校务委员会要求使用公共资金来支持游说

2013年9月10日发布

作者:比尔·摩尔(Bill Moore),《博福特观察家》,2013年9月9日。

我收到的文件显示NC学校董事会协会(NCSBA)已组织了一个行动中心来支持其议程。他们要求校务委员会以滑动的比例向该行动中心捐款。年度捐款从$ 2,000到$ 10,000不等,具体取决于2313-14预计的平均每日会员资格。

2013年4月,NCSBA董事会投票通过授权建立NCSBA行动中心。这是501(c)(4),旨在加强地方学校董事会的倡导工作。 NC校园委员会是501(c)(3)。但是,这在法律上可以用于宣传和基层活动的金额受到限制。

This "action center" will act separately from the regular School Boards Association. The initial Board met in July and elected officers and a proposed budget. It then invoiced member school boards asking 对于 contributions. A copy of the invoice indicates "Amount Due" as in please pay not a request 对于 a voluntary contribution.

该行动中心董事会由NCSBA当前董事会的4名成员组成。它还有5位不是NCSBA董事会成员的学校董事会成员。关于意图的直接引用是:

“ NCSBAC将无权做任何与NCSBA立法议程不一致和相符的事情。”

They claim it will not endorse candidates or establish a political action committee. They believe this "Action Center" "will provide the ability to raise additional revenue to engage in social networking efforts, expand our messaging, interact with the media and advocate 对于 NCSBA legislation."

NCSCA表示,他们很积极地相信这项倡议将提供额外的资源,以保护促进和捍卫学校董事会的治理以及NCSBA的立法议程。

They contacted an attorney to see if local contributions to this action center were in violation of the law. Their attorney indicated that the action was legal since the NCSBA had reached its allowed spending limits as a 501(c)(3). Unlike the c-3, Federal law allows the 501(c)(4) (the Action Center) to "engage in unlimited advocacy 对于 policy positions"

They are not considered a PAC since they will not endorse candidates. However, as with PAC's, they will attempt to influence legislation in support 对于 their agenda

So it appears to be legal. However is it moral? Taxpayers already pay dues to the NC School Boards Association through membership of professional organizations paid by the local District. Is it fair 对于

them to take additional tax dollars to pay an "Action Center" 对于 them to lobby 对于 the NCSBA's agenda? In an age where Districts are complaining about shrinking dollars, expending thousands on political issues to influence the legislature is inappropriate. Instead how about using those funds in the classroom where it would do the most good.

我敦促您与学校董事会联系,并告诉他们您想使用可用资金来改善课堂教学。不影响NCSBA的议程。

2013年9月10日,上午11:25
维姬·博耶(Vicki Boyer) 说:

It used to be we could rely on our state legislators to support public education. That is no longer true. Public education may be in need of a group to speak 对于 them.

The question that arises is, if it is acceptable to see tax dollars leave the state in the 对于m of 'profits'从特许学校管理公司那里看到它进入私立学校的钱库,为什么这么糟?

2013年9月10日,下午5:08
TP沃尔福德 说:

Vicki -- so many issues that you hit, but none on target 对于 me.

1.立法者实际上代表了您的利益。大多数教育者投票"Dem"压倒性地你这边丢了,你什么'现在重听主要是为了在下次大选中吓scar您和其他人不同的结果。就像你一样'd处于强大的教师工会状态(即密歇根州,威斯康星州等)。

2.在其他州,有很强的老师'据说如果魔鬼是Dem自己会自己支持的工会(密歇根州的MEA在支持Jack Kevorkian时就证明了这一点'对政府而言)。同样的事情发生在这里。实际上,人们热烈争论这样的组织是"For"教育或教育工作者-他们似乎是"for"工会工作人员和Dem政治家。

3. I did some work 对于 a huge charter school district a couple of years ago. I didn'看不到巨额的钱离开一个州去另一个州。特许学校不是他们应该的答案,但它们也不是魔鬼'已经导致相信。同样,教师似乎很容易被恐惧引导。

告诉我-如果您的孩子在底特律公立学校区(我曾与之合作的一些特许学校)不会'您要替代吗?