"Eyes Only" Endorsement Process Lacks Transparency

By Sandra Nichols

When public servants, or those who want to be, meet with special interest groups behind closed doors, promises may get made of which the public is unaware.

I decided to respond in public to the Committee so that the community as well as committee members understand why I choose not to participate in the Committee's process.

During my eight years on the school board, I have been a staunch supporter of open governance and the public's right to know what is happening in their schools. As part of my previous elections, I eagerly participated in the endorsement processes of many organizations.

Most civic-minded groups interested in school issues send questionnaires to candidates and follow-up with public forumsósome televisedóin which all candidates are questioned about issues that interest the members. Some forums, like those facilitated by the League of Women Voters, encourage questions from the public, although these are generally filtered through a moderator. To promote fairness, all candidates for a particular office are asked the same questions.

These public forums have an advantage over other methods, as they allow the public to attend and see, first hand, the candidates in action. At the conclusion of these forums, the public is actually able to meet the candidates and converse about topics not covered during the forum. In my experience, it is these public forums that help community members get to know the candidates and make informed voting decisions.

A few organizations, including the Committee for Good School Governance, interview all candidates separatelyóand in privateósomewhat like a job interview. This process leaves the candidate wondering about fairness and adds a touch of mystery to the endorsement process. Candidates have no way of knowing how their opponents fielded the questions or conducted themselves. Some organizations already know whom they intend to endorse, and merely invite other candidates to give the appearance of a fair process. We've all experienced that kind of job interview.

Also of concern is the appearance of "back-room deal making," which tends to undermine the democratic process. When public servants, or those who want to be, meet with special interest groups behind closed doors, promises may get made of which the public is unaware.

As you might expect, most candidates seek the endorsement of groups that hold viewpoints and express values with which the candidates agree. Organizations seek similar compatibility with candidates they intend to endorse.

In non-partisan offices such as school boards, energetic, open-minded candidates do attempt to reach out to groups with a variety of values in an attempt to communicate with all voters and show their willingness to work with everybody on behalf of a cause, in this case, the public schools. It is the school board equivalent of "working both sides of the aisle," and explains why some candidates are endorsed by a very heterogeneous group of folks.

As a public servant, I welcome the scrutiny of my record and my vision of PVUSD's future. I have acceptedóand will acceptóevery invitation to every public forum held to question candidates about school board issues. The public deserves and expects to hear from candidates seeking their vote.

But I will not participate in any organization's endorsement process that relies on private interviews in their selection process. Therefore, I shall not seek the endorsement of the Committee for Good School Governance.

However, I extend to all members of the Committeeóas well members of the publicóthe invitation to contact me personally regarding any matter involving our public schools. If you have a concern, I will listen and take your concern just as seriously as if I had won your endorsement. After all, public schools belong to the people and the people have a right to know.

Read more articles by Sandra Nichols at http://www.education-matters.com