Charter School Amendment - Sam Olens - What About GCSA?
Dear Attorney General Olens,
I read with interest your letter to State Superintendent Dr. Barge posted on 10/3 in Jim Galloway's column http://bit.ly/T1zoI1. You have advised Dr. Barge that school boards are prohibited by law from opposing or advocating the ratification of a constitutional amendment, directly or indirectly through their associations, because they are using public resources to do so.
I would like to know how this decision applies to the Georgia Charter Schools Association who is actively involved in promoting passage of this amendment. The GCSA receives membership dues from charter schools in the state. Please refer to the 2010 - 990 Form here http://bit.ly/T1zoI1. On page 9, Part VIII, Statement of Revenue, it shows on line 1. b. Membership Dues $81,050. These membership dues are from public charter schools, which receive the majority of their funding from public resources.
I feel it is essential to ask the Georgia Charter Schools Association to cease their advocacy in favor of this amendment. I am not aware of any stipulation of a percentage threshold of public resources received, which would allow or disallow advocacy in this case. Please advise the good voters of Georgia if there is one.
Thank you for your timely consideration in this important and sensitive matter. I apologize for asking this is in a blog but it is really the only avenue left for a parent without a lawyer on retainer to be heard in this particular case.
Elizabeth Hooper
Elizabeth Hooper
7:06 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
http://bit.ly/SDxOLW
Elizabeth Hooper
7:07 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Correction above - that is the link to GCSA's Form 990
No Name
10:38 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Non-profits seem to have found a convenient loophole. We've seen this immoral misuse of tax dollars in other areas as well.
http://rootsinalpharetta.com/2012/03/taxpayer-funded-progress-partners-crosses-ethical-line/
http://rootsinalpharetta.com/2012/08/progress-partners-websites-and-political-activism/
GA citizen & taxpayer
1:04 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
I smell a rat...actually,a PLAGUE of rats!
I've just read Sam Olens' letter in its entirety at http://bit.ly/SFBQDB.
Near the end of the letter, the Attorney General specifically said that "local government entities, including local school boards AND CHARTER SCHOOLS [emphasis mine] may not expend local funds or resources on electoral advocacy."
Vote NO...NO...NO!!!!
GCSA Director
7:33 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
As a member of the GCSA Board of Directors, I can assure you that GCSA is abiding by its IRS-enforced 501(c)(3) restrictions on the use of funds for political advocacy. The Board and CEO are very particular on this point, as are our funders, lawyers and accountants. Our "c3" funds are mostly used for education about charter schools and the law and to serve our members via legal means. The campaign in support of the amendment is being supported by a GCSA-created "c4" organization that has nearly a dozen other partners and raises funds legally and legitimately for political advocacy.
As an aside, it is interesting that you specified the $81,000 in GCSA dues and did not mention the more than $11 MILLION in school board and superintendent dues collected by their respective organizations every year. I think the war chest issue is definitely being won by the amendment opposition - which is not at all shy in spending those public funds, apparently in violation of state law.
JAH
7:43 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Could you please specify some of the organizations that are using the paid dues for advocacy on this matter? $11 million is quite a war chest, versus a piddling $81,000.
GA citizen & taxpayer
1:10 am on Friday, October 5, 2012
Would the GCSA Director please answer the question that Ms. Hooper asked on Sep. 19 regarding the organization's dissemination of incorrect information regarding the supposed lack of an appeals process for charter schools in Georgia?
I've been wondering about that ever since I read that erroneous GCSA handout.
Also, I have personally encountered charter parents who said they had been told by GCSA staffers that there is NO appeals process available to charter schools turned down by school boards...which is patently not true: there is currently one available via the Georgia State Board of Education.
I get that the GCSA wants another appeals process which a new, unelected Charter School Commission would provide but why the lie?
Steely Dan
11:30 am on Saturday, October 6, 2012
Mrs. Hooper's failure to mention the $11 MILLION isn't interesting - it's just more of the 'NO' movement's predictable hypocrisy. Their silence was deafening when CCSD illegally wasted taxpayer $$ coming out against 1162 last spring. Their silence was deafening when Barge illegally came out against 1162 and used a publicly-paid-for website to campaign against it. But that's OK for them, since both support their agenda of More Funding. In short, it's "OK When We Do It".
Thank you GCSA Director for pointing out that,once again, another Hooper accusation is uninformed and wrong.
Vote YES to 1162 and NO to districts like APS, Bibb, Dekalb, and Clayton that Hooper and her buddies are trying desperately to protect funding for. That's all this is about for them: More funding for a failed model of education while insisting on no accountability.
Jen
8:35 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
$11 million is a lot of money but it is not the "war chest" as the $81,000 in membership dues for GCSA is not their "war chest". If you want clarity as to who is spending what for the charter referendum and where the money is coming from and going to please see the attached link: http://media.ethics.ga.gov/
Click Campaign Information, then scroll down to "other than candidate committee search" and choose "constitutional amendment or statewide referendum" to search for PAC contributors. If you just put the letter "a" in the search engine you'll get a pretty complete list of PACS, sort through and choose the ones having to do with education/schools and click on them to access their contribution and expenditures reports. Families for Better Public Schools is the largest PAC listed "for" the amendment, Vote Smart No is the largest "against" the amendment.
@GCSA Director, do the school board and superintendent membership organizations require a per student/per school fee?
Really
10:04 am on Friday, October 5, 2012
Just yesterday the State Department of Education approved 3 new start up charter schools (Henry and Chatham Counties) and renewed 3 others (Cobb, Coweta and Atlanta). Don't tell me that there is no process for application or appeals.
Stevie Nicks
10:57 am on Friday, October 5, 2012
Yes, I saw it was on their agenda. I beleive none of the schools they approved use for profit EMOs, but are truly run and supported by the local community of parents. Amendment 1 is not needed...approval process in place.
https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/ViewMeetingOrder.aspx?S=1262&MID=25698
Elizabeth Hooper
1:10 pm on Friday, October 5, 2012
Thanks for that great information. Let's hope voters can see through the smoke and mirrors by Nov. 6th and give this incredibly poorly written piece of legislation the boot.
Word is that "parent trigger" legislation is next and another ramp up of the infamous tax credit scholarship program. Can't wait.
Chris
2:50 pm on Tuesday, October 9, 2012
I appreciate your diligence in supporting government ran education and the huge success it has had in dumbing down the electorate. Your time here on this issue is certainly more beneficial than less worthy goals such as improving school discipline and education. And heaven forbid you actually do something to create an educational environment where parents would prefer to send their kids to a public school.
Steely Dan
11:30 am on Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Chris, the NO crowd has "NO" interest in improving education - only protecting the funding needed to continue the clearly-failed status quo.
It's why they're completely silent on How To Improve Public Education, except to complain for More Funding.
Frank Jones
1:56 pm on Friday, October 5, 2012
Elizabeth...Please explain "parent trigger" legislation. Never heard the term.
FWIW, I was speaking with my tax advisor recently. She recommended that I contribute to an SSO even though I send my kids to public schools since it would save me on taxes. Confused, I asked why? The answer was simple yet devious at the same time. I'll explain the best I can:
Some people are subject to Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The AMT calculation, reduces certain deductions including those for state income taxes paid which results in higher federal tax liability.
SSOs provide a partial solution. For federal tax purposes, SSOs are considered Charitable Donations and charitable donations aren't reduced for AMT tax calculations. By using the SSO to shift part of my state liability to the SSO, I could pay less federal taxes.
The math is simple...A married couple subject to AMT shifts $2,500 of their state taxes to an SSO and receives a federal tax deduction. If they're in the 28% bracket, the SSO saves them $700 on their Fed taxes but costs them $0. If they're in the 35% bracket, it saves them $875.
There are three results of this:
1. The IRS receives less money than it should.
2. The GA Dept of Rev receives less money than it should.
3. SSOs receive money to use for un-regulated Private School Scholarships w/ no accounting.
My advisor told me that many people are doing this and it has nothing to do with a belief in private shools. Just tax savings!
Elizabeth Hooper
8:18 am on Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Hi Frank,
Holly is correct - the parent trigger law would require 50% plus one parent to vote on closing a school. This measure is widely supported by "pro-school choice" advocates. It has been very controversial. Glenn Delk, the attorney who has just filed the lawsuit against 180 school districts is a big proponent of the "trigger" law. He would like it to apply to all schools, not just failing schools. Parents options if the trigger is pulled - turn the school over to a for-profit charter operator or give everyone an SSO type scholarship to go to whatever school they want. If they can't get transportation to a private school or pay the balance of the tuition? Not his problem. The SSO legislation was introduced in 1998 while many people, including myself, were fast asleep. The Georgia Family Council is a big backer as is any organization which supports privatizing public education - the legislation was awarded the prestigious (not) "Black Hole" award this past year - google that one please. Stephanie Saul from the NY Times also did an extensive story on it. There are many people who want to privatize education because they are "free market" advocates and many others who want religious education paid for by public funds. The SSO program is a back door mechanism for this - I think its fair to say that most schools receiving SSO money are religion based. They have gotten around the constitution. The money is removed from traditional public schools at the same time. Double win.
Chris
2:53 pm on Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Frank, I'll echo Elizabeth's last two words. Removing money from ineffective government schools and routing it to effective private schools would be a "double win" for the students. She's clearly more concerned with the institutions and the employees than the students, but I did want to point out that it would be an actual "double win."
Holly J
2:07 pm on Friday, October 5, 2012
Frank, in a nutshell,the "parent trigger" legislation allows a group of parents to "take over" a failing school and replace the staff. I think it is rarely used, but frequently threatened. And, as with all "gee, that sounds like a great idea!" laws, there are lots of unintended consequences and (likely intentional) loopholes. Just like with charter schools, it's pushed as the silver bullet, but may not be quite so effective.
Hal Schneider
2:10 pm on Friday, October 5, 2012
A little research (and/or reflection) would have made the answer to the question in the OP self-evident! No one on the GCSA is a publicly elected official. The GCSA does not have direct access to taxpayer money as do Boards of Education, Boards of Commission, Mayors and City Councilmen. If you do not like the law concerning function and tax status of 501(c)(3) groups, perhaps you should spend time getting that changed.
Steely Dan
11:43 am on Saturday, October 6, 2012
Great points, Hal but the only thing the NO folks have any interest in spending any time on is getting more funding for their various school districts. Though they can oft point out the various restrictions preventing public schools from attaining excellence, they never seem to do much to get those restrictions removed.
If only they channeled their hatred of charter schools & parental choice into a movement to remove some of the insidious federal regs preventing teachers from being able to do their jobs (like NCLB, for example, or giving teachers more disciplinary power), public education might better fit the needs of the tens of thousands of parents who opt out of the public ed. system for private, charter, or home-schooling options.
But no - as evidenced by the anti-1162 movement, the only thing they seriously concern themselves with is anything that threatens their incessant needs for More Funding.
Me
10:15 pm on Friday, October 5, 2012
How about state representatives and senators, the Governor's Office, etc.? They are allowed to campaign FOR the amendment, but superintendents should be forbidden from posting FACTUAL information on their system's webpage? (This actually seems a responsible, reasonable use of resources, as staff can refer community members and parents to the FAQ first rather than spending time personally answering each (inevitable) question individually.)
Hal Schneider
12:49 am on Saturday, October 6, 2012
No, state representatives & senators and the Governor's office should ALSO not be permitted to expend public funds supporting or opposing EITHER candidates or ballot questions!
Me
9:21 am on Saturday, October 6, 2012
How about a state representative (Lindsey) as registered chairperson of a PAC (Families for Better Public Schools) which has accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars of contributions from out of state? That would include $250K from Alice Walton (Arkansas), $100K from K12 Ed (Virginia). $50K from Charter Schools USA (FL), $6K from Ed Reform Now (NY), $50K from two donors in Grand Rapids, MI.
(Plus $500 from President/CEO, GA Charter Schools Association and $1K from McKenna Long & Aldridge, who, BTW, provide legal services for the PAC.)
(This is all on the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission, formerly the State Ethics Commission, website that Jen provided the link and navigation directions for above. Thanks, Jen!)
The state legislature creates the budget; ALL the taxes collected in Georgia included there. School boards and superintendents are restricted in informing the voting public of the facts of the proposal, but state legislators can form and lead a group to spread misinformation? How does that make sense?
Steely Dan
11:50 am on Saturday, October 6, 2012
Me:"School boards and superintendents are restricted in informing the voting public of the facts of the proposal,"
-----------------------------
If that's the case, how did the CCSD super & board pass their anti-1162 Resolution just last spring and why weren't they prosecuted?
Personally, the last thing I need is a school board and superintendent telling me how to vote. I suspect many voters feel the same. Anyone needing such a group to tell them how to vote probably shouldn't be casting a vote in the first place.
Athens Mama
1:38 pm on Saturday, October 6, 2012
@Steely Dan: "Whatever it takes" means whatever it takes to keep the machine full of gas, cranked, and rolling... Even it the machine bulldozes flowers in its path....
Me
8:18 pm on Saturday, October 6, 2012
@Steely Dan I meant that the AG has indicated they are restricted.
Do you want the governor telling you how to vote? Or a state legislator with vested interests? Fulton just posted a Q&A, without direction on voting "yea" or "nay," but they were included in the complaint. Who should be afraid of voters getting the facts? (Maybe those who want to share an alternate version?)
Noting once again - if those about whom the AG received complaints are under gag orders, so should be the governor, et al.
Steely Dan
2:30 pm on Monday, October 8, 2012
"Me", I totally agree with you. The law needs to be applied to all parties.
Unfortunately, the CCSD board and numerous PTAs continue to flaunt their illegal behavior by actively using taxpayer-provided resources to campaign for a clearly-liberal, clearly-Democrat NO vote. The CCSD super and some PTA Presidents need to be arrested, just to make a point that noone is above the law.
From what I've read, the governor complied and took down his website YES message. I won't hold my breath waiting for the NO crowd to adhere to anything requiring ethics or legality.
Jessie
9:38 am on Saturday, October 13, 2012
Dan, The Governor traveled to Cherokee County to sign HB 797 into law. How did he get there? I am guessing he used taxpayer money, sat in a chair paid for by taxpayer funds and used a pen paid for by tax dollar all during the confines of a school day. Student were take out of class to attend this event. There were numerous photos taken with many smiling dignitaries (did they use taxpater $ to get there) and a oh, yea, a few token students.
As far as PTAs, they are permitted to voice an opinion on an ISSUE as long as it is not their main purpose. Just as churches can operate at a school during the confines of their service, PTAs, during the confines of a meeting, may express their position on issues.
Me
9:33 pm on Monday, October 8, 2012
Steely Dan: How about the events where the Governor campaigned FOR the amendment? It cost much more (ALL tax money) to provide transportation, security, support staff, etc. for his stumping than a few minutes of a school board meeting. So is the governor ready to be sued and to "the public treasury for any actual violations?" (He should remember that any legal fees he incurs should be personal, not taxpayer-funded, or he can reimburse those as well.) You acknowledge that he had a Vote Yes message on his website. And how is an FAQ in the Fulton web page, with no position taken, against any laws?
And now this pro-amendment group is COSTING our school system money to pay lawyers to respond to this frivolous suit. I hope we can counter-sue to recoup the expenses, as I GUARANTEE this will cost more than creating that FAQ did...
http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/de30a3e16d2941ddb68cc02a86b2155d/GA--School-Boards-Lawsuit-1st-Ld-Writethru
(You want some bad PR, just try to arrest some PTA presidents. They ARE allowed to express their opinions. ACLU will be on that case in half a hearbeat.)
Steely Dan
12:34 pm on Friday, October 12, 2012
What events did Deal campaign at for 1162? I'm only aware that he's taken down any pro-Yes comments. Meanwhile, various PTAs continue to flaunt the law.
Contrary to your belief, PTA presidents aren't allowed to hold meetings on public facilities and express their opinions at such meetings. Though the recent ruling does indeed show that the legal system is predictably in the pockets of the failed, liberal public education system too, apparently.
If it's true that Deal campaigned for 1162, then I'm glad. Clearly, the NO crowd sees no problems whatsoever with breaking the law to advance their Agenda of Failure and Mediocrity. When in Rome, do as the Romans.
Me
9:39 pm on Monday, October 8, 2012
"ATLANTA — A lawsuit filed Monday by five Georgia residents accuses the state's 180 local school districts of illegally using taxpayer money to campaign against a proposed constitutional amendment that would put more control of charter schools in the state's hands....Local boards currently control charters, though any applicant who is denied a charter may appeal to the state Board of Education...Filed in Fulton County Superior Court, the suit names the Fulton County School System and the Gwinnett County School District as lead defendants. ..The suit cites state officials giving public speeches opposing the amendment...Plaintiffs include...Rae Anne Harkness...and Kara Martin. The complaint asks the court to block the defendants from any further alleged violations and to reimburse the public treasury for any actual violations. Superior Court Judge Wendy Shoob has scheduled a hearing on whether to grant a preliminary injunction for Wednesday at 2 p.m. An injunction is granted in cases where a judge believes the party seeking the order has a reasonable chance to win the case. Shoob has been involved in the charter school debate already... Shoob sided with the state,.. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed Shoob in a 4-3 ruling. That led Gov. Nathan Deal and others to push the amendment that voters will settle next month." (http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/de30a3e16d2941ddb68cc02a86b2155d/GA--School-Boards-Lawsuit-1st-Ld-Writethru)
Me
9:41 pm on Monday, October 8, 2012
So if anyone wonders why this was filed in Fulton County, a system in which neither the Board nor the superintendent have made public statements on the amendment, it seems obvious that the group was judge-shopping.
That doesn't smell right, does it?
Elizabeth Hooper
8:06 am on Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Sure does have an odor. Wouldn't you just love to know who's footing the bill for the lawsuit? Think it's Alice?
Chris
3:00 pm on Tuesday, October 9, 2012
This writer seems to want to apply rules for government organizations to apply to everyone. Why? Perhaps the rules should apply to her as well. Open records request for you Elizabeth ... turn over all your tax returns and medial records for the world to see. Crazy, right? Exactly, because private nonprofit organizations are not governments and the rules don't apply to them. And the membership dues they receive cease to government dollars once they are paid over. Do you expect Exxon to become subject to government laws merely because a police officer fills up his gas tank there one day. Or how about the grocery store the mayor shops at ... his salary was tax dollars so everyone who receives that money should be subject to your same silly rule. As a taxpayer, your rights to how those dollars are used stops once they are no longer government assets. There's a clear difference whether you like it or not. And while I appreciate the GCSA Director providing an answer via the post above, she didn't owe you one speck of toilet paper filler.
Jen
6:48 pm on Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Well, then a "government asset" would be a school building wouldn't it? I mean we could get really crazy connecting all the dots so that eventually every school district in the state would be sued (including the state charter schools). Have you seen the move "Making the Grade?" The one that was shown to all the legislators in January at an event sponsored by the GCSA (to lobby for the charter referendum legislation)? Weren't "state assets" used to make that film?