Most City Council candidates favor open appointment process for school board

By Alicia Petska

Published: April 21, 2008

A majority of City Council candidates say they favor some kind of open appointment process for future school board members.

The question of an open versus closed system has been on the table since last year’s replacement of the board’s then-vice chairman. In statements made during forums and interviews this month, five of the six non-incumbents in the race for City Council have asserted their support for an open method.

“They’re going to have to sit in front of cameras and talk about issues affecting the schools,” Ward IV candidate Marie Waller said in an interview. “What is City Council going to ask them that they’re not going to have to deal with later? There’s not any secret to it, is there?”

Turner Perrow, also a Ward IV candidate, has twice declared his support for an open process during recent election forums.

“I’ve yet to hear any credible reason why any of this should be done in secrecy,” he said, citing both the responsibility of the position and the fact the schools make up the largest slice of the city’s budget.

Of the three incumbents running in this year’s race, each has taken a different position on the school board issue.

Ward I incumbent Mike Gillette has proposed a “hybrid” approach he’ll present to the full council this afternoon. His opponents, Jim Martin and Tom Shahady, have both spoken in favor of opening the process up.

Ceasor Johnson, the incumbent in Ward II, adamantly opposed changing the private system presently in use when it was discussed last month. He argued conducting interviews in public while deliberating in private amounted to a false transparency. He further worried public interviews would only create an opportunity for officials to “play up” to the cameras.

His opponent, David Johnston, did not directly address the interview question in previous forums, but did say he felt the school board functioned better when politics played no part in its process. A message left for Johnston late Monday was not immediately returned.

Ward III incumbent Jeff Helgeson was the first to propose the open system and is the only incumbent to offer unqualified support for the change.

His opponent, Nat Marshall, said he would favor a method that combined public and private elements, in line with what Gillette has proposed.

“I think in order to get the confidence of the citizens back, you have to come up with something other than what’s being used,” he said by phone Monday. “Citizens should know what the candidates say and how they feel on different matters. … They should be able to verify the right decision was made.”

At the same time, Marshall argued the applicants should be protected from a completely public process that might leave them open to attacks, comparing it to the scrutiny given to City Council candidates.

“Our lives are opened up and pretty much everything is open game,” he said. “I’m not sure that’s the way we want to go.”

Click here for more 2008 Lynchburg City Council elections coverage