Here we go again. Is it too soon to be talking about an election again? Sure on CNN they are always talking about the next election, but Clarkston usually has other things going on.
As the saying goes, history does often repeat itself. While there’s nothing unusual about the school election schedule, what seems unusual is how few people turnout, both in voters and in candidates.
A few more voters may have turned out for last year’s election than usual, but hardly anything worth getting excited over. The likely factor in increased turnout was the millage proposal, which effectively dictated a large part of the district’s funding for the next decade.
This year, however, no such proposal exists, giving voters even less reason to show up at the polls in May. Are school board elections that insignificant to 90 percent of the local population? Do only 10 percent of residents account for the 8000 students in the district? Of course not, but perhaps this cycle of voter apathy explains the lack of candidates as well.
Just like last year, the deadline to file for the open school board seat is quickly approaching and nobody has thrown their hat into the ring. As things currently stand, Barry Bomier will run unopposed and nobody is running to fill the seat that will be open after John Koval leaves.
If history likes to repeat itself very quickly, then I fear we’ll see another round of last minute applicants. While so far I think Joseph Armstrong is fitting in well in his trustee position, it was disheartening to see both he and his opponent Renata Erickson both filed at the last minute in 2006 and only after seeing that no one else had.
There have to be a few people out there who care enough about the future of the district to get actively involved.
Speaking of elections, I predicted back in November that the senior center millage would fail, but in less than a year we’d be hearing about it again. Well, two months later, the issue is back in the forefront.
Prior to the November election, we got bombarded with letters from people sharing their opinion on the matter, and a majority of them seemed to wonder when proponents of the new center will accept that voters were against it. Likewise, I wonder when opponents of the millage/new center will accept that proponents will not stop until they get a new building.
This issue will only go away for good when there is a new senior center.
Having visited the current senior center a few times in the last year, I have to agree that a new location is needed.
Voters obviously weren’t supportive of the idea, and maybe it is as simple as changing the plan to a ‘community center? that seniors can use, but hopefully people will get behind this new plan to convert the old school.
The building is currently unused; the cost of fixing it up will be much less than the cost of building a whole new building.
There are always going to be school elections, so there will always be a need for concerned people in the community to step forward and play a role in this community. Likewise, there will always be a need for a senior center, one that is not falling apart, and the community needs to be on board with this plan or it will never go away.