I feel like it may be a case of taxation without representation.

Our district has been served very well by our school board member, Edith Helen (Sunni) Hilts, and we alone get to vote to send her back for another term. She's very ably looked out for the students and small schools, as well as the large schools in the borough during her tenure.

However, I fear that other voters, living in different districts, may cancel our votes; if we send her back, and they vote to limit service to two terms, then she cannot be seated.

Sunni was appointed for a one-year term, and then ran for a three-year term, so she's served us well for only four years on the school board. She's been effective on the board and in Juneau, with the legislators.

She came up with the slogan to make children our first priority, which our chamber adopted, and then it became popular in Juneau and statewide, as she presented it in Juneau.

It takes awhile to learn the issues in the school board and assembly, so it doesn't do any of us well, if we were to constantly be served by a new face who is still on the learning curve, and then when they get past it, they run into term limits and cannot serve again for another three years.

There's something to be said for experience and the wisdom gained in serving. Continuity counts in a good legislator.

I don't like the idea that voters in another area can determine who from our district (or your district) serves on the school board (or assembly). I'd like to vote for our best candidate.

The voters should decide who best serves us, not the calendar. Think about it.

Darlene Crawford

Seldovia