Paul Baumbach On Status Of Potential School Board Member Removal Bill

I reached out to Delaware State Representative Paul Baumbach on the proposed legislation that would remove a school district board member under certain conditions.  I haven’t seen a bill pre-filed so I thought I would ask the sponsor.  This is what he had to say:

Multiple parties are working on alternative paths to follow when a complaint arises. I am giving each time to develop these alternatives. The holidays meant that little progress has happened thus far. I believe that there is a problem, even if the problem is in optics. I offered one ‘solution,’ and am open to other solutions. As long as there is progress in creating proposed solutions, I plan to hold off on filing anything.

Short and sweet, that is where the bill is at this time.

9 thoughts on “Paul Baumbach On Status Of Potential School Board Member Removal Bill

  1. “I believe there is a problem” I’m sorry that does not cut it and Rep. Baumbach (in my personal meeting with him) provided absolutely no examples of problems that were imminent or probable. He was unwilling to give me any reasonable hypothetical or conjecture and that would negate any reason for this legislation to be pursued or supported. If the problem is “optics” I would suggest that “mirages” are problems with “optics” and also merit little/no legislative action. We have had numerous elected State Senators (Vaughn and Adams) and House members (Rep. Peterman) who have missed almost entire sessions due to various medical ailments and committee members who never attend committee meetings without any clamor to impose a process for their removal. This somewhat feverish impulse to challenge and police a duly elected yet unpaid branch of government (school boards) demands an explanation as to motive and agenda from the sponsor not some ethereal, hypothetical imagining.
    Representative John Kowalko

    Liked by 2 people

  2. The term of the school board members is too long. 1/2 of members should be voted upon at each general election cycle, just like State Representatives, in the November general elections, By Law!

    The idea that members represent an area “district”” within a School District means you get to vote for only one person out of a group of seven, that spends your tax money, every six years! That is not representation. Add to that Special Interests run candidates and they don’t follow the interests of the tax payers.

    New idea, tax stock holdings, just like property. Why do folks with a miniscule non-productive property have to carry the burden of mass education?

    Like

    • What Not, I think you are misinformed. 1) Most terms are five years. 2) There are districts that have at-large seats. 3) Even in districts without at-large seats, every eligible vote in the district gets to vote in every school board election. Yes, candidates must come from a prescribed geographical area to ensure equal representation; however, that does not effect who can vote. Again, every eligible person can. The reality is that in most districts there are elections every year which means you have a vote every year.

      Like

      • First and most important, we need to have school business, referendums and SB, brought up only on the first Tuesday of November on the general ballot. The current system of hiding these elections from the Public is not acceptable. There is a great cost to hold Special Elections and they are not held to acceptable standards, such as, registered voters and bribe-free conduct by the schools. Red Clay is spending Millions of tax payer dollars to defend its illegal actions in the last Referendum.

        We shouldn’t need to have SB candidates from areas within a District. It is time to return to homologous local Districts. Each member is spending our money.

        Liked by 1 person

        • “The current system of hiding these elections from the Public is not acceptable. ” How is this done? Do you not know about the elections every year?

          Minus the referendum case, how have elections not been held to “acceptable standards”? Those who vote aren’t registered voters?

          “We shouldn’t need to have SB candidates from areas within a District.” So seven SB members from Hockessin would know the precise issues that face students and schools from the city?

          I think you are a bit off, What Not.

          Like

          • Steve,
            Referendums ARE hidden especially in their first attempts. The districts purposely keep the flow of information about the referendums low and distributed predominantly to district students only so as to not raise awareness to the majority of the district. YOU KNOW THIS IS TRUE. Only when the referendum fails, do the districts reset and begin a process to fully communicate their intentions. Then we get the guilt line ‘it’s for the children’ and ‘we’ll have to cut teachers’ if we don’t pass this. Well guess what, putting lipstick on a pig doesn’t get us Kate Upton or Hugh Jackman. We keep getting sales pitches of lipstick instead of a P90x workout regimen to get the district lean, strong and productive.

            Referendum notices should be sent to every resident 1-2 months in advance of the vote date with a full accounting and audit of the district. Subsequent votes should not be allowed until the following year. NO MORE, “let’s hold votes until we get it passed.” How about the districts do their homework, validate their answers and prove they have exhausted every other option before coming to taxpayer with their hand out. School board members shouldn’t even be allowed to authorize a resident vote until the district and its administration has proven their case beyond a shadow of a doubt.

            No School board member should be seated until 51% of eligible voters have voted. They need to require a minimum quorum because 300 votes doesn’t cut it. This would be a perfect reason to hold school board elections on election nights with other elected officials.

            The residents are owed reasonable education for their children. Reasonable is not 20%-30% pass rates on standardized tests. If School board members are incompetent, there should be an easy recall method to allow a vote of no confidence. I would argue it should require less votes than to get elected but NOT our current benchmark of only 300-500 votes to get on the board.

            Like

  3. Facman, you are way off. You defend the messy way we exert control over our tax money in inefficient education systems. I worked at the polls for the last RC referendum. People are allowed to vote without being registered with only the slimmest proof of residence, a piece of mail etc.
    Students informing parents seems to be the District’s preferred method of notification for upcoming votes. If reaching the tax paying public was a priority, they would sync their election voting with the general elections.
    Our gerrymandered Districts do not make sense, but we have come to accept the absurdity of paying our “local” tax into a system that is not the slightest bit “local”. Bring back neighborhood schools. It is not necessary to travel to get a good education and that is all the Public is really on the hook for. You want Choice, Charter or another fancy whim, let the State pay for it, they authorized that.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.