Months of hullabaloo over what trustee area map was best suited for the Morgan Hill Unified School District’s change from an at-large to a by-district election system turned into a seamless decision at Tuesday’s board of education meeting.
Although the vote was not unanimous, with a 5-2 approval for the “Map 1” designation, the trustees erased a vocal group’s fears of reducing the board to five members when they selected the first seven trustee area map among the six choices. There were also three five-trustee area maps under consideration.
MHUSD Trustee David Gerard added some intrigue to the decision when he first voted in opposition to Map 1 along with fellow board members Rick Badillo and Gino Borgioli—who were in favor of the Map 2 designation. However, during the subsequent roll call vote due to the split board, Gerard changed his mind and voted in favor of Map 1, altering the final tally from 4-3 to 5-2. Board President Bob Benevento, Vice President Ron Woolf and Trustees Amy Porter-Jensen and Donna Ruebusch voted in the majority.
And, while the Community Action Coalition members favored Map 2 over Map 1, they were satisfied with the board’s selection since it maintained a seven-member governing body with each current trustee in separate boundary areas.
Resident Sally Cazas supported Map 2 because it was “equitable and fair and offers culturally diverse voter opportunity,” she said.
“Why is this (decision) taking so long?,” questioned CAC spokesman Julian Mancias. “This is a simple matter that could have been taken care of in June. The whole time we were saying go with Map 2 and, if not Map 2, then Map 1.”
The Morgan Hill Federation of Teachers offered their unwavering support to the board of education that they would make the right decision on the trustee map selection.
“We know that you will carefully consider each map and determine which one best fits the needs for our district,” MHFT Officer Terri Eves-Knudsen said. “No matter which map is ultimately chosen, MHFT….will continue to seek out and support school board candidates and incumbents who share our values and our vision for education.”
Last month, the board approved the switch from its traditional at-large election system—in which registered voters can cast ballots for any of the seven trustees whose seats are being contested in an election—to a by-district system. In a by-district system, voters can only cast ballots for a trustee race that falls within their home residence boundary.
That action was prompted by a threat of litigation, in accordance with the California Voting Rights Act, from a group of Hispanic residents calling themselves the Community Action Coalition.
There have been 119 school districts, according to district-hired demographer Doug Johnson, that have been forced to make the same change to allow for better opportunity of a minority candidate being elected.
Along with the trustee area map selection, the board voted 4-3 to initiate a waiver of a request to bypass a special election by the public to approve the election system changes. That vote remained split with Benevento, Woolf, Porter-Jensen and Ruebusch all in favor of the move and Gerard, Borgioli and Badillo against it.
“As a parent and a community member, I want to make it clear that the people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them,” said Badillo, who stepped down from the dais to take the speaker podium and cited a government code from the Ralph M. Brown Act.
“The people insist on remaining informed so they may retain control over the instrument they created,” he continued.
Despite a stern warning from Johnson, considered an expert on the CVRA guidelines, that “if the community votes ‘No,’ you’ll have attorneys here within days, possibly hours filing a lawsuit,” Badillo’s sentiments were supported by Borgioli and Gerard. In all those court cases, Johnson said, the districts were forced to settle, pay in excess of $120,000 and change the election system regardless of the public’s vote.
Borgioli, who agreed the change was necessary but wanted to give the voting public the opportunity to make the decision, remained steadfast in his “faith in this community” to make the right call in a special election.
Porter-Jensen was puzzled by the election waiver claim opposition—which also included four additional public speakers—because the district would be forced to pay an estimated $40,000 of taxpayer money for a special election that could only have one result that didn’t end up in a costly, losing court battle.
“I agree that’s it’s rare (to bypass the public vote) and not ideal, but there’s only one outcome that we can go with on this,” said Porter-Jensen, who made the motion to approve the waiver request that was seconded by Ruebusch and then approved by the board.
Before the two public hearings regarding the election change, there was some jockeying as the original agenda called for a vote on the waiver request and then the selection of the trustee area map. However, backed by a 4-3 vote, the order of the two agenda items was switched so the board first decided on the map.
