Judge rules 2 BoE candidates ineligible

Tue, 06/13/2006 - 4:36pm
By: John Thompson

During the last week, the county’s two races for school board got a lot less crowded.
Late last week, Fayette Superior Court Judge Tommy Hankinson ruled that both incumbent board member Greg Powers and candidate Kay Seabolt were ineligible to run in two July 18 Republican primary races.
The ballot will now have Frank Oakley facing former board member Dr. Bob Todd in the Post 4 race. Powers had wanted to run as the incumbent in that race, but Hankinson’s ruled that Powers no longer lived in that district and was thus ineligible to run.
In Post 5, incumbent Lee Wright will be opposed by long-time school administrator Faith Hardnett. Seabolt had filed to run in that race.
Since neither race has a Democratic opponent, July’s winners will be on the school board in January 2007.
In his decision rendering Seabolt ineligible to run, Hankinson seems to indicate some frustration with the writing of the statute.
In the Official Code of GA 20-2-51 (c), the statute states that “no person employed by a local board of education shall be eligible to serve as a member of that board of education.”
Seabolt served as a substitute teacher this year, but when the school year ended in May, so did her employment. Hankinson addressed the issue head-on in his ruling.
“The question becomes whether the legislature intended to prohibit these school board employees from qualifying for election to their employer school board without giving them the opportunity to terminate their employment prior to taking office,” he wrote, and added, “as is sometimes the case, this appears to be a question of first impression to the appellate courts of this state for determination.”
Hankinson also wrote “... parties would not be before the Court if the legislature had used uniform terminology in these statutory provisions.”
Near the end of his decision, Hankinson’s struggle with coming to a decision is evident.
“This Court is quite candidly frustrated in trying to discern why the legislature used different language in these two statutes.”
After receiving the ruling, Seabolt was reflective on the decision.
“More than anything, I wanted a decision. I couldn’t plan anything. I’m just relieved.”

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by tonto707 on Thu, 06/15/2006 - 4:29pm.

in the code section cited and what I read earlier as the text of the sworn affidavits candidates are required to make when qualifying to run for the school board.

I am not surprised at the ruling re Greg Powers, but I believe a good lawyer could have made a convincing argument that Kay Seabolt was in fact not an employee of the school board. The rule of thumb that the IRS uses to distinguish between an employee and non employee is whether or not the employer control the place of employment, hours of employment and rate of pay. It also anticipates that "employment" is an ongoing relationship.

One could make the argument that "ongoing" does not seem to be a part of Seabolt's employment inasmuch as she may never be asked to fill in again.

I am betting that Ms Seabolt went to court without a lawyer.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Wed, 06/14/2006 - 9:01am.

It's regrettable that Judge Hankinson failed to grasp the rationale behind the rule that a person who is working for the school system may not RUN for a position on the school board. It is also regrettable that no one explained it to him.

Here's the explanation.

The school board establishes the superintendent's salary, approves the appointment of high-level employees and principals, and makes important decisions that affect school system employees. That includes decisions on job position and location, and pay. Pretty much everyone understands that a school board member who is a school system employee would be in a position to influence decisions that affect him (or her) personally. That's a conflict of interest.

When a school system employee becomes a school board candidate, the principal or other person who supervises that employee, or the other persons who work with that employee, may well start thinking that the candidate may (as a member of the school board) become their boss very soon. They are not sure, but they know the possibility is there. So they start behaving differently, supervising less, providing less candid evaluations, and generally protecting their rear. That's human nature.

So the legislature provided the rule, "resign first, then run." Unfortunately, they did not quite write it that way, but both the Board of Elections and Judge Hankinson could see that this was the rule.

Now they can understand why.


Submitted by Sickened on Thu, 06/15/2006 - 3:52pm.

Judge Hankinson fails to grasp most things. He is an absolute moron. He misquotes the law every time he is on the bench, and can't grasp why he should be constrained by the United States Constitution. He should be un-benched.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.