be greater and the chances of the ln power group not electing its candidates to this powerful board is great.

Although the theory of the elected board is supposed to be nonpolitical experience has shown that these elections as do other so called a political election tend to create power groups that run slates thus defeating the concept.

Since there is a question about the morality if not the legality in which the Board adopted the vote to revert the election date to April  There should be enough public outcry to cause the Board to reconsider its decision. Is it possible that an injunction can be  obtained to prevent this change? Perhaps our Corporation Counsel can answer this.

No comments:

Post a Comment