For reasons I don’t understand, the UTLA endorsed both Monica Ratliff, a teacher, and her opponent Antonio Sanchez. Sanchez has almost $4 million from the billionaires. Monica has raised $42,000.
A music teacher in Los Angeles wrote this appeal;
Dear Teachers,
I am sending this to a few LAUSD teacher e-mail addresses that I have. I do not have many, so please forward to others.
There is a totally crucial school board race on this Tuesday’s ballot, in LAUSD district 6, between Teacher Monica Ratliff, and lawyer-wannabe politician Antonio Sanchez.
You probably have heard that UTLA is endorsing both candidates, which is effectively the same as neutrality, endorsing neither. They are totally wrong in doing so, which I think at least some of UTLA leadership realizes, but they say that they cannot change their endorsement now, due to UTLA rules.
It is totally crucial that Monica Ratliff win that race, although she is being outspent 100 to 1 by her opponent. If you live in District 6, make sure to vote for her, and let your neighbors know about the race. No matter where you live, you can help by volunteering in her campaign in these last couple days, or at least make a donation. Please keep reading for more information.
Monica Ratliff is an excellent experienced 5th grade teacher in LAUSD, with many good ideas about education. She is a UTLA member, and was elected delegate to the UTLA House of Representatives. She is endorsed by Diane Ravitch, current LAUSD board members Bennett Kayser and Marguerite LaMotte, former board member David Tokofsky, both the LA Times and LA Daily News, AALA, and others.
Her opponent, Antonio Sanchez, a lawyer and former aide to Mayor Villaraigosa, with no experience in education (but who seems to want to launch a political career via the LAUSD school board), is being heavily funded, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth, by the worst foes of teachers—Michelle Rhee, Eli Broad, Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, Rupert Murdoch, the Walton family, etc. (You can bet that these donors have a reason for putting so much money into Sanchez, and expect something in return from their bought candidate. If Sanchez wins, he is likely to be the most reliable ally on the board of John Deasy and Monica Garcia.) (This is really a crucial race, and it is tragic that UTLA is not putting its full weight behind Ratliff.)
Below this e-mail is one from Brent Smiley, an unofficial UTLA organizer for the Monica Ratliff campaign, with information on how you can help in her campaign. (I think Smiley may have once been chairman of PACE.)
Before the Smiley e-mail, I will include some links that I would suggest you read, related to this race:
Monica Ratliff is fully endorsed by the new PAC of Diane Ravitch, “Network for Public Education” , as their first endorsement. (Please read about that endorsement here.) (I would suggest too, you join and contribute to Diane Ravitch’s PAC, to help fight off the big money poured into the coffers of anti-teacher candidates from the likes of Bloomberg, Gates, Broad, etc.)
Please read this article about a $350,000 donation to Sanchez from Bloomberg, via Villaraigosa’s school PAC.) (In case anyone reading cannot access that article in the LA Times, I will paste the article at the bottom of this e-mail, after the Smiley e-mail.)
Please read A post by Monica Ratliff to Diane Ravitch’s blog, prefaced by Diane Ravitch.
An appeal by Diane Ravitch to UTLA
Tweets by David Tokofsky, former LAUSD board member.
Monica Ratliff campaign web site
Please do all you can to help elect Monica Ratliff to the LAUSD School Board this Tuesday. Please share this information with others who did not get it.
See the Brent Smiley e-mail directly below. (The first LA Times article linked to aboveappears below that.)
Have a nice weekend,
Mike
From: laeducators@yahoogroups.com [mailto:laeducators@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Brent Smiley
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 6:02 PM
To: laeducators@yahoogroups.com; peac_group@googlegroups.com; LASUBS@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [laeducators] MONICA RATLIFF GOTV
Friends!
This weekend is the LAST weekend before the election and it is imperative that we hit the streets to Get Out The Vote!
Monica Ratliff is a 5th grade classroom teacher at San Pedro Elementary who graduatedColumbia University and Columbia Law. When Law wasn’t enough to satisfy the hunger to help, she turned to education and graduated from UCLA to take her role in the ranks of classroom teachers.
For the past decade she has been in the classroom, dealing with the same issues each of us face, every single day.
How are we supposed to get these kids what they need to succeed?
That question keeps us up at night, we think about how we would change things if we could. Well, we can.
This is Monica Ratliff’s perspective, the classroom, and right now we have an opportunity to elect her to the LAUSD School Board.
This campaign is for real, despite being outspent over 100 to 1, they forced a runoff. Teams in the field are being met almost universally with receptive audiences. They have committed to vote for Monica but need to be reminded to vote.
That will not happen with just good tidings and cheer.
HELP
Your time or your dime.
We need you desperately right now. This election will be decided by a couple of hundred votes and people are voting right now.
A teacher, Right Now, at the doorstep or on the phone will swing that vote almost 100% of the time.
Come be that teacher! Come make some phone calls or join us for a friendly precinct walk as we remind voters to vote for Monica Ratliff.
Time to Get Out The Vote.
This campaign is like no other in recent memory, it has been positive, uplifting, a message of hope and change,
of the ability of a fifth grade classroom teacher from an inner-city school to share a vision about what a real classroom looks like.
GOTV
We will meet on Lindley just north of Victory on Saturday at 10am. This is Reseda High School. Or if you can’t make it this Saturday, how about Sunday. Same place, same time. Or if you can’t do that, how about phone banking with Sean Abajian on Thursday (see below). Or, if you can’t make it this week, can you make a donation to the campaign? https://monicaratliff2013.nationbuilder.com/donate Any amount helps.
This campaign can succeed if the teachers that this message is reaching will take just a moment to help.
Help comes in many forms, but on the School Board help comes with Four Votes.
Please help today.
Brent Smiley
Teacher
Lawrence Middle School
See LA Times article about Bloomberg contribution to Sanchez below………
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-school-board-money-20130425,0,6967603.story
Michael Bloomberg donates $350,000 toL.A. school board race
The New York City mayor’s contribution to a political action committee led by L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will benefit board candidate Antonio Sanchez.
By Howard Blume, Los Angeles Times
April 24, 2013, 10:30 p.m.
New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg donated $350,000 to the Los Angeles school board campaign this week, records show.
Bloomberg’s contribution, which was filed Tuesday, will enlarge the already sizable war chest of the Coalition for School Reform, a political action committee led by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The goal of the coalition is to back candidates who will support the policies of L.A. schools Supt. John Deasy and pledge to keep him on the job.
Before the March primary, Bloomberg contributed $1 million for the three board races — the largest contribution ever made in an L.A. school board campaign. Bloomberg also gave a sizable donation of an undisclosed amount to the advocacy arm for the California Charter Schools Assn. That group spent close to $400,000 to support candidates in the election.
The beneficiary of the latest donation is Antonio Sanchez, 31, a former Villaraigosa aide. He is facing teacher and former attorney Monica Ratliff, 42, in a May 21 runoff to represent the east San Fernando Valley on the Board of Education.
The March primary yielded mixed results for the coalition, which spent about $3.8 million. One of its endorsed candidates won and another lost. In the loss, the coalition tried unsuccessfully to defeat incumbent Steve Zimmer, who was backed by employees’ unions. Zimmer, a frequent swing vote, said he has not targeted Deasy for dismissal, and it’s not clear that Deasy’s job is on the line in the contest over the remaining seat.
But Deasy’s supporters are taking no chances. Even before Bloomberg’s latest donation, the coalition had put together more than $600,000 for the second round of a campaign on Sanchez’s behalf. This total included $250,000 from local philanthropist Eli Broad, who had already donated $250,000 for the first round. And StudentsFirst, the Sacramento-based advocacy group headed by former District of Columbia schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee, gave $100,000 — after an earlier contribution of $250,000.
In the primary, money spent by or for Sanchez outpaced Ratliff’s spending by a ratio of about 84 to 1.
So far, Ratliff has reported raising $7,297 for the runoff. Sanchez has reported raising $14,880.
United Teachers Los Angeles endorsed all the candidates in the race but did not provide any financial backing in the primary. For the runoff, the union gave $1,000 to Ratliff.
Click here for the endorsement of Monica Ratliff by Diane Ravitch’s new PAC.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I have posted versions of this today at two of Diane’s blog sites…so, here it is again.
The LA Times today, Saturday, in an article on the election by Howard Blume, finally reveals why UTLA gave a double endorsement. They seem to have been blackmailed by some legislators who demanded they endorse Sanchez who ostensibly plans to use School Board as a stepping stone to higher office.
If UTLA refused, they seem to have been told, they would no longer have access to our California State House which is presided over by Mr. ‘Speaker of the House’ John Perez, nephew of Mr. ‘Mayor of LA’ Villaraigosa. If true, I guess nepotism tops all since V. and Deasy, and their billionaire supporters for closing our public schools in favor of privatization, rule not only LAUSD, but also Sacramento, it would seem. This is where Madam Rhee and her Mayor husband (who recently closed 23 schools) live.
It may sound like a convoluted soap opera, but it seems to be the story of our Golden State today. Who says California legislators cannot play dirty pool exactly like Chicago???
If anyone knows more, please post it. And please stop calling Sanchez a lawyer when his own site identifies him as an urban planner.
It is the better candidate, Ratliff who was a public service lawyer before finding her calling as an elementary school teacher in the inner city when she realized, she says, that the only way to break the cycle of poverty in America is through public education.
Ellen Lubic, do you have a link to that LA Times article, It is the first I heard of it.
If true, it is still wrong for UTLA leaders to accede to such blackmail. Instead, they should publicize it, and make those legislators look bad.
Cal state democratic leaders (including state legislators) recently put out a statement criticizing the “corporate education reformers”, so they would be embarrased to now be found in bed with them.
Back to the original post. I would suggest that any LAUSD teachers reading this copy and paste that post into an e-mail, and send it to all LAUSD teacher e-mail addresses that you have. (Or write your own, if you prefer.)
It seems clear now that UTLA very regrettably will not inform its members that they should vote and campaign for Monica Ratliffe,. (Such a communication from UTLA, even at this late stage, could easily swing the election to her.)
Therefore, all of us who are aware of this, should do everything we possibly can to inform our colleagues about this. It is not enough only to post on this blog site, likely read by a very tiny fraction of LAUSD teachers.
Therefore, talk to any teachers you can at school tomorrow, especially if you find out that they live in District 6.
But also–send information to every single LAUSD teacher e-mail address you have. (Even if not in district 6, as they can still help with the campaign, as this affects all of us.) A very easy way to do that is simply to copy and paste the origiinal message of this post into the body of the e-mail, make up an interesting title that will attract attention, put the e-mail address you have into the To:, CC;, or BCC: fields, and click Send. That would be enough, and not take more than a few minutes. If you wish however, you can add comments of your own, or even write your own message instead. (The messsage in the OP has several good links n it though, although one can add more.)
Please LAUSD teacher (and any concerned reader who has any e-mail addresses of LAUSD teachers), since UTLA is not doing its job of notifying teachers about this, we have to do whatever we can to spread the word. It is really not enough only to comment here.PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD TO ALL LAUSD teacher e-mail addresses you have NOW! It is already late, so don’t put it off. Do it right now,then report here about it. (Include in your report here how many you wrote to, if you wish.)
Such effort can make a major difference in LAUSD for many years to come. Take a few minutes to do it. Thank you.
Mike…I am doing what you are doing and contacting all teachers and also all voters in the NE SFV in Ratliff’s District. Actually am blanketing all my lists with the same message, and am encouraging my colleagues to do the same.
Google LA Times, and then Howard Blume, and you can find the article last week. You need to read to close to the end to see this inference. Takes some careful reading, even between the lines. I am a university public policy educator who works closely with some in Sacramento…the potential arm twisting of UTLA by some of the insiders is not only shameful, but could be grounds for impeachment if we could get someone to tell the truth.
Ellen
Thanks for that work, Ellen,
Yes, I found the article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lausd-election-20130518,0,2109824.story
It is not direct blackmail as I earlier had inferred, but some UTLA leaders thinking that they would get in better with the legislature by supporting their groomed new addition to their political machine. Really stupid thinking IMO.
You likely saw this one as well:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sanchez-utla-20130425,0,1921204.story
Although they deny a direct quid pro quo, Solkovits pretty much admitted there that there was discussion of UTLA having some say in Sanchez’s staff.
I wrote to the UTLA Board about both these articles, Perhaps I will post some of it here.I once again implored them to change and support Monica R., although very unlikely to happen.
By the way, I found out you were right, that Sanchez is not a lawyer. However, I still say that is not important. (Of course I would not describe him as such again.) However, I would not call him an “urban planner”, as you did. He may have that degree, but i did not see any evidence of him ever being employed in that capacity. His only job experience seems to be an “aide”, first to Villaraigosa, later to the LA County Labor Federation. His only ambition seems to be to become a politician, which can be a very lucrative profession in LA City Hall, and in Sacramento, with all the graft,. (He has already had a good start, in taking in hundreds of thousands from the “reformers”.) For that young man, the LAUSD School Board appears to be a launching pad for a life of wallowing in corporate graft,
Ellen, you mentioned impeachment. (I assume of UTLA officers.) As far as telling the truth, I assume some high in UTLA have done so, and that is how Howard Blume got his info.
Despite all the prior complaints about UTLA leadership, I would have never considered impeachment or recall before. But this Ratliff-Sanchez thing takes the cake, just allowing the school board to go to the other side, for whatever they hope to gain from it,
Do you know the procedures for impeachment or recall? From what I understand, many in the HOR and even BOD are unhappy with the top leadership.
Of course though, I would then have no idea who might be interested in becoming the new leaders, and whether they might be better?
From the 5/17 article about the race in the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lausd-election-20130518,0,2109824.story ), regarding newspaper editors and administrators perceptions of Sanchez:
“Newspaper editorial boards and some observers have concluded that Sanchez’s resume is too thin for the job, especially when compared to Ratliff.”
“We liked him, but his response to our questions lacked depth,” said Judith Perez, president of Associated Administrators of Los Angeles, which represents district administrators. Ratliff “had a deep knowledge of teaching and learning. She was clear on the priorities of students in the district.”
Compare that with UTLA’s meeting with Sanchez, from the same article:
“In union meetings, the leadership has said that Sanchez was being groomed for higher office by officials they needed to appease, especially if they wanted to prevail in the Legislature on laws affecting teaching evaluations and tenure rules, said members who were present.
Some high-level union members alleged that there was a deal for Sanchez to let UTLA choose his chief of staff.”
In short, newspaper editors and school administrators looked at Sanchez and concluded that he did not have sufficient experience and background in education for the job.
UTLA officials looked at Sanchez and saw political connections in Sacramento, money and power, and said “Let’s make a deal”.
Very sad.
Another possible option to impeachment or recall–Vote of No confidence? I don’t know if it should be of all the current officers, or only some, like Fletcher and Solkovits. (From the article, the latter seems to be the worst regarding this deal-making stuff. Of course others have a responsibility for going along with it.)
Following is an e-mail that I sent to UTLA officers last night, after reading the two recent Blume articles in the LA Times: I have receievd no response to it.
Hello ,
Can you confirm or deny to me whether the following statements in LA Times in articles by education reporter Howard Blume are true or not? (I think you would agree that Blume is a reputable reporter, and not a union-basher like some.)
From:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lausd-election-20130518,0,2109824.story
“In union meetings, the leadership has said that Sanchez was being groomed for higher office by officials they needed to appease, especially if they wanted to prevail in the Legislature on laws affecting teaching evaluations and tenure rules, said members who were present.”
True or not?
From:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sanchez-utla-20130425,0,1921204.story
This is the rumor discussed earlier. I know that the union and Sanchez deny that there was a quid pro quo deal. However, what about this statement:
“Solkovits said that the union had interviewed Sanchez before the coalition embraced him. He added that all UTLA-backed candidates were open to the idea that “at least one of the people on the staff would have relatively close ties to UTLA. I mentioned that at a board meeting,” Solkovits said. The critics “chose to construe this as a deal.”
“The goal was always to have good working relationships with whoever got elected,” Solkovits said. “We don’t ask for guarantees.””
True or not? It sounds like a direct quote from Solkovits to Blume. As I said, the full rumor of a quid pro quo promise sounded implausible to me, but this sounds much more likely, that some UTLA official might think in the way that Solkovits is quoted here. (Not exactly a “deal”, but a vague promise, which likely Sanchez would not honor anyhow. Lose the school board to full Deasy control for that?)
I consider it highly mistaken though, that others in UTLA leadership went along with the kind of thinking shown in both quotes, apparently thinking that Sanchez would win anyhow, so try to get in good with him and state political leaders who support him, to get better leverage in the legislature, and perhaps have a say in his staff.
I don’t think that UTLA would gain any influence that way at all. If UTLA had some say in choosing a staff member, that member would then be working for Sanchez, and would follow Sanchez’s orders, not UTLA’s. With Sanchez getting those megabuck donations from the corporate “reformers”, he will follow their tune, the same one as Deasy, and will in no way be good for us, no matter if UTLA has any choice in picking his staff. A hostile school board is a much worse outcome than access to the legislature.
When the first UTLA talks with Sanchez occurred, it may be true, as Solkovits is quoted, that the “reform” coalition had not yet backed Sanchez. But that support has been known for months now, no?
You guys should not have gone along with this, which makes UTLA leaders look more like the sleazy politicians they are trying to placate, rather than principled educational leaders and teacher representatives.
I am sure that more info will come out in the press in the future.
It is still not too late to back out of it, and be the leaders you should be. It is very late, but not too late. Issue a statement immediately to all UTLA members encouraging full support of Monica Ratliff for District 6 school board (and why), even though that conflicts with the official UTLA endorsement. Show some courage and integrity, for the sake of the children and teachers of this great city. If you do so, you guys can earn back the support and respect of UTLA membership.
I think we all can celebrate. that Monica Ratliff won that election. The efforts of many UTLA members helped in that effort, and may have played a major role in her election.
It is interesting though, to look at the article at utla.net about Monica’s victory–http://www.utla.net/ratliff
Here is a quote in it from UTLA president Warren Fletcher:
“We are overjoyed that a working classroom teacher will be part of the School Board,” UTLA President Warren Fletcher said. “She has on-the-ground knowledge of the harmful policies and destructive mismanagement that have hurt our schools, and she will bring a perspective that is sorely needed.”
I agree with everything he said above. But I have to wonder about that robocall from Fletcher we received on Monday, that spoke of “two fine candidates” for that school board election, implying that there was no difference between the two, and that both were equally good, when the facts were exactly the opposite.
I also have to wonder about both Fletcher and UTLA Secretary David Lyell attending the David Sanchez (Ratliff’s opponent) “victory” party Tuesday night. https://twitter.com/LASchoolReport/status/337061961772716032
I also have to wonder about a union president (Fletcher) who when appealed to personally by Diane Ravitch to fully support Monica Ratliff, never responded to her e-mail, and continued an absolutely ridiculous policy of “dual endorsement”.
Another quote from that article:
“Monica Ratliff’s win continues a solid streak of success for UTLA-endorsed candidates.”
What gall for UTLA leadership to take credit for the Ratliff win! Do they so underestimate the intelligence of UTLA members, that they “endorse” both candidates in a two-way race so that they can claim victory no matter which of the two wins against the other? (I am sure they would also be claiming “victory” if Sanchez had won, although that would have been a great loss for the teachers and students of this school district..)
Although most UTLA members are like myself, very happy with the Ratliff win, I don’t think we should therefore excuse the inexcusable behavior of UTLA leadership in this race. I think there should be an independent investigation of this, leading to a possible impeachment, recall, or vote of no confidence in some or all of current UTLA officers.