After decades, voters in Sacramento’s north area finally created a new Twin Rivers Unified School District in 2007 – merging three elementary districts and a high school district.
Ordinarily, a new board would begin with short, staggered terms: some serving a one-year term and others serving a two-year term.
But to provide stability, the State Board of Education granted the startup district a waiver, saying: “the initial terms of the trustees shall be four years, unless the governing board by resolution consolidates the election of the governing board members with the statewide general election, and then the initial terms of the trustees shall be three years.”
The choice was clear between holding the scheduled odd-year election in November 2011, at a cost of $450,000, and moving to an even-year election in November 2010, at a cost of $50,000.
The Sacramento County registrar of voters urged the new district in April 2009 to move the election, concluding: “Should your district choose to consolidate with the statewide general election, all seven trustee areas will stand for election in November 2010.”
Yet in 10 months the board has taken no action. The deadline for 240-day notice to the county is Monday. The board belatedly will take up the issue on Thursday – too late to get the election on the November 2010 ballot.
But it seems the district may have something up its sleeve. Some boards, including Davis Joint Unified and Woodland Joint Unified, have used Election Code 10404.5 to create a one-time five-year term to move elections to even years.
It is fundamentally undemocratic for current officeholders to unilaterally extend their own terms. Lawmakers need to change that flawed law immediately. Until then, boards – including Twin Rivers – should reject its use.
If it fails to make the Monday deadline for this year’s election, Twin Rivers should stick with its scheduled election in 2011 – and voters should remember the added cost.