The end of the year brings with it a close to a significant election cycle. 2020 wasn’t just lifted by a high-interest presidential election, but significant changes in the mechanics and the values incorporated for choosing representation locally.

Sarasota County Commissioners won election to single-member districts for the first time. Sarasota City Commission races were decided in a November election cycle for the first time in decades. The longevity of these changes remains to be seen, but the impact could be felt in both the ultimate winners of elections and the grip held within the broader electorate and those most closely tied to the political process itself.

Perhaps the most deliberate and conscious impacts were seen in Sarasota’s county contests. Confronted with the possibility of running with a limited electorate different than the ones that elected incumbents, County Commissioners voiced dissatisfaction with voters' decision to change things up. They also responded through an utter perversion of the process, but a legal and ultimately effective one. If county commissioners had to run only in the districts they represented, why not choose exactly what those districts look like through a non-transparent process designed to protect the commission’s most at-risk member?

A divided Sarasota County Commission approved a map, submitted anonymously by a local operative after discarding lines that had been publicly vetted, and ended up putting Commissioners Mike Moran and Nancy Detert in districts they should not — and did not — lose. The lines effectively dismissed Moran’s most qualified challengers from election. The only County Commissioner fervently opposed to the change, Christian Ziegler, ended up in a district that may be unwinnable but doesn’t vote for two years. We’ll see what happens here. Groundwork has been established so lines may be redrawn every election cycle; Census numbers prompting the traditional time for redistricting mean it makes more sense to redraw in 2021 than 2019. And commissioners may yet find a way to dispose of single-member voting.

But notably, opponents of the change found themselves utterly unable to respond effectively to these political tactics. Was no prominent candidate willing to move into a district to run under new lines? Could opponents to the current commissioners truly not find well-known leaders to file instead? Or experienced ones? The final weeks of the campaign were marked by stories of Democrats violating donation limits. Out-politicked until the end.

Proponents of change in the city of Sarasota seemed better prepared for the new political landscape and took advantage. Results included the ouster of a long-serving incumbent and more broadly a besting of a neighborhood get-out-the-vote machine that a decade ago seemed the most organized force in local politics. Of course, the rescheduling of elections from spring until fall was just the most recent challenge to that supremacy. Past election cycles saw the Democratic Party grow in significance. But there too, this change saw the party’s unanimous control of the city commission shaken for the first time in years.

The ultimate result in rescheduling the elections proved to be making this a persuasion election, not just one focused on turnout. Most voters came to polls to vote for Joe Biden or Donald Trump. The trick was convincing them to reach the end of the ballot and bubble in a particular candidate’s name. Losers in the election were the ones caught flat-footed, who didn’t truly comprehend how the change in rules changed the game.

The Sarasota community holds long conversations about process; among the wonkiest residents, that’s a point of pride. But these elections showed you can’t count on outrage over political maneuvering to turn anyone out to polls. Victory goes to the adaptable, those capable of evolution. That remains true as we brace for change leading into 2022.

Jacob Ogles is contributing senior editor of SRQ MEDIA. 

Undoubtedly, the coronavirus pandemic has affected virtually every aspect of our daily lives. Everything about the way we work, shop, socialize, learn and live has felt the impact. While the changes have been everywhere, for many, the most anxiety was caused by the disruption the pandemic has had to education. It is estimated that the educations of more than 300 million students globally were disrupted as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Yes, 300 million.

From the earliest days of the crisis in March, families were thrown into turmoil as schools and

daycares closed, and the entire educational system – from kindergarten to college – started looking for new, innovative ways to educate children and young adults. Parents found themselves thrust into the role of teachers, often while doing their best to figure out their own new ways of working. Students had to adjust to completely new ways of learning. They could not have their dedicated teachers looking over their shoulders to see their work or explain their assignments. Plus, students did not have the support of learning with their peers that occurs naturally in classrooms. To say the least, it was a challenge for families and educators.

Although the summer provided educators the time to more fully develop virtual learning curricula, it was somewhat like drinking out of a fire hose. As Simone Stolzoff, senior communication designer at IDEO San Francisco, says, “In two months, the world of education [has] shifted faster than it has in the past 200 years.” Many institutions had not been offering fully online learning prior to the pandemic. Shifting from a totally in-person model to a fully remote one is incredibly difficult under the best of circumstances. With the onset of the pandemic, many institutions, including Ringling College of Art and Design, made that shift in a matter of weeks. Even taking the three months of summer to revamp an entire curriculum’s delivery method is a Herculean task – but schools around the world did it. They had no choice.

As we moved into the fall, institutions looked ahead to offering not just one, but multiple modalities to educate students. Many schools are now using a variety of instructional models simultaneously, ranging from fully in-person to fully remote environments, and everything in between. They are finding new ways to continue developing their students through co-curricular activities and fostering community amongst their students despite the challenges imposed by COVID-19. The level of creativity and innovation that education has seen in the last seven months is astounding.

Despite the successes, however, many obstacles remain. Schools are still working to ensure students receive the quality of education and support they need. Inequities in student access to resources such as reliable internet and disparate levels of teacher expertise and knowledge of how to deliver virtual instruction are just two of the many issues that still need attention. So, while it is not perfect, one thing has become very clear: Technology as an educational tool saved education during COVID. And, it is likely here to stay in ways not previously imagined. Stolzoff put it well: “Many of the creative workarounds that have emerged in response to the pandemic are more than Band-Aid solutions; they are postcards from the future.”

Some believe this pandemic has proven that technology is the future of education, that it is the way to make education more efficient and solve its financial issues. That is simply NOT TRUE. Teachers are not irrelevant in this new world; indeed, the very opposite is in fact true. As George Couros, innovative teaching and leadership consultant, says, “Technology can never replace great teachers, but technology in the hands of great teachers is transformational.” Teachers are needed to inspire, motivate, engage and support students. The technology is only another tool in the teacher’s toolbox. We cannot discount the value and importance of in-person teacher-student and peer-to-peer student interaction to learning. But, integrating those pieces — the technological tools and the human knowledge — with intentionality and thoughtfulness… that will enable us to truly reimagine education.

The coronavirus pandemic forced us to rethink education. Like we did with the arts and work, we are seeing that there are some great benefits to retain from the creative ways schools innovated to make education work in the COVID era. As John M. McLaughlin, managing partner at McLaughlin Advisors, says, “a return to school life before COVID [is] unrealistic. Humpty Dumpty has fallen and there is no putting him back together again.” Rather, the trick will be to make sure we merge the best parts of what we had with what we have learned to create a reimagined educational system that truly succeeds in preparing students for the future.

Dr. Larry Thompson is president of Ringling College of Art & Design. 

In Christine Robinson’s column, she is right, people continue moving to Florida. She calls for planning, she doesn’t acknowledge that Florida already has a serious water problem and it is likely to get much worse. In addition, there are more dangerous storms in hurricane season and a bulk of people moving to Florida are aging Baby Boomers who will require more and more services. 

Another thing, Ms. Robinson ignores is that New York and California get little back from the federal government, but pay a great deal into the funding of the United States. New York is number 47^th in receipts of federal funds, that comes to less than $1,792 per person. Florida is number 30, with a rate of $2,187 per person. Florida’s population is about 2.5 million more people than New York. So as those people move to Florida, where they may pay less in taxes, Florida will have to make up for those lost federal dollars, just as its costs for a growing population of seniors rises and environmental pressures grow.

It is fair to say that New York spends more money than it should, but it takes better care of its citizens than Florida does and has a better public education system. More people fly to New York for medical care than fly to Florida when expertise is demanded, and even with Disney, New York has Broadway. Florida doesn’t have the transportation infrastructure New York has, but Florida will need to beef up its mass transit as the population continues to explode and that will cost billions.

As for corruption, neither state is free from it, but with New York’s world-renowned New York Times and Wall Street Journal, plus major television and cable networks based in the state, New York’s maladies are better covered and the public is far more aware than in Florida, where corrupt officials and policies go on for decades.

Yes, there is a shift away from living in high cost states and high cost states, like lower cost states will have to find additional funding to keep up with the world around them, but if everyone moves to Florida and Texas, and if climate change continues to move as fast as it is, then it won’t be long before Florida and Texas are going to have to find new ways to raise significant revenue, since it will no longer be coming from New York and California.

Robert Kesten is from New York.