Second of two parts
Re “How Siever Proved the Skeptics Wrong”
[img]737|left|Prof. Siever||no_popup[/img] As one of the least knwn candidates in the large field for this month's election to the School Board, Prof. Pat Siever said she had one overriding impulse:
“To get my name out there in front of the community and keep it there.”
“Through mailers and the telephone, we tried to keep in constant contact with the community,” she said, “because they didn't know my name.”
Between a well-funded, aggressive organization with an impressive wingspan and a tireless candidate, Prof. Siever roared home with the third and final seat two weeks ago tonight. She defeated the more widely known activist Alan Elmont.
Fairly or not, she had to sell her credentials to voters because critics, and there was not a shortage, implied she was insufficiently in touch with the School District. She is a college prof, they said, smarmily.
The skeptics took a beating, it turned out. She had logic on her side – she has been an educator all of her life. Who could have been better qualified? “People started looking at my qualifications after I said a few times that 'Education is education,'” the West Los Angeles College history professor said.
Wide Board Experience
She seasoned her resume characterizations with repeated emphases on her broad experience as a member of civic and community college boards, a specific area where she far outdistanced all rivals.
“People looked at my qualifications and experience, and they agreed with me,” she said. “That was a key difference. This was not a City Council race. This was a School Board race. That is what I am qualified for.”
As a successful first-time candidate, Prof. Siever said she genuinely enjoyed the heat and dust and ferocity of the campaign where some punches ranged south of the belt.
“I enjoyed meeting people,” she said. “And I learned a lot from my fellow candidates. I don't have anything against any of them.”
She paused to gain a more precise grasp on her feelings about running for office when there are twice as many candidates as there are available seats.
“In a weird, strange way,” Prof. Siever said with a middle-sized laugh, “I really enjoyed it. It was an up-and-down kind of thing. But that is okay. When it was over, I felt calm.”
Keeping Pledges
Before her victory became official, she said she was confident that “people are not voting for ideology. They are voting for schools and for our children.
“Right now, we have two attorneys on the School Board. I am not saying that is not good. But you have to have someone who understands about boards-manship, about budgets.
“From what I saw at the candidate forums, a lot of them did not understand that the School Board sets policy. They said it, but they criticized the Superintendent. Well, the Superintendent works for the Board. If you are criticizing the Superintendent, I ask, 'What are your goals and objectives?' Especially in the next two years, with our budget problems, you're going to have to set goals and objectives. Then the Board will be measured at the end of the year, by the public. How have they done?
“We, as Board members, are accountable to the people. The children are our future.
“When we start talking about the budget, I am going to suggest that, in order to avoid layoffs, we suspend COLA, the Cost of Living Adjustment, for two years. The SEIU has just done that. Mayor Villaraigosa caused them to do it.”
During the campaign, Prof. Siever suggested that retirement incentives be offered as another means to lighten the payroll. “If we have teachers making $100,000 a year, we offer them an attractive bonus package,” she said. “If that person is replaced by someone making $50,000, you won't have to lay off teachers.
“I promised voters that I would bring creativity and accountability to the Board,” said Prof. Siever. “That is what I intend to do.”
