This is a depressingly familiar story.
There are two slates running for the Denver school board. One slate is overwhelmingly outspent by the other. Out-of-state donors are pouring huge sums of money into the race from donors hoping to determine the outcome. They are helping only one side, the one associated with corporate reform (charter schools, privatization, high-stakes testing, demoralizing teachers with invalid measures, top-down mandates, indifference to community involvement).
This slate represents the status quo in Denver. Its advocates have been in charge of the Denver public schools for the past nine years and produced no improvements.
On the other side is a slate of four Denver citizens who have a well established record of supporting public schools, respecting teachers, and fighting for the children of Denver. The Network for Public Education reviewed all the candidates on all sides, invited them to fill out surveys, and endorsed the following slate: Meg Schomp, Michael Kiley, Rosario C de Baca, and Roger Kilgore.
Guess which side is flooded with out-of-state money?
The corporate reform slate has raised more than $600,000.
The pro-public school slate has raised $276,000, almost half of which was “in-kind” contributions, not cash. Just one of the corporate reformers (O’Brien) has raised more money than the entire pro-public school slate.
But to make the imbalance even greater, the corporate reformers have received hefty contributions from a PAC, called “Great Schools Denver,” that has given them an additional $205,000 from nine contributors. Of the total, $165,000 came from New York, including a donation of $75,000 by New York City’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg. There is also a donation of $9,000 by billionaire Philip Anschutz, who financed the anti-public school films “Waiting for Superman” and “Won’t Back Down,” funded an anti-gay campaign in Colorado, and strongly supports hydrofracking.
On election day, we will learn whether the Denver school board is for sale.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Reform, thy name is Edufracking.
LikeLike
Thanks for covering this Diane. We’re out walking and calling voters this weekend, trying to keep the public in public schools. We won’t let money prevail in these races if we can help it. Your coverage keeps it in the national eye, this movement taking over our local control needs to stop — for our kids, for our schools, for our families! People should wonder why these NYC guys want to get involved in our Rocky Mountain school board races to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars…….Meg Schomp, School Board Candidate, Denver Public Schools, District 3.
LikeLike
I just voted for Meg!
LikeLike
Thank you, Diane, for helping us get the word out about what is happening in Denver School Board races. Hundreds of thousands of dollars from out of state to what end? We all know. Privatizing and profit. This is certainly not about the kids. This is certainly not about teaching. Denver voters, if you haven’t voted, please, please do so. We are seeing small voter turnout, so we can do this. Let’s show the country Denverites can take back our schools. MEG SCHOMP, ROGER KILGORE, ROSARIO C DEBACA, MIKE KILEY are the local people’s choices!
Jeannie Kaplan, Outgoing DPS Board member from District 3
LikeLike
Makes you wonder…how do big shots like Bloomberg and Anschutz even have the Denver school board race on their radar? Hmmmmm?
LikeLike
Billionaire Boys Club is a very small tight knit group!
LikeLike
Another Denver teacher for Schomp and Kiley! I fear for our community if they lose!
LikeLike
Mercedes Schneider says it best:
Here’s a hint: When you hear that a candidate in a local election is being outspent by 10- or 20-to-1, vote for that candidate.
http://bit.ly/HsLNGO
LikeLike
I’ m confused. The Network for Public Education has how many offices/employees in Denver? Did the Network examine how many LOCAL endorsements the other candidates received? Did the Network watch the locally aired debates? Oh, that’s right, the Network and Diane Ravitch are so pro-status quo and so anti-reform, they will advocate for anyone who espouses remotely change-minded thinking. It’s not about what is best for all students in Denver and Colorado schools for you, it’s about how you can generate headlines and money for yourselves while blanket attacking any perceived corporatization in education.
More importantly, why aren’t you taking time to advocate in favor of Amendment 66? It would create real money spent in real ways to help students and families. Try investigating that and writing a blog entry that would help instead of hurt, be positive instead of negative, address tangible issues instead of perceived ones, and demonstrate advocacy for Colorado children. My guess is that you won’t advocate for this critical piece of legislation because it also has outside funding, so your knee-jerk reaction (if you take the time to look at it) will be to oppose it.
LikeLike
The Network for Public Education reviewed the candidates in the school board race, as we do in every race in which the future of public education is on the ballot. We invited every candidate to complete a survey. I was in Denver recently and met with the candidates who had already received our endorsement. They are outstanding members of the community. We do not receive any money, and we do not give any money. We support public education. We oppose privatization of public schools.
LikeLike
Hey Scott – I am a Denver parent, teacher, taxpayer, and voter. I think DPS is trying to thread the needle between the millions of dollars it is getting in “strings attached” grants and an honest desire to keep public education public and is therefore a “mixed bag” but quite honestly I’m worried about the general notion that scores will go up, the gap will narrow, etc. if only we “reform” schools and teachers. My child went to the third highest performing school in DPS (that raised a lot of money to pay for more “help” with fundraisers by the way). The teachers were good (NOT perfect) but if you were to put those teachers in the lowest performing school in Denver they would have a very difficult time moving the needle. And if you were to put the teachers in the lowest performing schools into my child’s high performing school I doubt the scores would plummet. Diane is addressing something we educators all know – poverty is the best predictor of academic outcomes. BTW – Amendment 66 is also a “mixed bag” – I do want poorer districts to have more money BUT I don’t want 100 million a year (about one ninth of the Amendment 66 funds) to go to “innovation” that has Race to the Top type strings attached. If the anti-Amendment 66 folks knew how much money reform minded consultants, for profit companies, and other capitalists will make on Amendment 66 they’d be for it too. Many of us are so desperate for any legislation that will funnel more money into early education and poorer districts that we are willing to vote for the bathwater (over 50%) along with the baby. I would like YOU to take a closer look at Amendment 66!
LikeLike
Nice bit of obvious trolling. You have less than no clue about the issues or how outside money is being air dropped onto Denver by people with no actual background in education who are the polar opposite of NPE. BTW, corporate reform IS the status quo and has been for at least 2 decades. No results to speak of other than profiting from the attack on public education and the teaching profession. Buy a hammer and break out of your echo chamber.
LikeLike
so sorry to hear money counts not a community of people not a neighborhood not a school not a teacher just money
LikeLike
I will reiterate what I mentioned in another blog:
Read “Why Nations Fail”. Eye opening.
LikeLike