February 2020 – Los Angeles Education Examiner

Bloomfield Devotes $3.7m Education Dollars Toward Elections, Not Schools

It’s been a week since last peek at the LAUSD board election spending. The rate of spending has slowed down a bit since over $1m was anted up by Bill Bloomfield and the California Charter School Association (CCSA, a charter school lobbying and service organization) between Thursday and Friday of one week ago. But the absolute spending in LAUSD school board elections since just last Friday has increased by nearly two and a half million dollars.

Across all four board races the total reported to the City of LA Ethics Commission is $8.2m. With almost half as much spent on negative campaigning as positive campaigning. In LAUSD7 one candidate (Gutierrez) registers no independent expenditures actually supporting the candidate, with all expenditures on her behalf spent in opposition.

The only candidate explicitly endorsed by the charter lobby is running in LAUSD3, recipient of an onslaught of resources both positive and deceptively negative. Expenditures favoring charter school public relations specialist Koziatek over incumbent former principal Schmerelson, run at 4 to 1. And in LAUSD5 where the expenditure imbalance is half again as great – 6:1 – the extravagantly-favored challenger didn’t even present herself at the only scheduled debate in that district. The incumbent, veteran teacher Goldberg, was the only one to show up to the charter-industry-sponsored event.

oppsup-comparison-update-022820-IEC

Figure 1 above is an updated visual representation of the relative distribution of independent expenditures across all four board district races. Boxes are proportional in size to the total; negative spending is below the line. These data broken out by donor are reported as of February 28, 2020. The total relative distribution can be readily compared with February 21, 2020 and February 20, 2020.

Bloomberg’s Autocracy In Flower: What His Political Spending Tells Us About His Candidacy

With billionaires circling the wagons on the debate stage and encircling our sensibilities in local municipal school board elections, it is reasonable to consider how moguls-turned-politicians influence politics. Michael Bloomberg is no stranger to California education politics; how has he been donating toward control in our California elections?

The good news from a local-autonomy standpoint is… not much, not this time. Like the lobby association for charter schools, CCSA, charter ideologues seem to be allowing a charter candidate to fall out of the primaries, at least in the open District 7 seat. Currently, several candidates are seriously vying for the seat, and most of the big money backing charter school candidates is waiting to see whether Tanya Franklin or Mike Lansing emerges as the challenger to the union-backed Patricia Castellanos, or Oakland-schools charter maven-regulator Silke Bradford.

Michael Bloomberg has not contributed to any Independent Expenditure Committees (IECs), where the really big bankroll lies in this year’s school board races. He has instead contributed maximally ($1200) only to candidate Franklin.

Editorial : Yes on Prop. 13

Last week, we wrote about some confusion about what is, and isn’t, on the ballot in the ongoing spring primary ballot that closes next Tuesday.*** But let’s be clear: if you care about public education, you should vote yes on State Measure 13 or Prop 13.

As we noted last week, Prop 13 is a statewide bond measure that will raise $15 bllion to use for immediate costs, to fix crumbling schools, upgrade emergency response equipment and basically make the structures our students learn in more modern and safe.

What Even One Day Bears: Charters Scrimmage For Majority Control Of The LAUSD Board

In reports downloaded from LA City Ethics Commission records posted between 2/20/20 and 2/21/20 – just 24 hours – the California Charter School Association (CCSA) lobby anted up nearly ¾ of a million more dollars in the LAUSD board District 3 race. Despite being one of the most visible forces in school board lobbying and elections, CCSA has endorsed in only one of four school board races this year.

In all, over one million new dollars was recorded, with more than 80% spent by partisans intent on reclaiming the majority board they lost when their candidate Ref Rodriguez plead guilty to felony money laundering and Jackie Goldberg was elected to his seat.

For comparison, in contrast with large contributions we reported previously, free market ideologue Bill Bloomfield contributed a modest $61,000 in the same time. Meanwhile CCSA spent nearly $500,000 dollars on their singular candidate Koziatek, and just shy of another one-third million smearing her opponent.

comparison-of-IE-donations-DL-0219-022120-to-all-Mar20-elections

Table 1 above compares independent expenditures reported in the past 24 hours (bottom), with those in the preceding five months (top) between 5/19/19 and 2/19/20.

An update of the chart published last week, 2/20/20, uses proportional squares to visually depict the pro and con independent expenditures in all LAUSD board elections.

oppsup-comparison-update-022220-IEC

Relative distribution reported 2/21/20 of all independent expenditures in all LAUSD board races, 5/19/19-2/21/20.

Top News: Charter Relocations, More on the Big Money in LAUSD Races, Schools and Communities First

Kyle Stokes at KPCC/LAist has been keeping a close eye on the school board race. Breaking down who is spending and when they are spending, he shows us that the outside money has been flowing towards a slate of candidates that oppose the pro-public schools majority on the Council.

The Los Angeles Times’ Steve Lopez looks at the mailings against Scott Schmerelson and urges readers to take a shower to clean off the slime after reading about it.

More on spending later today, including nearly $1 million dropped on one-day last week. (Update: here it is.)

Charter School Advocates Spending Big in LAUSD Board Elections

The California Charter School Association (CCSA) is the largest and most visible pro-charter organization in Los Angeles’ political scene. CCSA has chosen to endorse just one candidate in LAUSD’s 2020 school board elections, but that doesn’t mean that pro-charter candidates aren’t receiving millions of dollars in support from independent expenditure committees (IEC’s) aligned with the charter school movement.

In LAUSD District 3, the singularly favored CCSA Candidate is Madeline Koziatek, a specialist in community outreach who works at a charter school. When CCSA selects a candidate the tendency in giving is of shock and awe. Amongst other activities, the CCSA is responsible for the attack on Scott Schmerelson that has been called everything from dishonest to anti-semitic.

However, pro-charter candidates not in District 3 are not being left without support. One local free marketeer is functioning as de facto surrogate donor for the group by privately funding prodigious IEs in support and opposition to all four LAUSD races. Bill Bloomfield is a major benefactor of education reform groups such as Parent Revolution, Educators For Excellence, Students Matter, and Great Public Schools LA. Together with his immediate family he has contributed $3.2m between 2013-2016 to CCSA.

¡Prop 13 Is Not About Property Tax! (But It Is About Funding Schools)

In 1978 Californians voted to limit their personal tax liability. The ballot initiative approved at that time was titled and summarized by the CA Secretary of State as “Proposition 13, Tax Limitations Initiative (1978)”. Click here for a terrific retrospective (or primer, depending on your age).

This is not the Proposition 13 on March 3, 2020’s primary ballot.

We are currently voting (yes, the vote has started already, and will be ongoing now through 3/3/20) on a ballot initiative to authorize $15b in bonds for school and educational facilities throughout California. This current state measure is also termed “Proposition 13”, but its official summary title is “School And College Facilities Bond (2020)”.

Rounding Up the Top News

Every week we’ll be rounding up the top education news. Here’s the top news from the last eight days.

Who is funding the LAUSD elections?

LAUSD Board elections are becoming more and more expensive. We’ve already discussed how much of that money is from dark money PAC’s, but over the last week larger, legacy media have taken a look at the mega-bucks that are taking over the LAUSD Board elections.

LAist notes that the record for spending in an LAUSD primary election is at least $5.7 million. That record is being challenged with a couple of weeks left, and the figure of over $4 million spent so far is rising rapidly.

Prodigious Funding Drives Distorted Accusations in LAUSD3

Scurrilous flyers have been peppering LAUSD board member Scott Schmerelson’s 3rd District. As former teacher, counselor and principal, the incumbent board member, Mr. Schmerelson, is challenged by Marilyn Koziatek, a community outreach spokesperson for a large charter school in that district, and by Elizabeth Bartels-Badger, a long-time political and community activist. The race has been quiet because Mr. Schmerelson is well-qualified as a current board member and former educator and unencumbered by overt scandal; a clear contrast with his opponents, neither of whom are educators though one is an administrator working in Education.

LAUSD3 includes the neighborhoods of {Canoga Park, Chatsworth, Encino, Granada Hills, Lake Balboa, Reseda, North Hills, North Hollywood, Northridge, Mission Hills, Porter Ranch, Studio City, Tarzana, Valley Glen, Van Nuys, Woodland Hills, West Hills, Winnetka}. Angelenos in these areas (or parts of some, see the map here) will choose between these two voting in the primary election of March 3, 2020.

Reproducing the flyer here would only serve its purpose of propagating fake news, but the stated provenance is significant as an: “Ad paid for by Families and Teachers United, sponsored by California Charter Schools Association Advocates. Committee major funding from Charter Public Schools PAC. Not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate.”

That is, the charter school advocate’s candidate Koziatek can (by design; all candidates may as well) maintain plausible deniability regarding the ad’s insinuations because her campaign did not design the ad. Sidestepping the candidate, another entity is responsible: a PAC called ‘Charter Public Schools’.

Welcome To (And From) The Los Angeles Education Examiner

Welcome to the Los Angeles Education Examiner, your new source for news on public education in Los Angeles! We will address questions surrounding education in the vast LA region hoping to raise public consciousness about how things-educational matter to everyone here, day to day. We will host stories from other writers, do a weekly news roundup (this week’s was published yesterday) and produce our own original works around LAUSD, our teachers and our schools.

As it happens more public monies and control is exerted by the seven board members of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) from its downtown Los Angeles “Beaudry” headquarters than from across the 110/Harbor Freeway in LA’s City Hall. Join us for considerations ranging from what you need to know about simply “going to school” today, to analysis of why it all matters on a local and statewide level, whether you are student, parent or taxpayer.

The largest school district in California is the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), but the entirety of Los Angeles County (LAC) enrolls nearly two-and-a-half times as many students as attend LAUSD. There are 88 school districts within LAC, ranging in size from one school of 196 pupils (in 2018/19) to the giant LAUSD with over a thousand schools and well over a half-million students. Its largest (Granada Hills Charter High) school alone enrolls nearly 4700 pupils. See figure 1 below to trace LAUSD’s overall enrollment in graded and “traditional” schools (see below for definitions) since 1981. This and all figures can be enlarged by clicking the hyperlinked header or caption.

Enrollment has declined steadily since 2003/04 with a high of 747K students. Current enrollment of approximately 600K approaches that of three decades past.

Figure 1: LAUSD long-term enrollment in and traditional school types from 1981-2019

Many “fingertip facts” about LAUSD can be found here, including a list of municipalities adjacent to Los Angeles that are governed by LAUSD whether in whole or in part. Many different school “types” are listed but the full array is complicated and multidimensional. It is important to understand the extent of the system which includes our own singular, local school.

The most common distinction between school types is simply on the basis of student’s age or grade. Modern schools are differentiated as elementary (ES), middle (MS), and high schools (HS). Within LAUSD some campuses also operate as “Span” schools including a configuration of grades spanning {ES and MS}, {MS and HS} or some combination of all three levels.

In contrast to these “traditional” school types, LAUSD operates a set of “Options” schools according to State of California Education Code (state law pertaining to Education) as “Alternative Schools and Programs of Choice”. These ‘alternative’ schools differ on the basis of curriculum or environmental circumstances affecting students. The terminology is confounding because in 2009 a “Public School Choice” initiative (PSC) was adopted by the LAUSD school board (BOE) addressing school autonomy and management (see below). Thus there are two kinds of school ‘choices’ – ‘functional’ tied to the special needs of students and reflecting different curricula (“alternative”); and ‘operational’ tied to governance and reflecting administrative and managerial differences.