Current board policy states that no school district employee be on the board. The intent of this restriction is to avoid potential conflicts of interest in budgeting, workplace environment, salary and benefits, etc. The potential for such conflicts is very real and policy to avoid them is very appropriate.
But, what about immediate family members of district employees? There is a similar potential conflict. When such individuals are on the board, would they be governing for the benefit of all district residents or for their own family? And, what about teachers in other public school districts? When such individuals are on the board, would they be governing for the benefit of all district residents or for their own union members? I have always supported teachers and the work that they do in educating our children. But, this potential conflict is not consistent with the intent of state laws regarding local governance.
I believe that board policy should be changed, so that new board members are neither employees, nor any immediate family member of any current employee, nor any immediate family member of anyone participating in the state retirement system. Further, I believe that no teacher in any public school system, no immediate family member of any teacher in any public school system nor anyone participating in the state retirement system should be on the board. Such good government policies would more successfully address the potential for conflicts of interest.
Robert Prorok
Hilton