School Boards Dealing With Less Commitment

A Drop of Ink

Reed Anfinson, Publisher

Last week, Minnesota Public Radio’s Elizabeth Shockman wrote a story about how school board members across the state serve far less time today than in the past.
It is ironic that her story was published now. September is Minnesota School Board Recognition Month. “This year’s statewide theme, ‘Minnesota School Boards Help Minnesota Kids Rise,’ capitalizes on the state’s new campaign and celebrates the essential role locally elected school boards play in helping students achieve their highest potential,” a news release from the Minnesota School Boards Association says.
“School board members volunteer countless hours to lead one of our community’s most important responsibilities — providing students with a high-quality public education that prepares them for success in college, careers, and life. Their leadership helps create learning environments where students are challenged, supported, and inspired to grow,” it says.
Those words emphasize the tremendous responsibility that goes with serving on a school board. Yet fewer people are willing to take it on and, if they do, stick around seeking reelection to multiple terms.
“We are seeing school board members’ terms shrink,” Kirk Schneidawind, executive director of the Minnesota School Boards Association, told Shockman. In the past, it wasn’t unusual for school board members to serve 12 to 16 years, but now that number has been halved to eight years or less.
We should thank those who have served for any length of time.
School boards and the citizens of a school district pay a cost when they are educated in school financing challenges, state-mandated educational requirements, student needs, shifting sports cooperative memberships, and policies to stem student loss to open enrollment leave. It means school board members with experience negotiating with employee union organizations are no longer at the table.
All that lost knowledge and experience erodes the depth of knowledge needed to make sound decisions for a school district. It means administrators spend more time educating new members than working with an experienced group that moves established plans and goals forward. Repetition of discussions delays needed action.
What’s behind the falling commitment to serve longer terms on school boards?
One sad fact behind the shorter commitment to serving is generational, Schneidawind suggests. Baby boomers are now between 62 and 80 years old. They have been the foundation of city, county and school district public bodies and committees for decades, serving long terms. Too often, their length of service was due to no one else coming forward from younger generations to take on the responsibility.
Schneidawind also cites increased partisanship - political differences driven by national agendas, which create a more divisive atmosphere on public bodies. Rather than working for the common goal of improved educational opportunities for students, school board meetings can become contentious political confrontations, leading some members to walk away. So far, we’ve not seen a great deal of that in our area rural school districts.
Having covered school board meetings for several decades, we see other stresses coming into play that may lead to shorter service for school board members.
Too often in the past, school boards, along with other public bodies, have put off decisions to renovate, update, or expand buildings. With each passing year, the needs become more pressing and more expensive. School boards then go to the voters seeking a building levy referendum, but every year they get feedback saying, “This isn’t the year to do that. The economy isn’t good, farm prices are low, and the future is uncertain.”
Still, school boards recognize the need, move forward, and then see the referendum fail and the building deteriorate further.
School boards facing higher operating costs due to inflation, with years of state funding not keeping pace, see budget shortfalls looming. Declining enrollment due to a shrinking rural population and smaller family sizes makes it worse. Each child in the school district is worth roughly $8,000 to $9,000 in government funding. Lose 10, and you lose a teacher and maybe a program. Meanwhile, the state Legislature puts increasing demands on school districts without funding the new responsibilities.
To avoid a budget shortfall and ensure students get a good education, school boards vote to seek an operating levy referendum. Again, they are told this is not the right time to ask for more money. Faculty members are let go, programs cut, and sports opportunities reduced.
It’s a demoralizing cycle for school board members. We’ve watched as they have walked through a budget, making increasingly difficult cuts – everything under consideration affects the quality of education kids in the district will get.
School board members who are business owners can feel the repercussions of voting for a tax increase by losing customers. Employers who once supported an employee may suggest that employee not run for reelection.
Schneidawind also suggests people may be too busy to commit to a school board.
“People have more things that they want to do in their lives, right? And I think most people will find out that serving on the school board isn’t just showing up for two meetings a month. There’s a lot of work on the committee level, community-relations level that requires more time from our school board members,” Shockman quotes him.
People have always had other things to do rather than volunteer their time serving their community. It is a poor excuse for most. In the past, those committed to improving their schools, cities, and counties stepped up to serve. We stand on the foundation of their sacrifices today. We also find there are a lot of critics on the sidelines who have never offered their time.
We seem to be a less civic-minded society today, one that is more self-involved than community-minded.
Community newspapers help bring a community together, creating a sense of shared challenges and responsibilities. With their loss, no one will tell the story of our schools, their value and challenges, and participation on school boards will fall off even more.