First in a series.
Probably for the first time since the School Board election campaign raced a turtle to the starting line in early August – and barely won – one candidate is going to make voters sit up straight when they digest his provocative observations.
First, though, Scott McVarish opened gently.
He reviewed how he and (election) partner Anne Burke dusted off the history books. For the first time in Culver City since the 1970s, two candidates, Ms. Burke and Mr. McVarish, are running as a team, as a joint entry, for the two open seats against Prof. Kelly Kent.
Even though it was a sun-splashed morning at the French Café, ebony clouds huddled at the intersection of Barman and Overland. Hunching low, they began murmuring ominously.
“Kelly Kent’s supporters have been very negative toward both Anne and me in this campaign,” Mr. McVorish, an attorney, charged, merely hinting at what was to come.
With regard to Ms. Burke, his campaign partner, “It has been nice to have a friend when, frankly, you are going through something like that to commiserate with, to help keep you focused.”
Mr. McVarish issued a vow.
“Neither one of us is going to be drawn into the criticisms, the innuendos,” he said, attaching gentlemanly terms to the bushwhacking of him that has become airborne and muscularly ugly.”
An unshakeable edge that the notably confident, exceedingly comprehensively prepared Mr. McVarish holds over his critics is that he doubtless is the most retrofitted candidates. His exterior and interior have been reinforced with a coat of steel, likely borrowed from Superman. Sources say that no matter how deeply his sideline foes plough the field, Mr. McVarish won’t be shaken from his carefully plotted path.
Without appearing a drop overconfident, he is so thorough in his intricate planning that he may be working on his School Board agenda for October 2017 – if elected.
“Anne and I are just going to stay focused,” he said. “We have a very good plan for the School District. We are very experienced with the bond. It is the single most important thing to happen to our District in the last 20 years and in the next 20 years.
“That is it,” said Mr. McVarish. “Voters will judge us on that, and we won’t get sucked up into the hysterics of Kelly’s supporters.”
(To be continued)
I support Kelly Kent, and I’m no hysteric. The emphasis on bond experience by Anne and Scott puzzles me. From my board experience, the only truly knowledgeable bond specialists at our district are consultants hired for their unique skills.
My credentials for joining the board hardly included any financial acumen. My only contributions have been in the areas of student health and safety, as well as curriculum.
Kelly has a substantial support network, a loving contributing family and enough juggling ability to keep many balls (i.e. obligations) in the air at the same time. It’s comforting to know Kelly’s personal and academic background; she measures up as a responsive, kind neighbor. Most impressive are Kelly’s honest responses to questions. At the candidate panels that I’ve attended, she has consistently emphasized the importance of the students and their kindergarten through twelfth grade educational experience.
Bond decisions are important, and board members will need to do a lot of homework to make wise decisions. However, my concerns are the students presently achieving their educations. How will the bond projects interfere with this generation’s educational opportunities? For example, where will AVPA students perform while their performance area is being renovated? These student considerations should always take priority, because we have only this twelve year period within which to prepare our children for their entire lives. To be effective in that role, board members must prioritize the present students’ needs. Kelly will look out for those day to day realities that are essential to the creation of a complete individual.
Over the next four years, board members will likely struggle to keep present students’ needs at the forefront of their decisions. There will be a tendency to try to wrap up the various bond projects to achieve that satisfying, “We did it!” feeling, but the board must temper their decisions with a constant review of, “What is best for the students in our schools, right now?”
Putting students at the forefront of the decisions that we make as a board has been and should continue to be our policy. That position is hardly hysterical.
I hope that I am not a hysteric either, but I am supporting Dr. Kelly Kent, and Anne Burke.
I’ve worked with Kelly on the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission, and have found her to be knowledgeable, prepared and focused. She understands the issues presented and puts a real world perspective on those issues. She’s also incredibly easy to work with, with no ego and a sole focus on doing what is right.
I’ve seen the work of Anne Burke and know that she can be an effective collaborator on any board, including but certainly not limited to the Board of Education. She has the knowledge, drive, desire, and the temperament to not only succeed but to excel as a member of the Culver City Board of Education.
As Nancy points out, the job of a member of the Board of Education involves a multitude of things, including making student considerations the first priority in anything that is done. It’s not about I, I, I, but what a board of five can accomplish to benefit the district. In my opinion, Kelly and Anne are clearly the best equipped to act on such a board.
I’m quite pleased to join others who are willing to engage in a dialogue about policy differences between the candidates. That is the responsibility of all of us as voters and community members.