If you read Sunday’s editorial regarding the Caldwell School District and the recall election for two of its trustees scheduled for Nov. 3, you may find yourself experiencing deja vu as you read this one.
While the comparisons between the goings on in Caldwell and the West Ada School District aren’t completely parallel, there are many similarities, and they provide an opportunity to evaluate what recall elections should — and, more importantly, should not — be about.
Both districts had superintendents that by most accounts were liked and respected — Tim Rosandick in Caldwell, Linda Clark in West Ada (Meridian). But it turns out there has been discord between the elected, non-paid school board members and the superintendents, and when the trustees changed the superintendents’ contracts, supporters of the latter became furious and are demanding retribution.
While Caldwell patrons haven’t gotten a reason for the disharmony there, we do know the source of the friction in West Ada. Clark has criticized for speaking and focusing on statewide issues; some say she should focus more on her own district. Other board members see her as a big spender; they removed a testing director position costing $100,000 and said it as an unnecessary expense, and the perks on her contract have also raised some critical eyebrows.
The primary impetus behind an effort to recall four of the five board members stems from a Sept. 15 vote they took to void the 2017-18 year on Clark’s contract. They say they did so because the board violated Idaho open meeting law on June 23 by extending Clark’s deal without giving public notice and by discussing it in executive session. Recall proponents claim that’s just a lame excuse to mask the fact that the trustees just don’t like Clark and are seizing on any opportunity they can find.
School board members aren’t elected to say nice things about superintendents and give them whatever they want. They are elected to make choices they believe are in the best interest of the kids who walk through those schoolhouse doors every day. They hire and fire the superintendents based on that very simple principle.
Do you LOVE local news? Get Local News Headlines in your inbox daily.
Thanks! You'll start receiving
the headlines tomorrow!
If the West Ada trustees believe Clark’s contact extension was approved in violation of the law — and there’s every reason to believe it was — then good for them. They shouldn’t be recalled for being sticklers for the law.
But even if the contract was approved legally and they just want to remove Clark for philosophical reasons, they’re perfectly entitled to do so. There’s nothing unethical or unprincipled about it.
Recall elections shouldn’t be conducted because you don’t like how a public official votes. They should be reserved for unethical conduct. Recalling school board members for the reasons given in Caldwell and Meridian would be akin to recalling members of the Idaho Legislature because you don’t like the vote they took on the “Add the Words” bill.
As long as our public officials are making a good-faith effort to conduct their business ethically, they deserve the right to govern as they see fit for the rest of their terms. If you don’t like the way they’re doing it, toss them out in the next election.
— Phil Bridges
Our editorial board: Our editorials are based on the majority opinions of our editorial board. Not all opinions are unanimous. Members of the board are Publisher Matt Davison, Opinion Editor Phil Bridges and community members Gretchen Quarve, Rick Hogaboam, Dee Sizeland and Matt Andrew. Editor Scott McIntosh is a nonvoting member.
