Parents and community members are invited to take part in a Public Forum at the Pasadena ISD School Board's regular meeting at 7 p.m., November 27. The board will ask for community input concerning the difficult election decision brought about by House Bill 1 and differences of interpretations by the Secretary of State and the Attorney General. At the October 16, 2007 meeting, the Board expressed its desire to hold elections with the City of Pasadena for several reasons which include serving the community better and distancing the board from party politics to ensure that students and their education remain the focus. The Board will be requesting feedback from individuals concerning the effects of this decision which means that the next Board election will be held in May 2009 for board terms of four years.

This situation occurred because of House Bill 1 (2006 Leg. Session, ending in May 2006) which contained a provision requiring school districts to hold their school board elections jointly with either the county or city during the year in which the county or city elected officers. This provision was made without considering its effects on the districts that are in multiple cities and/ or counties. In addition, this HB 1 provision is binding to the school districts, but it is not binding on counties or cities. In other words, while the district must partner with the city or county, they do not have to agree to partner with a district. If they choose not to do so, it is unclear what happens to the district.

Responding to the HB 1 requirement in good faith and in a proactive manner, the Pasadena ISD Board voted in February 2007 to hold its future elections jointly with the county; therefore, the board cancelled its May 2007 election and called the new election for November 2007. Pre-clearance was received from the Department of Justice before this action was taken. In March 2007, the Secretary of State (SOS) reinforced the board’s decision by ruling that school districts could hold annual elections with county or city even if the county or city were not electing officers. His interpretation was that it was sufficient to conduct joint elections since most counties hold elections every year for either officers or constitutional amendments or other local measures. Further, the SOS said the board was under a requirement of law to continue holding trustees to three-year terms…a fact that necessitated these annual elections.

In April 2007, the Secretary of State and Attorney General (AG) got into a jurisdictional discussion. Ultimately the AG ruled that the SOS’s interpretation was incorrect. Under the AG’s opinion, all trustee elections must be held in conjunction with the city or county in a year in which the city or county are electing officers (even numbered years for Harris County; odd numbered years for the City of Pasadena). Under the AG’s opinion, Pasadena ISD cannot hold a joint election with the county in November 2007 (because it is an odd numbered year and the county elects officers in even numbered years), but it could coordinate with the City of Houston which does hold its election for officers in odd numbered years. There are several problems with this option, however.

The only way to continue with three-year terms and meet the AG’s requirements would be to alternate board elections one year with the Harris County (even numbered years) and the next year with the City of Houston (odd numbered years). If the district chooses not to partner in this way, the AG said the district must go to four-year terms for its trustees…which had been expressly forbidden by Texas law since the mid-1990s. To further complicate the alternating issue, there is a ruling under consideration that if the precincts in the city which are up for election do not align with the district’s voting precincts, the election may not be valid. Most of Houston’s single member districts which are up for election in any given year do not overlap Pasadena ISD. Therefore, Pasadena ISD attorneys advised the Board that under those circumstances a partnership with Houston would not be feasible anyway.

Recognizing that the AG’s opinion and the law were incompatible, the Texas Legislature passed a law in May 2007 (SB670) giving the school districts the option to move to a four-year term as long as that decision was made prior to December 31, 2007.

The board has been studying, with the advice of attorneys, the two best remaining options --holding a joint election with either Harris County or with the City of Pasadena. In the case of a joint election with the county, the first election opportunity is November 2008. Holding a joint election with the City of Pasadena would result in the next election being held in May 2009. In both cases, board terms would have to be extended to four years.

The Board made the decision, pending community feedback, to hold elections with the City of Pasadena because of the potentially negative impact of moving to a November election that would result in placing important non-partisan decisions on the same ballot as state and national party elections. Unfortunately, many voters might not read to the bottom of a long ballot to vote on school board trustees. Also the amount of advertising by state and national candidates makes it more difficult to give sufficient local coverage to the vital issues concerning the education of Pasadena ISD students.