Opinion: School Board incumbents should be upfront to voters

These past few weeks we have read campaign literature pieces and the FranklinNOW pre-election questions to the Franklin School Board candidates. What I find frustrating is the repeated use of school improvements and working with administration or fellow Board members to get things done as reasons why two incumbents, Janet Evans and Aimee Schlueter, should be re-elected on April 7th. Those talking points are questionable at best.

If the incumbents want to tout improvements to Franklin High School, for example, then perhaps they should have voted in favor of allowing you, the voters, to cast a ballot for or against the referendum. Instead, the remaining School Board members, not the two incumbents on the ballot, had to carry the referendum forward - a referendum that was successful in allowing the district to carry out improvements to FHS facilities, and added on a needed Performing Arts Center for our community. How one can ask for your vote to re-elect them based on positive projects that occurred IN SPITE OF, not because of, their support blows my mind.

Additionally, it's highlighted that under Janet Evans' leadership as Board President, Franklin has seen one of the "most cohesive Boards" in history. That might be the case, but it isn't due to Evans' leadership. Looking at her record, Evans is much more in-line to cast a NO vote, or be less cohesive, than any other Board member. While she has been elected and re-elected as Board President, I question why this occurs since the School Board and Evans have differences of opinion on, well, a LOT of issues. A Board President is supposed to be a solid representative of the views of the Board as a whole, not a singular minority on issues.

While Franklin voters can appreciate a fiscal conservative leading the good fight on responsibility and holding the line on district spending, there's a strong need to find someone who has that philosophy and won't be a regular NO vote that, after some time, simply becomes an unreliable vote for anything that needs to be brought forward. Have your NO votes mean something, not just a staple to obtain brownie points for the conservative base with no substance behind it. For the record, Schlueter has been better on this issue than Evans.

I offer this for future reference: don't vote NO on things that you're later going to champion as issues you helped achieve for the district just to convince voters who don't know the wiser to think you're a solid candidate. That only questions your overall integrity as a candidate and as a continued Board member if you do, in fact, get re-elected.