On Feb. 18, the school board voted to keep Board of Education elections in May.
Eight Oakland districts recently moved their elections to November, but, despite the county trend, the board voted on the resolution without any opposition.
‘The push, especially in our county, is to move every [election] to November,? Orion Superintendent Ken Gutman said.
Why the push?
To pinch pennies, of course.
Since 2005, the district’s spent anywhere between $11,000 and $36,000 to run May elections.
Moving it to November and aligning it with the general election would nearly eliminate school election costs.
But the board believes a May election is still the way to go.
School Board President Bill Walters feels that, even at the increased cost to the district, the money is being well spent.
‘If that’s the price of democracy, I think it’s a valid use of the money,? he said.
Superintendent Gutman thinks that with better planning, the election costs could go back to a more reasonable amount.
Before 2005, when new state legislature dictated local clerks conduct school elections, the district was only spending around $5,000.
‘I think you can save money holding the election in any month,? he said.
According to Boardmember Bob Gritzinger, simply cutting back on the number of polling places open would greatly reduce costs.
‘When the district conducted its elections, we opened up an appropriate number of precincts for a school election,? Gritzinger said.
Gritzinger said the drastic rise in cost came when clerks began opening every polling place for voting instead of the board’s traditional two or four ? a number more appropriate for the smaller voter turnout.
But shouldn’t the board aim for better turnout numbers, as might be the case during the general. election?
Gritzinger believes educated-voter turnout would be the same no matter when the election.
And the school board president agrees.
‘People would vote blindly, if they vote at all,? said Walters. ‘There’s no valid gain to throwing everyone in at the November election.?
Gutman and Walters each added that board candidates and school issues can easily get buried on a ballot under presidential and state-wide matters.
‘The May election puts the issues where the voters can find them,? Walters said.
Gritzinger is concerned about possible political obstacles like campaign contributions and party alignment if the board moved the election date.
‘We believe that school election voters deserve to have school issues stand alone ? not politicized, not polluted by partisan politics,? he said.
Gritzinger also indicated that the small voting numbers for school board elections is because residents don’t want to change out board members.
‘I’d like to think that low voter turnout is because they think we’re doing a good job,? he said.
Walters believes smaller turnout can be explained by a simple math equation.
‘The school population is only around 25 percent, so low voter turnout is appropriate. It’s logical,? he said.
As indicated by public comment in local newspapers, some area residents believe May election turnout is ideal for school board members who can gain a seat simply by asking 40 friends and family to vote for them.
But the board insists otherwise.
‘It’s not intended to be cronyism,? said Walters. ‘We make no effort to hide our issues. Interested people will find out where and when to vote.?
He also says he’d like to see area school districts work cooperatively during elections and set one date outside Nov. for all districts.
‘We’ve been examining this issue for a long time,? said Walters, ‘and we don’t see a benefit in switching to November.?