MRH school board candidates stress equity, staff pay and cautious use of technology at PAL forum

A forum for candidates running for three open seats on the Maplewood‑Richmond Heights Board of Education gave voters a compact, policy‑focused view of the contenders’ priorities: protect and expand equitable programs, shore up staffing and budgets, and adopt technology with attention to access and privacy.

The Principal’s Advisory Leadership (PAL) board hosted the event and reminded the audience that three seats on the board carry three‑year terms and that the election is April 7; polls open at 6 a.m. and close at 7 p.m., PAL vice president Noe Zamora said. Anteses, the PAL president who opened the forum, noted the district’s Annual Performance Report (APR) rose from 77% in 2022 to 98.5% today, a point candidates repeatedly cited as evidence of recent progress.

Why they are running and what they would protect

Rachel Lindsey, an associate professor at Saint Louis University and MRH parent, said her academic and nonprofit leadership experience informed a focus on curriculum and equity. “We need to make sure our teachers are equipped with the resources they need to help every student excel,” Lindsey said, and flagged the district’s need for transparent spending, noting the board’s legal‑services budget was originally set at $45,000 and has already incurred costs “more than $160,000.”

Several candidates framed equity as central. Bridal Shattuck said “MRH should be a place where belonging is a right, not a privilege,” and described her work on the equity and action committee. Christy Martinez, a school psychologist and former board member, and other candidates cited the district’s equity resolution and urged elevating underrepresented voices in both classrooms and the boardroom.

Funding, staffing and stewardship

Candidates repeatedly named funding and staff retention as the district’s top challenges. Loretta Colvin, a current board member running to keep her seat, described fixed costs (salaries and benefits) and the board’s use of a rainy‑day fund and maintenance plans to buffer inflationary pressures.

“We have to be very careful and wise in hearing from our administrators,” Colvin said, describing the need to translate budget details into information the community can understand. Multiple candidates supported exploring living‑wage models or budget scenarios for educational support professionals — bus drivers, attendance clerks and janitorial staff — to reduce turnover and protect students’ daily experience.

Academic measures and newer assessment models

Candidates celebrated the district’s APR gains while urging broader, more real‑time measures of student growth. Lauren Widmer (Tiefenbruun), who holds a doctorate in education leadership, described the district’s participation in an innovation waiver that would allow use of through‑year assessment data and narrative dashboards to measure progress for subgroups and guide instruction.

“A one‑time test can be autopsy data,” Widmer said, urging the board to use assessment approaches that inform instruction as it happens.

Community engagement and governance

Candidates described multiple ways to stay visible and gather community input — attending events, hosting roundtables at varied times, partnering for childcare during meetings and showing up where families and students already gather. They articulated governance as a board’s responsibility to set direction and hold the superintendent accountable, not to manage day‑to‑day operations.

Technology and AI

On classroom technology and AI, candidates struck a balance: praise for access and new learning opportunities, but concern about equity, excessive screen time and data privacy. Several said MRH should pursue clear AI policies, provide teacher training, and preserve intentionally unplugged spaces for students.

Audience question on state and federal pressure

When asked whether they would push back on state or federal policies to protect students and staff, candidates said they would advocate collectively and sometimes “push pretty far,” while avoiding steps that would risk costly litigation. Many urged coordinated advocacy with other districts and legislators as a way to press for change without jeopardizing district finances.

What’s next

The candidates closed by reiterating a commitment to teachers and students and to working collaboratively if elected. Organizers thanked candidates and volunteers and reminded the audience to vote on April 7. The forum did not include any formal motions or board actions; it served as a voter‑education event focused on candidate platforms.