Election season is often a busy time for The Herald’s editorial board, because one of our roles is to weigh in on the various races and ballot questions facing voters. This year, that entails two robust slates of school board candidates vying for seats on the Durango School District 9-R board and that of Bayfield School District 10-JT. In order to craft our endorsements, we meet with the candidates to get a sense of their policy priorities, concerns about the district, and goals for their time serving on the board.
These are friendly and informative conversations where we have the opportunity to get to know candidates who are volunteering for important and largely thankless positions. They also provide candidates the chance to articulate their positions — something that anyone seeking public office must be willing to do; voters deserve a clear understanding of where their would-be representatives stand.
Those positions are the basis upon which the Herald makes its endorsements and it is not particularly fair to issue them without hearing from all candidates. So it was rather surprising when a candidate for Bayfield’s school board cancelled our interview on Monday because of her anger over a news story covering another candidate’s disqualification from the race.
Judy Spady contended that the story (http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20131023/NEWS01/131029822/0/SEARCH/Bayfield-school-board-candidate-disqualified) suggested Justin Ross was disqualified because of his position on evolution, when in fact it was because of his address — he does not live within the district’s boundaries. While the story mentioned Ross’ position on evolution, it was peripheral to the relevant issue: Ross’ home is in the Ignacio district — something he did not know until last week.
Spady took an interesting leap from that story, determining it was an indication of the Herald’s liberal, left-leaning bent and declined to meet with our editorial board. What is missing as a result is a clear understanding — from us and, by extension, readers and voters — of her positions. We are left to either fill in with assumptions, or rely on our knowledge of other candidates’ articulated positions to craft our endorsements. While neither is ideal, the latter is far more responsible.
