My take; if you look at it as a whole, rather than Place by Place. And consider what you'd like the entire board to look like when finalized. There are already two on the board with conservative values/perspectives.
If you lean that way (I do), and want to maintain a majority conservative board; but are also sick and tired of the polarizing political grandstanding/drama/news headlines/brash and overly self-important personalities; while actually maintaining true diversity, of thought and perspective (not born, immutable identity), on the board. You could hope for a final board with something like:
Weston*
Bone*
Salinas
Slape
Avila
Harrison
Johnson
I think that likely gives you 5 Conservatives, 1 Independent, and 1 Liberal. And I think it would be a board that stays out of the news, drives the correct agenda, and considers all viewpoints respectfully. I'm not sure we need a board that is 7-0 leaning in one direction, and doing so in a very brash/news grabbing manner.
Zimmerman is too farfetched (not even far right), too political, and too brash. He seems more interested in being a polarizing figure and in the public eye, than simply providing his selfless-service to the board/students.
Farris and Keagy seemed to have done no prep work in their Q&A's, didn't share any good ideas, and generally answered with generic "need to fix things, need to look at things, need to try harder". They seem like pawns, put in place by Zimmerman to oust incumbents and then be a controlled vote for him as the puppetmaster.
Austin, TX