Getting to the bottom of Westminster’s spat
Thursday, July 17, 2008Written by: Uncle Charley
We all know politics can get ugly. Education politics can get even uglier. Six weeks ago I wrote about the “hornets nest” stirred up in Westminster over the use of school bond money. Today, the Denver Post’s Monte Whaley brings us up-to-date, as two conflicting efforts to recall a total of three school board members—Kevin Massey, Vicky Marshall, and Marilyn Flachman—appear to have blown the lid off the debate:
“It’s appalling what they are doing to this district,” said Dino Valente, who is pushing for the recall of Massey and Marshall.
He said there is an organized campaign to defame Flachman and her supporters through drawings and hate mail.
Massey claims Flachman’s backers also are slinging disinformation around the community to tarnish his and Marshall’s reputation. “A ton of what they are saying is simply untrue,” Massey said.
My goal is not to wade into the acrimonious he-said, she-said, though undoubtedly it would be helpful to get to the bottom of the story. Instead, allow me to take a birds’ eye approach with some thoughts for both sides, in case they have yet to be considered. What do I mean?
To the citizens angry about the decision to spend all the money on Westminster High School and who launched the initial recall: Be careful of getting fixated on the characters rather than the structure. Even if you’re right, the “throw out the bums” approach yields only a temporary salve. Let’s also look constructively at ways to change the governance of our school system, maybe devolving power away from school boards to an even more local form of control—maybe Weighted Student Funding, with greater school-level autonomy and parental choice.
To the board majority’s defenders launching the counterattack: If you are in the right, it would be best to look beyond the current heated dispute as much as possible. Think about the vital interests and the potentially loud voice of taxpayers now on display, and how such anger might have been averted with greater transparency. From more detail on budget line items to more open access to the decision-making process, ponder how the high ground attained from this sort of policy could strengthen your defense and your case for leadership.
Just a few stray thoughts as I read the story this morning. I may be a bit of a rosy-eyed optimist, but it would be very satisfying to see some sort of productive systemic reform move forward as a result of the ongoing dispute in Westminster.
You may say I’m a dreamer…
