Hartstein: How you can evaluate local candidates

In reviewing candidates for local boards, there are characteristics to look for and to avoid.

Sometimes you can look to screening bodies to assist you, such as caucuses that make recommendations after interviewing and screening candidates. Such groups often do a great job choosing whom to support.

Sometimes, however, there are candidates who should be considered but weren't slated for some reason. If the process for slating is thorough and transparent, the people on the caucus usually take a lot of time to evaluate who will be the best fit for given offices. Regardless, as citizens, it is often beneficial to do an independent evaluation. That is what elections are for, and it is always good for the community to have candidates from which to choose. That also makes for better discussion and debate within our communities.

As a general rule, it is good to have candidates familiar with the boards on which they seek to serve. That understanding can come from a variety of experiences. Incumbents should have that understanding from their service on the boards, but that alone does not necessarily make them the best candidate. People who have served on committees and as volunteers also have the opportunity to learn about the boards. Still another way to gain understanding is to attend board meetings and observe the board in action. Quite frankly, anyone who wants to serve on a board should be able to show they have taken the time to attend one or more board meetings. During COVID-19 this may have been more difficult, but watching some meetings online over Zoom can give candidates some understanding of how a board operates.

What a given candidate brings to the table in terms of other background, experience and perspective is also quite important. Some candidates may have a particular professional background that is valuable. Others may have personal experiences that give them a necessary perspective. It is always beneficial when selecting candidates to try and have the board make up represent a diverse makeup with people of different backgrounds and experiences to insure that, when decisions are made, they reflect the community from all views.

Why different people are running for the boards is also of critical importance. Those people who are upset over a particular decision of the board or of an employee of the board might serve as a motivation for people to run, but if a candidate does not have a broader interest in the totality of the issues the board deals with - that can be problematic. Such candidates might not grasp the policy setting function of most local boards and want to micromanage professionals who work for the governmental entity beyond their purview, or may not focus on the myriad issues facing the board, if it was not "their issue."

From experience, I can tell you that single-issue board members are not overly productive to the boards and can often consume time and energy that does not serve the community as a whole.

Those candidates who do not reflect a true and sincere and ongoing interest in the workings of the board or district they are seeking to serve also is a factor to consider. This can often be gleaned by whether the candidate has a track record of involvement with that governing body. That is not to say new people and fresh faces cannot be good board members. It is just another factor to consider. Those who have demonstrated some prior commitment tend to end up being board members who will make lasting and significant contributions. Giving a chance to someone new, however, can add an important new perspective that may add to a given board assuming a candidate has otherwise demonstrated qualifications.

One last thing that I feel strongly about with regard to school, library, park and village boards is partisanship. Such boards function well and board members work well together regardless of individual personal partisan positions, if there are any. I think that keeping traditional politics out of those local boards is a good thing. Yes, there may be slates of candidates running or candidates running together as a team, but think that injecting party politics into those local boards would only detract from getting boards to work together in the interest of the community as a whole. I am hopeful it stays that way. We have enough partisanship at other levels of government. We want the best people serving in all of our local boards, and it's up to you to review those candidates carefully, and to get out to vote!

• Elliott Hartstein of Northbrook is an attorney and former village president of Buffalo Grove.