I would love to see a way where pressure could be put on the Oregonian and the other papers to make sure that “how much money have you raised” is not part of the criteria that they will use to judge candidates. We really need to have school board members that are effective board members and policy makers – not effective as individual fundraisers.

I spoke with Stand for Children about doing a workshop(s) on the role of the School Board, running a campaign, etc. soon after the last election. I think either Stand or someone needs to take some leadership on identifying and supporting potential school board members. Would the League of Women Voters be interested?

I wonder if this next election may not be different again – in that there is a general(mis)perception that things are much improved with PPS… for the folks I know that do not have kids (that pesky 80% of Portland’s population) it is so interesting to see how short the short term memory is… recently someone said to me – “I know there was trouble with those K-8 schools… but I think that has all been fixed… right?”

I take a deep breath… and start educating the 80% one more time…

Asking 1,000 people to use their $50 credit would be just as much work as the current system – if not more. I still think public financing is the way to go.

I had a mix of a few big donors, a whole bunch of small donors in the $25-50-100 range, and a ton of volunteers/in-kind donations. The crazy part was not deciding to run until February so it was truly a race to the finish. But I’ll save that for the workshop….

Toni’s already got my vote!

Re. public financing, we can virtually roll our own, to a small extent, by encouraging people to use the $50 Ore. income tax credit — that’s credit, not deduction — to donate. This means every Oregon taxpayer can effectively take $50 ($100 for couples filing jointly) directly from the state treasury and give it to a campaign.

With a focus on raising $50 from 1000 people, a campaign could get $50,000 of public funds at no net expense to the donors. And who knows what could happen if you coupled this with a $5 – $10 internet campaign.

Also, Ruth is right about Stand not giving her campaign money.

But she did take $500 from Stand’s board chair and benefactor, Gun Denhart; $250 from Portland School Foundation’s then-executive director Cynthia Guyer; and $6,000 from Rosemary Lewin, a major donor to PSF.

There can be no doubt that the endorsement of Stand helps open some big wallets, and it is indisputable that the candidate who spends the most money wins in the overwhelming majority of cases.

Toni, Zone 2 is up for election in 2011. You finish early at Scripps and come back to Portland.

If I had chosen to attend Reed or Portland State, etc. I would run for the board myself!

*Very well put, Ruth.

*This is out of my heart as being on the board is a VOLUNTEER position. Remember that folks. They don’t HAVE to do this, they do it because they want to.

Having collected a bunch of signatures/$5 forms on behalf of a publicly funded candidate, I am a firm believer in the model. Plus, of course, it removes any issues about candidates potentially being beholden to powerful contributors.

Speaking of which, I would like to correct a misstatement in earlier comments. I did not receive a dime from Stand for Children, nor from the Foundation’s PAC. Doug and I did get the dual endorsement from both orgs which of course was helpful, but I received no financial or organizational help from either group.

I would love to see someone organize a community forum for people who are even potentially interested in running for school board, with info and Q&A with board members, campaign experts, etc. both to get the scoop on the job and tips on how to run.

As for the zone model- I think it’s actually a good way to go. Having to run citywide ensures that you are focused on the entire district-that is the core of the job, in a nutshell, to be accountable for every single student not just your own part of town. At the same time, while you don’t technically represent your zone, you do have a deeper understanding and connection with your own area that you bring to the table. If there weren’t the zones then we’d run the risk of not getting members from around the city.

The biggest problem I think is that a part-to-full-time, very intense volunteer job is more than most people can afford to undertake so there has tended to be a severe lack of economic diversity. To maintain the independence of the board, I am not sure of the solution, other than some kind of blind trust where a stipend is supplied but one has no idea where the money came from!

I think you got it right when you mentioned the key to winning ” . . . is to mobilize voters in the neighborhoods that are getting screwed.”

I think the reason Schultz had such a good showing is because so many people were pissed at Wynde for his rubber stamping of VP’s policies. And remember –she declared her candidacy late in the game, too. If someone like Lakeitha were to declare her candidacy now, she would have the benefit of getting her name out there and connecting with enough connected people. If she got enough support from people in the right places–and there are ways to make this happen–she might be able to get a Stand endorsement. Though I am not a Stand member, I know a lot of good people in my community who are, that are open to giving candidates a forum. In other words, approach Stand at a grass roots level in your own community and work your way up the ladder.

Remember that both Ruth Adkins and Doug Morgan had Stand’s endorsement.

Ruth was excellent at organizing at the grass roots level. Her fliers had listed names of her supporters that just about anyone in one’s own individual community knew personally.

Another thing Ruth did very well was to attend house parties. She got to know people in the community, drum up a few bucks, hand out lawn signs, and gather support.

I think we are being too pessimistic. This is doable! Steve R. is right on with his recommendation of mobilizing people in the neighborhoods that got screwed.

The organizational structure and the commitment has to be big time to have any chance. We would need about $150,000 and tons of volunteers to hit the streets as well as organize coffees, events, and the people who are somewhat disgruntled and active in the schools. This means hundreds of hours for the candidates and huge numbers of hours for the main cadre of volunteer leaders. Who’s in??

Speaking of slates, the 2003 slate of four was definitely engineered by Stand, PSF, and various ex-school board members. Perhaps even the Portland Business Alliance.

I’m pleased to see that at least some people are beginning to understand the significance of the school board in determining PPS’ educational policies.