4 ms·

One big consequence of having so few children in the city of SF, is that the school boards are voted in by people with no direct interest in making sure that ch

One big consequence of having so few children in the city of SF, is that the school boards are voted in by people with no direct interest in making sure that children actually get educated. So the board is simply used as a proxy for other political agendas. Should only people with school-age children be allowed to vote on school board members? This inclines me towards yes, although I understand the arguments against.

pg_bot 6y ago
"Should only people with school-age children be allowed to vote on school board members?" This is an obvious no. Apart from the issue of taxation without representation, not having children does not disqualify your opinion on education. There are plenty of taxpayers who are interested in ensuring that children get a good education at a reasonable cost who don't have kids.
- mcculley 6y ago
  Where he wrote, "although I understand the arguments against", I interpreted that as the obvious no.
- ianbicking 6y ago
  While I wouldn't support the restriction, most voters at this local level are not voting with any real information and often no real opinion on the issues relevant to the position. Even if someone has some general principles they'd like to express in the voting booth, mapping that to school board candidates is very difficult.
  - pg_bot 6y ago
    If this is the way you feel why stop at school board elections? Why not restrict voting for the legislature, governor, or president? We live in a democracy, that means the "uneducated" have the same ability to vote as the "educated" on the issues. If you have a problem with that you can run for office yourself.
    - marcinzm 6y ago
      I feel at some point choice paralysis sets in and voters choose people at almost random. We also do not live in a democracy but a representative democracy. Very big difference. Having the elected legislature or mayor choose the school board is perfectly in line with a representative democracy.
    - retrac 6y ago
      This argument runs the other way too. Why stop at electing school boards? Why not the public water company's board, and the animal control office? Why not elect the janitors at City Hall? This can be extended until anything but total direct democracy is undemocratic. I live in a jurisdiction with elected schoolboards as well, and I find the notion odd and somewhat anachronistic. It seems only natural to me that public schools should be handled by the municipality's government, or maybe the provincial one directly. (The provinces have, in practice, assumed much of the responsibility anyway. I understand it's the same in the USA with state laws, and state funding, being very involved in public education.) Even municipal elections are marginal enough that many people don't take them seriously here. No one knows anything about the schoolboard elections. I have to actively research quite a bit just to find out anything about the candidates. I often abstain out of ignorance despite trying to inform myself!
      - toast0 6y ago
        > It seems only natural to me that public schools should be handled by the municipality's government, or maybe the provincial one directly. At least in California, school districts are independent from cities, and while most are wholy within one county, some aren't. The school district is the municipality. California municipal districts for the most part have elected boards, although the elections don't have to be run if there aren't more candidates than seats. Pay attention when a California mayoral candidate says they're going to fix the schools. That's a sign that they either don't understand how schools in California work, or they think you don't. School districts aren't subordinate to cities, so mayors have no power over them. With a slight caveat that because San Francisco is a unified city and county, the mayor of SF is also on the SF county board, and counties have some power over school districts, but not a whole lot.
  - notafraudster 6y ago
    The problem with school board elections is emphatically not that too many people vote with low information; it is instead that they are decided by small cadres of reliable voters which make up <10% of the electorate.
mcculley 6y ago
This is an interesting question. I have had similar questions about my native state of Florida. Florida, like many retiree magnets, suffers from having retiree immigrants who vote against the interests of those who still need schools, roads, and other infrastructure. I half-joke that we should amend the state constitution to restrict the franchise to those with skin in the game. Obviously there would be childless voters who would have the best interest of students in mind when choosing school board members. For example, couples planning on having children might want to be able to influence the election. Of course, a board elected by those with children could also be allowed to appoint childless advocates as well.
burlesona 6y ago
There is something to be said for having "skin in the game," but if you were going to have that kind of criteria I think it would have to not only be "have school age children," it would have to be "have children attending these schools."
sjburt 6y ago
I think the experience for most voters is having to pick 7 people out of a list 20 names of people they've never heard of. 50% will be educators of some sort, 25% will be real estate agents or developers, and 25% will be raving lunatics or anti-vaxxers.
- cardiffspaceman 6y ago
  ... or submarine candidates from some social movement that you would not want anywhere near your child's school.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > 50% will be educators of some sort, 25% will be real estate agents or developers, and 25% will be raving lunatics or anti-vaxxers. Those numbers are all too low, because the last category has substantial overlap with the first two.
cameronh90 6y ago
Why are school boards directly elected rather than just appointed by the elected representatives? It seems like the democratic equivalent of micromanagement.
erentz 6y ago
Probably the more straight forward answer is to get rid of elected school boards. We vote for our local/state government. They should be responsible for education policy. Let it stop there.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
cardiffspaceman 6y ago
I don't have children but I do have a "vested" interest in an educated populace with tax money spent efficiently on the education itself.

pg_bot 6y ago

"Should only people with school-age children be allowed to vote on school board members?" This is an obvious no. Apart from the issue of taxation without representation, not having children does not disqualify your opinion on education. There are plenty of taxpayers who are interested in ensuring that children get a good education at a reasonable cost who don't have kids.

mcculley 6y ago
Where he wrote, "although I understand the arguments against", I interpreted that as the obvious no.
ianbicking 6y ago
While I wouldn't support the restriction, most voters at this local level are not voting with any real information and often no real opinion on the issues relevant to the position. Even if someone has some general principles they'd like to express in the voting booth, mapping that to school board candidates is very difficult.
- pg_bot 6y ago
  If this is the way you feel why stop at school board elections? Why not restrict voting for the legislature, governor, or president? We live in a democracy, that means the "uneducated" have the same ability to vote as the "educated" on the issues. If you have a problem with that you can run for office yourself.
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    I feel at some point choice paralysis sets in and voters choose people at almost random. We also do not live in a democracy but a representative democracy. Very big difference. Having the elected legislature or mayor choose the school board is perfectly in line with a representative democracy.
  - retrac 6y ago
    This argument runs the other way too. Why stop at electing school boards? Why not the public water company's board, and the animal control office? Why not elect the janitors at City Hall? This can be extended until anything but total direct democracy is undemocratic. I live in a jurisdiction with elected schoolboards as well, and I find the notion odd and somewhat anachronistic. It seems only natural to me that public schools should be handled by the municipality's government, or maybe the provincial one directly. (The provinces have, in practice, assumed much of the responsibility anyway. I understand it's the same in the USA with state laws, and state funding, being very involved in public education.) Even municipal elections are marginal enough that many people don't take them seriously here. No one knows anything about the schoolboard elections. I have to actively research quite a bit just to find out anything about the candidates. I often abstain out of ignorance despite trying to inform myself!
    - toast0 6y ago
      > It seems only natural to me that public schools should be handled by the municipality's government, or maybe the provincial one directly. At least in California, school districts are independent from cities, and while most are wholy within one county, some aren't. The school district is the municipality. California municipal districts for the most part have elected boards, although the elections don't have to be run if there aren't more candidates than seats. Pay attention when a California mayoral candidate says they're going to fix the schools. That's a sign that they either don't understand how schools in California work, or they think you don't. School districts aren't subordinate to cities, so mayors have no power over them. With a slight caveat that because San Francisco is a unified city and county, the mayor of SF is also on the SF county board, and counties have some power over school districts, but not a whole lot.
- notafraudster 6y ago
  The problem with school board elections is emphatically not that too many people vote with low information; it is instead that they are decided by small cadres of reliable voters which make up <10% of the electorate.

mcculley 6y ago

This is an interesting question. I have had similar questions about my native state of Florida. Florida, like many retiree magnets, suffers from having retiree immigrants who vote against the interests of those who still need schools, roads, and other infrastructure. I half-joke that we should amend the state constitution to restrict the franchise to those with skin in the game. Obviously there would be childless voters who would have the best interest of students in mind when choosing school board members. For example, couples planning on having children might want to be able to influence the election. Of course, a board elected by those with children could also be allowed to appoint childless advocates as well.

burlesona 6y ago

There is something to be said for having "skin in the game," but if you were going to have that kind of criteria I think it would have to not only be "have school age children," it would have to be "have children attending these schools."

sjburt 6y ago

I think the experience for most voters is having to pick 7 people out of a list 20 names of people they've never heard of. 50% will be educators of some sort, 25% will be real estate agents or developers, and 25% will be raving lunatics or anti-vaxxers.

cardiffspaceman 6y ago
... or submarine candidates from some social movement that you would not want anywhere near your child's school.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> 50% will be educators of some sort, 25% will be real estate agents or developers, and 25% will be raving lunatics or anti-vaxxers. Those numbers are all too low, because the last category has substantial overlap with the first two.

cameronh90 6y ago

Why are school boards directly elected rather than just appointed by the elected representatives? It seems like the democratic equivalent of micromanagement.

erentz 6y ago

Probably the more straight forward answer is to get rid of elected school boards. We vote for our local/state government. They should be responsible for education policy. Let it stop there.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

cardiffspaceman 6y ago

I don't have children but I do have a "vested" interest in an educated populace with tax money spent efficiently on the education itself.