Quaker Valley School Board Election – The Long and Short of it

Happy Halloween, indeed. Scary…

Leslie and I attended, in person, the October 19 meeting of the Quaker Valley School Board. The total number of audience members present in the middle school auditorium amounted to three. There were numerous online attendees via Zoom, but only two of us that were actually present chose to speak at the first public comment opportunity.

This seemed to be in stark contrast to prior recent meetings of the Board, and especially meetings in other places that have been marked with unruly and disruptive crowds.

I spoke about an issue that I first wrote about 6 1/2 years ago, and one that new 2020 census data has confirmed still exists in earnest. One talking point that I tried to include was that this issue has been decades in the making, but won’t take millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours to resolve should equity in representation be a goal that the Board wants to get behind.

The Board members had little to say in response at that time, but I did get a very nice email from Board member Kati Doebler. They obviously have many other things on their plate. I will continue to revisit the issue with them periodically.

Ferry Street in Leetsdale, looking northeast to the intersection with Beaver Street.

If you read the local newspaper, peruse local social media sites, or drive around our valley’s main roadways, you know that the upcoming Board election is a very contentious one. The Sewickley Herald has been rife with full-page ads in recent weeks.

While this is symptomatic of many school board races around the commonwealth, a lot of the partisan rhetoric and unpleasantness has been muted somewhat in the Quaker Valley contests.

This does NOT mean that it’s been eliminated completely.

Follow The Money

Many of those races around the state have been intensified by the involvement of the Back to School PA PAC, funded by Bucks County entrepreneur Paul Martino. In a PennLive profile earlier this month, Mr. Martino stated, “We have one position: We need the schools open for in-person education”.

On the PAC website, six satellite PACs are listed in Allegheny County, including the “Keep School Open QV PAC”. This listing is linked to the e-mail for Region 3 candidate Heather Saftner.

In a Herald ad from October 14, QV Strong identified their chosen slate of candidates – Region 1 incumbents Daniela Sauro Helkowski and Jonathan Kuzma, Region 3 incumbent Ms. Doebler, and Region 2 newcomer Stratton Nash.

They also called out Ms. Saftner, Region 1 candidate Brett Williams, and Region 2 write-in candidate Doug Jones for their acceptance of what they termed “funding from this Philadelphia area Political Action Committee“.

These candidates replied with a statement admitting to receiving one of the numerous $10,000 donations that Mr. Martino distributed to candidates across the state. While decrying the accusation as a “distraction“, they then chose to denigrate QV Strong over their equally legal activities as a registered nonprofit that accepts donations from citizens and other groups.

While state campaign finance laws have reporting requirements for political candidates, the ability of nonprofits and other corporations to freely receive and distribute funds is likely the result of the 2010 Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. Per Wikipedia –

The court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.

While I agree with the assertion that the focus on outside money is a distraction in this particular race, I also agree with the editorial staff at Gazette 2.0 when they opined earlier this month about the concerns inherent in how local campaigns are funded.

In any event, the Citizens United case was brought by a conservative political group. Pot, meet Kettle…

This may be a timely strategy in an ordinary election cycle, but with the QV race it’s just the short game, and pales in comparison to that 159-acre gorilla on the hill.

The Long Game

Considering the history of the debate about the proposed site for the new high school, it’s not surprising that the race is primarily divided along those lines, with the two existing advocacy groups taking an active role in promoting candidates in favor of their position.

While not appearing to support candidates directly, Citizens for a Great School (CGS) has nonetheless been very active and visible with their assertions that the best place to build a new high school is on the same site it currently occupies.

Advertisement from Citizens for a Great School (CGS) in the October 21 Sewickley Herald. Click to enlarge.

As I wrote in August, CGS appears to be firmly committed to asserting and defending their position that a new high school should be built on the existing site. Their assertions, while excessively wordy for the printed page, are nonetheless comprehensive, intelligent, and well-researched, even with the occasional embellishment for effect.

Click to enlarge.

As an example, an October 14 Herald ad shows a proposed site plan from 2019, and compares it to a 27 acre site plan presented to the Leet Township Zoning Board, under a large heading that asks “WHAT ARE WE REALLY GETTING?”. This revised site plan was actually prepared in October 2020 and posted to the district’s Blueprint QV website.

The site plan is old news, but the ad tries to make it sound like the district pulled a bait-and-switch when it really didn’t. Mr. Jones tried to do the same thing in a blog post to his campaign website in September.

The concerns about the revised plan – from a geotechnical, environmental, and traffic standpoint – appear to warrant additional discussion. I’m looking forward to hearing more from official sources.

QV Strong is not without its attempts to spin information as well. A most recent example is the adoption of a mutual cooperation agreement recently ratified by Leetsdale Borough Council and the school district.

In an October 20 Facebook post with a lead paragraph promising “exciting news“, QV Strong asserted that Leetsdale Council “has officially confirmed its support of the project at the site off Camp Meeting Road“.

The actual wording of the agreement includes the following –

The agreement goes on to establish a framework for several issues such as managing truck traffic through the borough, the widening of the Beaver / Camp Meeting intersection and the construction of sidewalks, and a method for receiving and handling resident complaints.

It sounds to me that Leetsdale wanted to make sure these items were addressed in a formal, written manner should the site construction be approved, and I commend them and their representation for making it happen.

This should not be confused with any sense of acceptance that the new site is a done deal. The Leet Township Zoning Board continues to conduct hearings and receive testimony, with no specific time frame for a decision on the special exception requested by the school district.

This ‘long game’ – the new high school – is among the most important projects in the history of the school district. That an intense debate persists over the project as envisioned by the district is as unfortunate as it is disappointing.

The arguments on both sides are persuasive, and the available information, while impressive in volume, is still difficult to fully visualize and maintain currency of.

It seems clear to me that what is needed are leaders willing to compromise and work together as this significant long term investment in the future of QV students takes shape.

The QV school board race has thus far not been as impacted by the politics of anger as other districts have – everyone here knows, or should know, that the stakes are too high.

The big question for me is who is best prepared to continue the long game, while understanding the need for calm, reasoned discourse as a prerequisite for compromise, effective leadership, and measured movement forward.

The efforts thus far by those who seek to replace the incumbent Board members seeking reelection have left me unconvinced that they adequately possess these abilities.

Short Game Silliness

Portion of Brett Williams campaign flyer, mailed to Region 1 residents. Click to enlarge.

Speaking of calm, reasoned discourse, I don’t mind a spirited yet respectful campaign based on the issues at hand. I don’t think that Quaker Valley or its citizens have the time or the patience for anything else. I know I don’t.

So when things creep into advertising, campaign literature, or social media posts that get me shaking my head, I feel it necessary to bring them up –

Taxes – In the campaign flyer above, Mr. Williams asserts in the same set of bullet points that he “will be fiscally responsible” by “Pledging there will be no more tax increases” while at the same time “Helping build the best new school for our children!” Ms. Saftner also pledges in an October 21 Herald ad to “Adopt a budgetary plan to limit tax increases at 1.5 % per year maximum“.

I think it’s a given that our taxes will go up to pay for the new high school. To refuse to do so, or advocate for an arbitrary cap in advance of knowledge of any internal deliberations or factors involved, is an irresponsible approach. I’m old enough to remember this phrase, and how it backfired on who uttered it.

The Quaker Valley Democratic Organization had similar concerns in a Facebook post from October 29.

Curriculum – Mr. Williams also asserts in his flyer that he intends to replace books that “contain excessive graphic language, graphic violence and rape, and melancholic, suicidal characters“.

Really? Who would be the arbiter of such designations? I can rattle off several characters from classic literature – Holden Caulfield, Winston Smith, Kilgore Trout among them – who could be described as melancholic, and whose stories helped to shape a growing, inquisitive mind. I think that I turned out OK.

The banning of books by school boards, while permitted in some instances by case law, nonetheless has significant First Amendment implications, and invariably generates controversy and activist response wherever it occurs.

A recent Pennsylvania case can be used as an example. When the Board of the Central York School District decided to ban course materials recommended by their own diversity committee, as the York Dispatch described it “the books hit the fan“. The ban was lifted not long afterward.

While the same case law referenced above prohibits school boards from removing materials from libraries, it should be kept in mind that Quaker Valley operates the award-winning Sewickley Public Library. I question how a prospective board member who would share responsibility for hiring competent professionals to operate a library would advocate to overrule professional educators in the selection of educational materials.

Measured, reasonable review and input from all stakeholders is valuable, but facilitating a pathway for line-item censorship is unacceptable.

Regardless of how Mr. Williams may spell “curriculum”, he lost my vote the second he proposed messing with it.

CGS Herald ad from October 28. Our childrens’ high school is in the Village? Who wrote this? Click to enlarge.

Going Personal? Keep it Relevant – The October 28 Herald contained 8 1/2 pages of advertising related to the school board election – that’s nearly 24 percent of the paper’s 36 total pages.

As Election Day is nearly upon us, the rhetoric in these ads, already noteworthy for a local election, took a more personal turn.

A QV Strong ad supporting Mr. Nash asserted that his opponent Mr. Jones’ “relentless anti-mask campaign and his eagerness to misrepresent facts and mislead voters have defined his campaign“. A little fact-checking would be in order here, or at least a reference or two.

I can verify that Mr. Jones pulled his daughter out of Osborne Kindergarten over the district mask policy, and supposedly some other things as well. He said so himself in his news feed.

Ms. Saftner’s latest full-page ad states that “Incumbent candidates are supported by a social welfare organization that is run by a career political operative“.

What does that have to do with anything at issue here?

I would ask the same question of the Quaker Valley Democrats, who on October 26 posted to their Facebook page a screen capture of Ms. Saftner’s social media post detailing her experiences and opinions after attending the January 6 rally in Washington DC.

There is an end in sight to this silly season. I wish I could say the same for the controversy.

Why None of This May Matter

Even if all three challengers unseat the incumbents on Election Day, they will comprise a 1/3 minority on the 9-person board – hardly a position with which to assert any substantive change without the consent of at least 2 other members.

Perhaps that is part of another ‘long game’ by these candidates and CGS – to obfuscate, delay, and obstruct through legislation, litigation, etc., any forward movement on the high school project until they get some (or all) of their way, or the next school board election rolls around.

One cannot discount the involvement of other local governments. While Leetsdale moved proactively, the Leet Zoning Board seems intent on moving at its own pace. According to Herald reporting, at least one candidate for Leet Township Commissioner has listed the high school project as prominent in his long-term goals if elected.

I’ve struggled with how I feel about the project and its related concerns, but was recently buoyed by an unlikely source – a memory from a social media site.

Last weekend was the annual Dirty Dozen bike race in Pittsburgh. This is 50 miles in and around the city, including 13 of its steepest hills.

A video on Facebook from the 2016 race showed a man scale Canton Avenue in Beechview, one of the steepest inclines in North America, on a heavy, single-speed rental bike.

Jeremiah Sullivan said something very profound about how he tackled that extreme obstacle with less than optimal equipment –