EDITORIAL
By:
The hotly contested Lawrence Township Board of Education race concluded last week with voters rejecting two incumbents and selecting two newcomers and a former board member to fill the three vacancies.
The district’s proposed $57.6 million operating budget and a $2.5 million second question won narrow approval by the voters.
The voters want a change in the direction of the board and that presents a considerable challenge for the newly elected board members, Ginny Bigley, Deborah Endo and Gerri Hutner, as well as the rest of the members.
The 2004-2005 Board of Education seemed to be marked with strife and dissention and never seemed to become a cohesive, functioning public body.
There is a difference between healthy debate and dissention. The Board of Education should embrace the former and eschew the latter. The new board should welcome the views of residents, parents, teachers and administrators in charting a course for the schools. Adequate notice of critical policy decisions and generous public comment sessions will create a sense of cooperation between the board and the public. We hope this will allow the board to reach a consensus without so much strife.
Also, the public should remember that the board is entrusted with the welfare of the entire school district. So when the board disagrees with a citizen’s view or a group’s position, it is not necessarily the case that the board didn’t listen. The board must act in a manner consistent with its overall responsibilities.
As the board embarks on its reorganization tonight, choosing committee assignments and setting the meeting dates, it should not neglect a less tangible task. The board should take the time now to gel as a group. It should plan to take a retreat or share a meal together outside the confines of the boardroom.
We do not expect, nor would we want, the board to become an entity that rubber-stamps proposals. We do expect the board to be a functioning public body.
One final note about the school board election. We were dismayed by some of the vituperative comments aired by the public, in letters to the editor and in public forums, about the candidates. Challenging the positions of a candidate is a citizen’s right. Personal attacks, by the public of the candidates or between the candidates, have no place in the campaign.
Residents who run for school board, whether elected or not, choose to make personal sacrifices to serve the community. They deserve the thanks of township residents for their dedication and commitment to improving the public schools. This is certainly true for out-going board members Philip Benson and Carole Drury and candidates Kari McGann and William Nathan.