Evans more qualified to represent Mason District on Fairfax County school board
Next Tuesday, voters will go to the polls to select a school board member to represent Mason District during a critical period. Over the next few months, the Fairfax County school board will be making some tough choices, as it struggles to adopt a balanced budget to close a shortfall of some $176 million.
Of the two candidates, Sandy Evans and Samantha Rucker, the Annandale blogger believes Evans is better qualified for these reasons:
1. Evans has more experience with the Fairfax County Public Schools, and has had extensive experience analyzing FCPS budgets. She is a co-founder of the Fairfax Education Coalition, a group formed to promote accountability, transparency, and community involvement in the FCPS decision making process, and the Start Later for Excellence in Education Proposal (SLEEP), a group formed to promote later start times for middle and high school students. Evans also has served on many school advisory groups and has been a long-time PTA leader and education advocate.
While Rucker is campaigning as a FCPS educator, she has only worked as an instructional assistant at Weyanoke Elementary School from January to August 1993, has done some substitute teaching, has served on a couple of FCPS advisory boards, and is on the board of the Higher Horizons Head Start program.
2. Evans promises be a full-time school board member if elected, while Rucker plans to retain her job as an assistant attorney general in the office of the Virginia Attorney General. That also raises the question of whether Rucker can be an effective advocate for Fairfax County schools, while also serving in the administration of Gov. Robert McDonnell. The governor recently announced a proposal to cut $730 million in K-12 funding as part of a plan to address a $2.1 billion state budget shortfall. Rucker has close ties with the governor and he has been actively campaigning for her.
3. Rucker is a committed conservative ideologue and former leader of the Fairfax County Republican Party, who appears to be positioning herself for a run for state office. Although she has since tried to downplay her participation, Rucker was a speaker at a White House Tea Party rally last April, along with a series of polarizing extremists.
4. Evans has been endorsed by the Fairfax Education Association; Fairfax County Democratic Committee; Rep. Gerry Connolly; House delegates Kaye Kory, David Bolova, Charniele Herring; Mason District Supervisor Penny Gross; FCPS school board members Tina Hone, Ilryong Moon, Jim Raney, Brad Center, and Dan Storck; Fairfax County Federation of Teachers President Mark Glaser; and parent advocacy groups FAIRGRADE and the Fairfax Education Coalition.
In addition to McDonnell, Rucker has been endorsed by former Rep. Tom Davis and Springfield District Supervisor Pat Herrity.
5. The Washington Post’s endorsement of Sandy Evans says she has “more experience and better ideas” than her opponent. “As a leader of an effort to change high school starting times, Ms. Evans spent years scrutinizing the school budget; a result of that work was transportation efficiencies that saved the system millions of dollars. When she talks about cutting administrative costs, she is specific in where she would cut and how much she would save,” the Post editorial states. “Mason is the county’s most diverse area, with the most students coming from low-income families; Ms. Evans speaks knowledgeably of their needs and the importance of the county doing a better job to serve their interests.”
If you are going to be out of town next Tuesday, you can submit an absentee ballot in person tomorrow at the Fairfax County Government Center (12000 Government Center Parkway, Suite 323, in Fairfax), Virginia, 22035 (no voting at the Mason District Govt. Center) from 9 a.m.-5 p.m.
Mrs. Rucker has proudly listed the positions you listed in her campaign literature. Everyone has to start somewhere, so I see nothing wrong with that.
I am aware of other staff at the Attorney General's Office who either currently serve or did serve on their local school boards. I have no doubt that Mrs. Rucker will be able to handle the duties as a member of the School Board (if elected) as well as her job.
Mrs. Rucker is not serving in the McDonnell Administration as he is no longer the Attorney General.
I've had the opportunity of meeting Mrs. Rucker and speaking with her. I don't see where she is looking to run for state office. Her whole focus is serving on the School Board. What about Mrs. Kory — she served on School Board and is now a member of the House of Delegates. Was that said about her when she first ran for School Board — I doubt it.
And as far as the Washington Post endorsement, many have given up on the endorsements by the Wash Post — all you have to do is read the comments on this endorsement in addition to the other special election for the House of Delegates.
Mrs. Rucker is a hard worker and very dedicated in what she does — give her a chance!
I am with the commenter… I am voting for real change… maybe a board member that isn't going to pick families off 200 at a time for boundary changes… or maybe one that won't despise the input of parents… or one that will embrace common sense and reasonable solutions… or one that wont begrudingly abandon starting school later at the absolute demand of the parents, only to start school later for some other reason… the current board embraces the Pelosi style lack of transparency, the Bulova style tax cuts and the Connolly style of spending money… I am voting for change I can believe in! I can't wait to go to the polls next week and it is good bye Connolly in November!
I think there needs to be a serious and honest discussion in this county about at whose expense do we continue to fund the FCPS at the levels wanted by parents.
And that's why I'm leaning towards Rucker
I'm still not sure who I am going to vote for, having concerns about both. I have listened to and talked with both candidates. I will say the Annandale Bloggers reasons for support of Evans strike me as mildly humorous. Since this post is endorsing Evans, my comments will be directed toward that (but I could just as easily list my concerns about Rucker).
1) Evans may have more experience with FCPS but a lot of that comes from her life as an advocate. That may make her more passionate but it does not mean she has better quals.
2) While the lack of 'full time' status concerns me, it might, for a change, be useful to have someone who is tied into Richmond politics on the board since many of the problems FCPS faces are state issues.
3) If the Annandale Blogger was a conservative, this might read something like "Evans is a far left tax and spend liberal…blah…blah…blah". This is the most ridiculous of the reasons cited to vote for or against someone for this (theorhetically non-partisan) position. Evans, for the record, is a Democrat and fully supported by the Democratic machine (not that there is anything wrong with that – apparently unlike Republicans!).
4) For anyone who thinks that the current school board is not doing what we need it to do and believes we need fundemental change on the board, overwhelming endorsements by current and former board members is a reason to vote AGAINST her.
5) Well if the WaPo says it, then…what? The major part of her past experience has been via her role as an advocate. Whether you agree with what she has advocated for or not (at times I have, other times I haven't), she has obviously gained a working relationship and familiarity with board members. She was prompted to run by good friend Kaye Kory and has, as she has stated, been at more SB meetings than she can track. That tells me she knows how things run but I am not sure it tells me she will be able to bring about any fundemental change to the way the board (her collegues) does business. Additionally, I am concerned that she will be an advocate instead of an elected board member.
I sat next to her back at one of the SLEEP input sessions. When I expressed my concerns about the things SLEEP was proposing, she looked to find ways to mitigate my issues. That is was an advocate is supposed to do. But there was no chance I would have been able to change her opinion on the subject because as an advocate, her mind was made up long ago. I want a SB representative who will be open minded and a fear I have is that she will take an 'advocate' approach to the position, looking to mitigate public concerns instead of actually listening to them and taking them to heart, because that is who she has been for the last decade or so. Finally, when the Post states "As a leader of an effort to change high school starting times, Ms. Evans spent years scrutinizing the school budget; a result of that work was transportation efficiencies that saved the system millions of dollars", that is not a fair characterization of events. Safely and effectively doing what she wanted to do with respect to SLEEP would have cost us substantially more money. FCPS continually looks at transportation cost savings and adjusts the schedules accordingly. Ms. Evans was advocating to send Elementary school kids to school during the dawn (and pre-dawn)hours and HS kids later in the morning to accomodate their apparent biological clock. Her goal was NOT to save money via transportation efficiencies and the SB was looking at transportation regardless of SLEEP.
As I said at the beginning, I am still not sure who I am voting for and your endorsement does nothing to help me with that decision. I am still concerned about the failings I see in both candidates. But having participated in the school board process the last couple years, I now have enough experience to see the SB needs serious change. My vote will be for the person who I think is better suited to bring that change to the board.