School board election ramifications explained

The Montevideo School Board had a lot to discuss at a special meeting Monday night as members worked to finalize a list of new belief statements and set related goals for the district, review policy changes for the upcoming school year, and discuss contract negotiations with office personnel, educational assistants, and administrators.

Superintendent of Schools Dr. Luther Heller also reviewed the upcoming November board election, and explained the various possibilities because only two candidates — incumbent Andrew Stenson and first-time candidate Steven Kubista — filed for three open positions.

With fewer candidates than open board positions, there will have to be a candidate elected with write-in ballots to fill the third slot.

How many write-in candidates there are in the Nov. 2 general election is up to the voters, explained Heller. Voters could choose to write in one name only, but it is more likely that there will be multiple write-in candidates.

Any interested resident of the school district who meets the requirements could mount an organized write-in campaign if they choose. Otherwise voters could simply write in the name of someone they think would be a good addition to the board.

Either way, the result would be the same.

“The write-in candidate re­ceiving the most votes would be elected,” said Heller.

Assuming the winner was actively seeking the position, that would be the end of it and they would be elected.

But what happens if the top vote getter chooses not to serve? Who gets the nod?

Contrary to what most people may think, the individual receiving the second highest number of write-in votes would not automatically be elected, Heller explained.

Instead, the board would appoint someone of its own choosing. That appointment would be for a two-year term, even though all three open positions this year are for four years. There would then be four positions up for election to four-year terms at the 2012 general election.

The election took the least amount of time to discuss, while discussion of the beliefs and goals took more than an hour. Board members spent most of the time discussing one of the dozen proposed belief statements, which said “(the district will) assure every student is college ready.”

Board member Betty Christensen said she was concerned that the term college ready could offend some parents. Board member Maggie Kluver agreed that college is not for all high school graduates.

Christensen said she thought the word college was too specific and ignored other post-secondary education options. Board member Andrew Stenson disagreed, saying he thought changing the wording would “dumb it down.”

Kluver wondered if “assuring” was the right word, since it is not possible to assure all kids will be college ready. Board member Gerry Wohlhuter had earlier brought up the fact that some graduates have to take remedial classes at college. He thought the word assure should be changed to “preparing.”

After additional discussion, board member Darin Balken suggested moving the statement to the goals list. Board chair David Lipps agreed, saying, “I think we should take it out. I want this to be unanimous.”

The goals are the accomplishments to be reached if the vision and mission reflected in the belief statements are to become reality. Goals need to be limited to between three and five and should be in place for five years.

The plan is for the district to become a “goals oriented district,” with no distractions allowed. These goals will help the board allocate time, money, materials and other resources.

According to Heller, there need to be two non-negotiable goals: student achievement and classroom instruction. The administration determines the objectives, and the staff achieves them. He noted that the objectives are like to vary from year to year, and that they should be realistic.

“A goal has to be attainable and it has to be measureable,” Heller stated.

Because of the time taken by the discussion, facilitator Karen Jacobson, of the Minne­sota River Valley Education District, suggested the process be continued at a future date.

“I know you wanted to roll the goals out to the staff next week, but that won’t be possible,” she said.