EduShyster was alerted by a confidential tip to the possibility that Jim Peyser, the State Secretary of Education, remains a director of an organization that lobbies for more charter schools.
She checked public records and learned that Peyser is still listed as a director of “Families for Excellent Schools.” This is an organization of hedge fund managers, millionaires, and billionaires who lobby for privately managed charter schools.
“The Secretary of Education, Jim Peyser sets education policy for the state and also votes on said policy. And as a director for the charter school advocacy group Families for Excellent Schools, and its 501 (c) (4) lobbying arm, Peyser is seeking to influence the very state policy that he is then voting upon. In other words, he is lobbying himself.As the Secretary of Education, Jim Peyser sets education policy for the state and also votes on said policy. And as a director for the charter school advocacy group Families for Excellent Schools, and its 501 (c) (4) lobbying arm, Peyser is seeking to influence the very state policy that he is then voting upon. In other words, he is lobbying himself….
“But wait, there’s more
“If it sounds like our Secretary of Education has his hands full, both lobbying and being lobbied, consider that Father Peyser wears yet another cap these days. He is also the defendant in a class-action lawsuit vs. the state’s charter cap, defending the very cap that he is working feverishly, whilst wearing one of his other caps, to lift. The obvious question: how does he do it all? Followed by: what size hat does Peyser wear? Followed by: doesn’t Massachusetts have some kind, ANY kind of, conflict of interest law? Alas, I’m informed that its nearly as toothless as our public records law.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Woody Allen interrogates himself in the courtroom scene of “Bananas” (1971)
LikeLike
Is this getting any coverage is the Boston media?
LikeLike
My question, too.
LikeLike
No…
LikeLike
My big question is: Why do we have both a Secretary AND a Commissioner or Education?! Talk about government waste at its finest! They should cut one of these hacks jobs!
LikeLike
Edit: of not or..foiled by the ipad once again
LikeLike
I have never understood why we need a Secretary of Education. The position was created under our last governor, Democrat Deval Patrick. The Commissioner is akin to a superintendent of schools, except at the state level, so – or his staff – he has real day to day responsibilities. The secretary Is an advisor to the governor on education policy from PreK through higher ed. As a voting member of the Board of Education he also sets policy.
LikeLike
Clearly, you need a Secretary of Education to keep minutes at charter board meetings.
LikeLike
“The Möbius Lobby”
The Möbius Lobby
Is Peyserus hobby
And left hand shakes the right
The Family’s for Schools
Are Möbius tools
To win the charter fight
LikeLike
Peyser occupies the Ouroboros Office.
LikeLike
Unbelievable….
LikeLike
This is part of the “conflict of interest” regulation that all state and municipal employees, in Massachusetts, including teachers, must sign off on annually. Passing an online test to indicate that the employee understands the regulations is required within the first 90 days on the job.
“(d) Self-dealing and nepotism. Participating as a state employee in a matter in which you, your immediate family, your business organization, or your future employer has a financial interest is prohibited. (See Section 6)
…A financial interest may create a conflict of interest whether it is large or small, and positive or negative. In other words, it does not matter if a lot of money is involved or only a little. It also does not matter if you are putting money into your pocket or taking it out. If you, your immediate family, your business, or your employer have or has a financial interest in a matter, you may not participate. The financial interest must be direct and immediate or reasonably foreseeable to create a conflict. Financial interests which are remote, speculative or not sufficiently identifiable do not create conflicts.
There’s a big loophole though if all the parties involved in determining conflicts have the same end interest:
“Example where there is no violation: An appointed state employee may also comply with the law by filing a written disclosure about the financial interest with his appointing authority – that would be the governor in Peyser’s case, and seeking permission to participate notwithstanding the conflict….The appointing authority may grant written permission to participate if she determines that the financial interest in question is not so substantial that it is likely to affect the integrity of the employee’s services to the state. Otherwise, the appointing authority will assign the matter to someone else, or do it herself. Participating without disclosing the financial interest is a violation….”
Did Peyser file a disclosure? If he did, did Governor Baker grant him permission to participate?
LikeLike
The more basic question is does he have a “financial interest”? And if so, is it “remote, speculative or not sufficiently identifiable”?
LikeLike
FLERP, when I was in the federal government, I had to resign from every organization I belonged to, even when there was no direct or indirect financial interest. If Jim Peyser is lobbying to open more charter schools, there is a clear financial benefit to the group for which he is a director. I have never heard of a high level public official working for an organization that lobbies his own office.
LikeLike
I’m just saying it may not qualify as a financial interest for purposes of the “self-dealing and nepotism” regulation. I would assume there is another regulation, or at a minimum a policy of the agency, that has a broad enough scope to capture this kind of conflict.
LikeLike
It would be astonishing if Mass. permits state officials to be active members and leaders of organizations that are lobbying to change the laws, especially the laws for which the same official is responsible
LikeLike
Ohio Attorney General Dewine, has made a cottage industry out of his promotion of proposed legislation (with which he is ideologically enamored), while his office defends existing laws that are in opposition, to the ones he works to pass.
At the state level, one always hopes that there is regulation to prevent a political appointee from, at a minimum, being an employee or board member of a group that works to undermine existing state statutes and policies.
Voters resoundingly defeated the Ohio Republican right-to-work laws. Yet, public officials at Ohio universities, write university checks to support the Chambers of Commerce, which have, as an agenda, passage of the same failed Republican/ALEC laws.
Intellectual consistency, fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers, honesty, integrity and concern for the greater good, are oxymorons when Republicans are in session, in Columbus (and, for some Ohio Democrats, when there).
Massachusetts may have had greater foresight.
LikeLike
As a director of FES, does Peyser receive any compensation, monetary or non-monetary?
One conflict, which should be addressed by law, is on display when politically appointed, highly-placed government officials, receive compensation from the taxpayers and, while doing so, they undermine the interest of the public. In this case, Peyser is working to benefit the private, profit-seeking sector (as has Supt. of Education, Ross, in Ohio).
The percentage of officials who came from industry, before government appointment and, who return, through the revolving door to higher paid positions in the private sector, should be the basis for an anti-corruption, anti-racketeering statute.
LikeLike
At the risk of repeating myself, the federal government ethics laws required me to resign from every organization I belonged to, even when I was unpaid and had no financial interest. If I went to lunch or any meal with anyone who did business of any kind with the government, I had to pay my own check. The standards are very high. Even the appearance of conflict was forbidden.
LikeLike
This section of the conflict of interest regulations may be more relevant:
“A state employee may not participate in any particular matter in which he or a member of his immediate family (parents, children, siblings, spouse, and spouse’s parents, children, and siblings) has a financial interest. He also may not participate in any particular matter in which a prospective employer, or a business organization of which he is a director, officer, trustee, or employee has a financial interest. Participation includes discussing as well as voting on a matter, and delegating a matter to someone else.”
Although it says “business” organization I think it also applies to non-profits. I could be wrong about that.
And then there’s this:
(f) Appearance of conflict. Acting in a manner that would make a reasonable person think you can be improperly influenced is prohibited. (See Section 23(b)(3))
A state employee may not act in a manner that would cause a reasonable person to think that she would show favor toward someone, or that she can be improperly influenced. Section 23(b)(3) requires a state employee to consider whether her relationships and affiliations could prevent her from acting fairly and objectively when she performs her duties for the state. If she cannot be fair and objective because of a relationship or affiliation, she should not perform her duties. However, a state employee, whether elected or appointed, can avoid violating this provision by making a public disclosure of the facts. An appointed employee must make the disclosure in writing to his appointing official.
LikeLike
According to the mass.gov website Peyser has not filed a Conflict of Interest Law Disclosure in 2015, not did he in 2014. So he isn’t disclosing even the appearance of a conflict.
LikeLike
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then…
LikeLike
…nor did he in 2014…
LikeLike
If conflict of interest laws were enforced, all of the command structure of LAUSD would get the boot. Same thing with public record laws, not enforced. It seems a growing list of laws that benefit the public being ignored. Due process, speedy trials, see witnesses against you, self incrimination,defamation of character, age, sex, racial discrimination. The list is growing.
LikeLike
So what can we do? I will contact my rep, Pat Jehlen…
LikeLike
http://www.edushyster.com/all-in-the-family/
LikeLike