John M. Young 109 Cypress Dr. Newark, DE 19713 June 8, 2012 Hon.

Representative Edward Osienski House of Representative Legislative Hall Dover, DE Dear Representative Osienski: I am writing to ask you to oppose HB 360. This bill will soon come to a vote in the Delaware House of Representatives. The purpose of this bill is to move School Board Member elections to the November General Election cycle and shorten terms from five to four years. It proposes cost savings, but fails to identify solutions for newly created problems. My opposition is based on the following concerns: The establishment of school board elections during the general election puts the school board elections in a political arena. o Even if the names are not included in the partisan lists, the elections will become a part of the partisan political process. This bill creates a biennial election process whereby a quorum of most boards are up for election one general election and an almost quorum of the board is up for election in the next general election. o The exception to this is in Milford (8 members) and Indian River (10 members) where a quorum of these boards will be up for election each of the two general elections during the 4 year terms, creating opportunity for even more instability. This bill changes the start date of office from July to January. This is particularly problematic for the school districts. o The leadership team of a school district set the goals for the year, according to the strategic plan, for the superintendent and the district in July. This timeline is part of DPAS II regulations. To potentially change a majority of a board in the middle of the year is potentially disruptive to this required process. Lame duck quorums could set policy and agenda absent newly elected members voices. o The budget year begins in July. The final budgets are not known until after the State Budget is passed on June 30th and the September 30th count is finalized by the Delaware Department of Education. With a possible quorum of the boards changing in January, this could create budgetary conflicts in the districts, which could lead to higher costs. Also, lame duck quorums will be placed in a voting position on mandatory budget submissions to the DOE o Administrator contracts begin on July 1st. However, the approval of the renewal of those contracts is done in December. A lame duck quorum could be placed in the conflicted position of voting on contracts that will be honored after their departure while newly elected members are disenfranchised. State Law governs administrator renewal timelines.

Representative Edward Osienski June 8, 2012 Page 2

The issue that more people will be voting in a general election does not adequately address that they will be better informed on educational issues when all of the other elections are vying for voter attention. The movement to the general election will create more expensive campaigns, for this unpaid position. o Under the current system with school board campaigns in May, the focus is entirely on education. Despite the recent introduction of 501(c)(4) PAC money, these off cycle elections are the best way to moderate their disproportionate moneyed influence as witnessed in New Castle County this year. o Most of the forums for school board elections are held through the district PTAs/PTOs. The November election fractionalizes the ability to host these forums because of the splintered focus of other general election races. In many districts the polling places for the state legislature and the local board members seat are not in the same school district. Despite the fact that there is no formal fiscal note on this bill, there will be a cost to overlay the school district residencies with the electoral districts and to enable the voting machines to process these votes that outweighs the seeming intuition of combining them.

The above list is not complete and merely represents some of the more glaring aspects of this legislation. The current 5 year term assures stability by preventing wholesale complete quorum change. Imagine the disruption and disarray if HB 360 becomes law and we insert constant instability and big money campaigns into our communities who seek what they wish for their students: stable, caring, sound learning environments. I ask you to oppose this bill on principles of stability and fairness of school based processes mentioned above and not allow the laudable, but unproven goal of higher voter turnout leading to better outcomes. The tradeoffs are too much for our schools.

Sincerely,

John M. Young
John M. Young