The resignation of Joe Wiest from the Butler School Board provided a great opportunity for someone with no previous ties to the board to seek to become involved in overseeing the school district.

In fact, three of the four applicants for Wiest’s position — Helene Abramowitz, Arthur Haag and Ben Holland — are former board members whose terms ended in December. Abramowitz and Haag were defeated in their bids for re-election, and Holland did not seek re-election.

The other applicant, Ann LeMay, is Wiest’s sister.

The four candidates were interviewed by the board Wednesday evening, in preparation for a vote next week.

The unexpired two-year term provided an excellent opportunity for someone with no board ties to test the waters for longer-term service. Regular board terms are four years in length.

Unfortunately, no one without any prior ties stepped forward to provide another choice for the eight sitting board members — five of them who took office for the first time last month — who are tasked with appointing Wiest’s successor.

If none of the four candidates attains a majority vote and the board cannot agree on a replacement within 30 days, Butler County Court would have the duty to make the appointment.

District taxpayers should stay tuned to what happens, because the person named could determine whether the board falls in line with past thinking and decisions, or whether there will be tougher scrutiny on spending, especially regarding contracts for teachers and administrators.

The previous board members seeking the open seat have, by virtue of their past service, provided an indication of what their intentions and priorities will be if reappointed. Regarding LeMay, it’s unclear, although she had complained to the former board about a shortage of textbooks and about the retention of a coach.

The board must factor in that the majority of district voters who cast ballots in last year’s elections were unwilling to return two of the current candidates to office when they sought re-election. Board members also can rightly be puzzled as to why a board member who didn’t want to vie for re-election has had a change of heart so soon after leaving office.

As for the other candidate, LeMay, they are justified in remembering that when she came before the board to lodge her complaints about textbooks and the coach, she didn’t publicly disclose her family relationship with Wiest.

All considered, the upcoming appointment shouldn’t be an easy decision for the board. First and foremost, board members must decide who will best represent both the district’s and taxpayers’ best interests.

Based on last year’s campaigning and election, the stage might be set for an appointment deadlock that could send the issue to court. If so, it will be up to the court to weigh the various considerations and issues surrounding the candidates.

It would be best if there were several people vying for the seat who were totally new to the school board scene and whose only promise would be to be an independent voice — someone whose appointment would not be geared to tipping the board consistently to one faction of school directors or another.

The board plans to vote on the appointment at a meeting at 7:30 p.m. Jan. 17 at the district administration building in the high school complex.

Whatever the result, assuming that an appointment is made, the vote will chart the district’s direction for the next two years.