The issue is that it's self-referential. The org itself gets to define what is good management or bad. Outsides parties, have no say.
And that's how local school boars work. They are local politics and they have very little external oversight, if any at all. Sort of criminal acts, like a board member embezzling school funds, that violate state law, there isn't really much criteria over which they can be held accountable, other than winning votes from their local voters.
I live in Boston. I can harp all I want about a local school board in TN, but the only power I have is over my own local school board here, where I can vote. And man the candidates we have... are usually a mix of nutbags and slightly less nutbags. School board elections tend to attract weirdos more than sensible people, IME.
You are captured by the false media narrative that you are one thing or the other.
The vast majority of voters are neither far right or far left. They are moderate. However, moderate people dont' get any airtime because the extremists here, and everywhere else, paint everyone as either FOR or AGAIN things.
Moderate voters went for Trump because he offered them a better platform to vote for, especially economically. And Trump's tanking now that his policies are showing to be horrible. But he has 2.5 more years in office.
the judgement is the judgement voters of that district.
do you vote in your own local school board elections? I do, and yeah you vote based on the person's policy stated positions. however, just because I do that, doesn't mean lots of candidates I don't vote for, don't get elected and push policies I don't agree with... because they get more votes than the candidates I vote for did.
Also, why do you assume that the voters in this school district, don't want this guy? He may very well be who they think is best for the job. If you don't live in this district... you don't get to vote for the school board there.
the issue is that people who are far right, are far more likely to run for office than moderate candidates are. and run better campaigns, and win more votes.
there is no test to run for, or be on a school board.
what would this test be, exactly? are you saying school board members should have to pass a civil service type of test before they can run, or after they are elected?
I have no idea what you are saying now. You're saying, you should dictatorially be given the power to appoint school board members, and you'd do so solely on a first come, first given, basis?
OK, so you are saying you want to be a dictator of school board members, because you are the one who should have sole authority in this area. And you would not judge people based on qualifications or merit?
Seriously, do you even vote in your local school board elections? I do. If so, what criteria do you use? I vote according to the educational platform they propose.
None of that has anything to do with merit of qualifications that are hypothetically being raised as criteria for evaluating a school board member's performance or competency.
It's not demanding answers, it's pointing out the typical lemmy/reddit hypocracy of sitting on a illusory high horse, getting outraged, and refusing to actually deal with the problem on your local level where you do have the ability to make a difference.
or if you want to be really extreme, you could move to this district in TN and run for school board yourself.
My local school board anyone can run. The only requirement is you are a resident of the district you represent, and you are over 18, and you are a registered voter. That's literally it. There are no other requirements, qualifications, or criteria for running for school board.
It's in the institutions best interest to cover it up. It is not in their interest to be transparent.
Institutions, made of people, are just like people, in that they pursue their self-interest first and foremost. Morality, the law, and all that is ultimately secondary.
And the self-interest primarily for orgs, like most people, is to protect their image at all costs, including the cost of allowing abusers to continue to be into them, as long as it isn't publicly visible and it's plausibly deniable.
my biggest complaint about the liberal/left is they will do anything but take charge. they seem to love sitting around and quarter backing and demanding someone else do something in their name... and a lot of them don't even vote, because 'what is the point'.
you don't get out much do you?
most every society is obsessed with youth and sex. when i the last time you saw a billboard with a sexy 70 year old advertising you something?