I've been looking for some input on this topic, and since this forum is such a wealth of knowledge in so many areas, I thought I may try for some insight here.
If anyone around here works as a school administrator, or is familiar with the requirements of such a job - How much time / knowledge do you think a school superintendent needs to give to matters of the state legislature and funding? Funding for schools where I live (Ohio) has been messed up for a long time, and has been an issue always complained about, but never fixed. The school district where I live has an operating budget levy on the ballot on Tuesday. For a number of reasons, for the first time in my life, I'm torn on how to vote on this one. I have ALWAYS voted in favor of school levies in the past.
So to try to resolve my undecided status, I went this morning to an "ask the superintendent" forum that was open to all city residents. I was pleased with what I heard in a few areas, but very very bothered by the superintendents apparent utter lack of knowledge of the workings of the state legislature. he kept on talking about how the way to tell the legislature that we demand change in funding was to quit voting the same guys in to office over and over. The only problem is there is not a single incumbant on the ballot in the city where I live for any state office - legislature or executive branch. Term limits have gone into effect which means NO ONE will be giong back to office. So the advice he was giving was outdated and irrelevant.
I walked away thinking that a man who has to spend so much time worrying about state funding, and points to it as the cause of most of his problems should really be involved more in finding ways to DO things about the problems, rather than just talking about them.
Am I being unfair to him with this expectation? Or is it reasonable to think that a superintendent should be aware of, and in contact with, the state legislators who represent the district he runs?