Understandably, the best outcome for any public body is to have good candidates, who become good incumbents, who then produce good policy. This should be obvious to anyone: candidates, residents, bloggers, etc.
A next-best outcome would be the opportunity to draw clear contrasts between good policy and bad, so much the better to illustrate alternatives.
When that next-best outcome is so predictable – from the greatest possible distance – it’s that much better.
Other than the rising of the sun each morning, there could be nothing in town more predictable than that the Whitewater Unified School Board seats would be uncontested, and that Jim Stewart would be running for one of them. I’ve previously written about Mr. Stewart’s 2015 candidacy.
As a policy matter, just about anyone else would have been a better choice than Mr. Stewart; as a matter of drawing contrasts between good policy and bad, his tenure will offer a three years’ long opportunity to do so. (A cynical blogger – and I’m not – would have entitled this post Christmas Comes Again, in January.)
Big-spending but anti-labor is probably the worst policy position for Whitewater, but a political legacy of that sort offers the next-best thing for others to draw clear distinctions between good policy and bad.
There are difficult choices ahead for the Whitewater Schools (and other districts), although they can be managed.
What circumstances don’t offer in candidates they will in commentary.
It’s easy to see how you see this as an opportunity. the two of you have nothing in common except both having websites. Jim’s not a bad guy but he really lacks a big picture perspective. Craving being at the center of things is not the same as being talented but he doesn’t get that. He’s not in the same league. People who share his ideas really really could have used a different spokesman.
As a “town squire’ under the Free Whitewater definition I can positively say that the school board needs younger candidates with new approaches on issues. (Agree with you completely about the digester plus a few things. Disagree with you about a lot of others.)
Totally agree about the not in same league comment. (I can say for sure that Stewart does not see it that way. That is part of the problem.)
almost like you paid to have it go like this
I’m curious about something – why doesn’t Stewart’s running seem to bother you as much as last year?
Hi Alex. Thanks for your comment. As a policy matter his candidacy is as uncompelling as last year, but as a political matter he won’t change the ideological composition of the board this year as he would have done by taking a seat in 2015. Each year isn’t the same; timing counts for much. A win last year would have been an affirmation of at least some of his views, and a shift in the board’s philosophical composition. Neither will be true now: his incumbency will produce no ideological change, and winning against no one is an ideological affirmation of nothing.
Unfortunately, with an uncontested race there is little, if any discussion of the significant issues facing K-12 public education. It should not be easy, and it is unfortunate for constituents, that incumbents / candidates run for office without opposition. The limited coverage when races are contested will now be nil. There are important differences between the current board and past boards.
Yes, I agree. Our landscape is different locally, and so much has become challenging even in the last three to five years on the policy side for many communities in Wisconsin.
It’s not easy to be on a board/committee. The mix of people matters a lot. It’s very sensible to keep writing about events separate from being on a committee. It’s mature to keep the roles apart. People respect it when a person picks one role not a bunch. Free Whitewater gets credibility since people know that you are writing but not trying to get yourself into office. It’s hard for other people on a committee when one person wants both roles so much.
I have always believed in the separation of the two, especially in a small town. I am contented in my role, knowing it’s one of many equal possibilities within a diverse city.
I have always believed in the separation of the two, especially in a small town. I am contented in my role, knowing it’s one of many different possibilities within a diverse city.
I am buddies with “Mr. Anonymous” and “Attendee”.
Please don’t blame us for this one, John.
It wasn’t our idea!
Hi A Town Squire. Thanks for your comment. I promise to keep that in mind. 🙂