What A Difference A Year Makes

This time a year ago, we were in the midst of two hotly contested School Board races.  In District 2, two challengers came forward in an effort to unseat a five term incumbent.  Further up the Keys in District 3, the incumbent stepped aside and five candidates slugged it out for that open seat.

Week in and week out, the candidates appeared at forums from Key West to Key Largo and back.  In one and two minute increments, the challengers attempted to both answer questions and lay out their vision for the future of the School District.

What I find most interesting about that campaign is how all of the issues so important last August were somehow ignored or forgotten after the election.  What was so critical in August quickly evaporated.

For example, take the question of school based management.  For Ed Davidson, it was a veritable mantra at the heart of his candidacy.   No one really disputed Davidson.  Rather, there was universal agreement that the schools should be more independent in the decision making process and the reins of the central administration needed to be loosened.

From what I can tell today, nothing has changed.  We have a new superintendent, but he manages things from Trumbo Point much as his predecessors did.  Davidson sits on the Board today, but I am unaware of any initiatives that he has fathered to foster greater autonomy in the schools.

The need for planning, especially financial planning, was central to my campaign.  Michael Cunningham vigorously adopted planning in his appeal to voters and the other candidates joined him.  After all, who could oppose planning?

The closest we have come to planning this year has been the Superintendent’s abortive Strategic Plan.  There has been lots of sound and fury, lots of meetings, but no Strategic Plan.  Similarly, the Superintendent promised a budget plan by April 1 as part of his contract with the School Board, but the upcoming budget is another product of smoke and mirrors, not a plan.

Improved and expanded vocational education was another frequently discussed area in need of improvement.  Sloan Bashinsky was especially keen on this subject, but everyone endorsed the idea.

The focus of discussion was often on why Coral Shores High school had such diversity of offerings and sizeable enrollment.  The simple answer was that CSHS operated on a seven period day whereas the other two high schools only provided six periods.  Interesting to me, this discrimination never gained much traction with voters.  Perhaps that is why the coming school year will witness the same arrangement, seven periods at Coral Shores High School and six at Marathon High School and Key West High School.

Another compelling topic at the forums and elsewhere was decentralizing the administrative apparatus by moving offices out of Key West and distributing them throughout the District much as the county has done.  Marathon High School and Sugarloaf School were identified as prime candidates for receiving administrators, who could operate almost anywhere in the electronic age.  Marathon High School, in particular, has whole wings closed.

Jesus Jara showed some interest in this concept, occasionally working out of Marathon High School and Coral Shores High School.  Conversely, Mark Porter has not expressed any desire despite encouragement by Ed Davidson.  It looks like the ESE Department is moving to Sugarloaf School.  Whether that is a singular step or the first of many remains to be seen.  Hope springs eternal.

Speaking of Marathon, another oft discussed subject was Marathon Manor, a multi-million dollar fiasco purchased by the District when the School Board decided that it was going to have to provide subsidized housing in order to attract teachers. This one-time nursing home is slowly deteriorating like Hickory House with its sole purpose being a sewage treatment plant for Marathon High school in anticipation of tying into the central sewer system.

Andy Griffiths authored a scheme, endorsed by all, of selling the building rights associated with the structure since no one was interested in purchasing it outright.  Estimates were provided suggesting that the development rights could have a market value in the $2-$3 million range.  With his re-election, Griffiths seems to have lost interest in recouping whatever value there may be in a white elephant and no one has expressed a desire to pursue this opportunity despite the District’s woeful financial condition.

I expect that if I plumbed my memory more I could recall other challenges, as Superintendent Porter might call them, that we tossed about on the campaign trail.  Despite the heightened interest at the time, none has come to fruition.  As important as they seemed then, they are forgotten now.  Kind of makes you wonder why we bothered.

Of course, issues are not the only things that have disappeared since last year’s campaign.  Most of the candidates are also missing.  What has become of Michael Cunningham?  Has anyone seen Howard Hubbard?

I could go on to ask the whereabouts of the others missing in action, but the point is made.  I am not surprised at the disappearance because, with few notable exceptions, these were stealth candidates who had shown no interest in School District affairs before the campaign.  Why should we expect them to act differently after the campaign?