Wednesday, February 26, 2020

Who really cares about school board elections?


Who really cares about school board elections?

Charles Ungerleider

Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[Permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged] 


Although sometimes fiercely competitive among the candidates, school board elections receive little attention from eligible voters. Political scientists R. Michael McGregor and Jack Lucas open their 2019 article about the correlates of school board voter turnout with the declaration: “If turnout is an indication of public engagement in an election, then most Canadians are distinctly disengaged from school board politics.”[i] Ouch!

            It seems likely that citizen disengagement has at least two negative consequences. One is that disinterest in school board politics means that school trustees are not accountable for the decisions they make, except to the narrow constituency from which they draw their support. The second is that the lack of accountability to local electors leaves provincial governments as the main agencies holding school boards accountable.

            Infrequently and typically with reluctance, a school board is ‘fired,’ and an official trustee appointed in its place. When Vancouver School Board Trustees failed to approve a budget under guidelines the Ministry of Education had set, the Board was dismissed, and an official trustee appointed for the school district. The trustees who had been dismissed petitioned the court saying, among other things, their rights to liberty and equal protection of the law as enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms had been infringed.

The court disagreed. In its ruling, the court ruled that the trustees had “no status to bring the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to their aid” because only individuals were accorded rights by the Charter. “Creatures of statute like a school board” or “members of a board acting in their official capacity” had no such rights. “Even if they had a constitutionally protected liberty to be school trustees, they had no absolute right, and lost their status when they failed to comply with a constitutionally valid statutory requirement.”[ii]

Ten years later, an Alberta court rejected an argument by the Alberta School Boards Association that reforms introduced by the government “. . . violated their right of reasonable autonomy which extended to elections, recruitment, management and fiscal control.” In part of its judgment, the court ruled that “. . . school boards did not have an expressed or implied constitutional right to reasonable autonomy,” possessing only “rights and powers delegated to them by the province.”[iii]

In other words, although they may have been democratically elected, school boards and the individual elected as trustees have only the standing and authority granted to them under provincial legislation.  This was evident when Nova Scotia eliminated its seven elected school boards, replacing them with a provincial advisory council on education whose 12 members are government appointees. As was the case in Vancouver and Alberta, there were those who considered the change undemocratic. Professor emeritus Wayne MacKay, an expert on educational law and constitutional matters observed:

[It’s a] lesson in how important and powerful the provincial government is in relation to education. School boards are simply a delegate of the province and they can create them, they can take them away.

McGregor and Lucas go on to report the results of their study that they say is the “first individual-level study of school board elections ever conducted in Canada.”  Their study of the Calgary Board of Education found that those who vote in school board elections are likely different from those who vote in municipal council elections. Voters in school board elections are more likely than voters in municipal elections to be highly educated parents who favour partisan positions that are often “left-leaning.”

McGregor and Lucas observe that “studies of school board elections in the United States, where turnout is similarly low, have noted the potential influence of well-organized groups in low-turnout elections that may have distinctly different interests from the wider population” (p. 924). While it would be dangerous to make strong inferences from a single study, the outsized influence of well-organized groups in low-turnout Canadian school board elections may explain why, once elected, trustees find it difficult to see beyond the horizon of their own electors' interests to govern in the interest of all citizens, and why, from time to time, provincial governments find it necessary to intervene on behalf of the wider community.

As decisions are increasingly made by provincial ministries, school boards become less important. Diminished school board importance and low voter turnout for school board elections are likely harbingers of the future of school boards.




[i] McGregor, R.M. and J. Lucas (2019). Who Has School Spirit? Explaining Voter Participation in School Board Elections. Canadian Journal of Political Science 52, 923–936. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423919000088
[ii] Weinstein v. British Columbia (Minister of Education), [1985] B.C.J. No. 2890
[iii] Alberta School Boards Association of Alberta v. Alberta, [1995] A.J. No. 1317