More than 12 percentage point spike in contested November school board elections compared to 2016
November 10, 2017
By Mandy Gillip
Compared to past years, November 2017's elections saw a significant spike in contested school board races held by America's largest school districts by enrollment.
On Tuesday, 968 (86.04 percent) of the 1,125 candidates faced opposition. This continued a trend of increasing rates of contested school board elections since Ballotpedia's first full year of school board election coverage in 2014:
- 2014: 65.90 percent of school board candidates faced opposition in November and 32.57 percent ran unopposed over the year
- 2015: 71.68 percent of school board candidates faced opposition in November and 28.89 percent ran unopposed over the year
- 2016: 73.68 percent of school board candidates faced opposition in November and 26.32 percent ran unopposed over the year
- 2017: 86.04 percent of school board candidates faced opposition in November
In summary, the November 2017 election saw 12.36 percentage point increase in the rate of contested elections from November 2016 and an increase of 20.14 percentage points from November 2014.
Across 185 of America's largest school districts by enrollment, 629 school board seats were up for grabs in 18 states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.
A possible factor affecting the spike in contested school board races in 2017 was a policy adopted in California, which led to the cancellation of over 80 percent of the elections scheduled in the state's largest school districts on November 7, 2017. These elections were moved to November 2018 and allowed the districts to comply with a 2015 voter participation law that required local election dates to coincide with statewide election dates by November 2022. This shift to even-year elections may have contributed to the increase in contested elections, as an average of about 25 percent of school board races were uncontested in California between 2014 and 2017.
Editor's note: Washington had 77 seats up for election in 34 districts, but that state's data is not included in the challenger and incumbent success rates table of this report. Because Washington is a vote-by-mail state, postal delays in ballot returns mean that election results may not be available for several weeks. Ballotpedia will report results for Washington state school districts once all ballots are counted and the general election winners have been determined.
Breaking down November’s elections
Candidate slates
A candidate slate is a group of candidates running a shared campaign for multiple seats in an election. Candidates may choose to run as part of a slate because they belong to the same political party, share preferences about education policy, or were endorsed by the same individual or organization. Party-based slates are uncommon in school board elections since most school board elections are nonpartisan; school board candidate slates are typically formed for one of the other two reasons mentioned above. If a candidate slate succeeds in winning office together, they can create a new faction on the school board by exercising their voting power. If they hold enough seats on the board, they can become the governing majority and determine the direction of the school district together.
Nine of the school districts covered by Ballotpedia in the November elections featured candidate slates: Cherry Hill Public Schools, Douglas County School District, Elizabeth Public Schools, Hamilton Township School District, Jeffco Public Schools, Mesa County Valley School District 51, North Penn School District, Perth Amboy Public Schools, and Toms River Regional Schools. In total, 58 candidates ran as part of a slate, and slate candidates experienced a 55.17 percent success rate at the polls.
Campaign finance
Although school board races are not known for big spending, each year brings exceptions. Since the cost to run for a school board seat is relatively low, a large amount of money being raised or spent may indicate a particularly contentious election. Ballotpedia identified five school districts this November where spending was significant: Atlanta Public Schools, Denver Public Schools, Douglas County School District, Houston Independent School District, and Seattle Public Schools. The biggest spenders were in Denver, where candidates received a total of $617,276 and spent a total of $465,375 as of October 29, according to the Colorado Secretary of State. The runner-up was Atlanta, where candidates received a total of $617,285 and spent a total of $458,130 as of November 3, according to the City of Atlanta Office of Municipal Clerk.
Education funding
School districts may experience financial pressure or come into conflict with the state government over education budgets. The funding battles in these districts can play a significant role in their school board elections, although board members may not be able to directly influence state education funding. This year, school districts in both Kansas and Washington state faced ongoing funding challenges. In Kansas, an October 2017 ruling was the latest development in a 20-year battle over school finance and the fifth time in three years that the Kansas Supreme Court determined the state legislature had underfunded public education. Before that in June 2017, Washington state added $7.3 billion to public school funding after a court ruled that the state's previous funding plan was unconstitutional.
The tables below compare the incumbent and challenger success rates for 2016 and 2017 as well as the percentage of unopposed seats from 2014 through the present.
Editor's note: For information on the 2014 and 2015 incumbent and challenger success rates, please see Ballotpedia's 2016 school board analysis.
Editor's note: All tables contained on this page will be regularly updated by Ballotpedia as vote recounts, runoff election results, mail-in ballot totals, and write-in candidates are reported by local election officials.
See also
Footnotes
| |||||
