When I learned that the phony “Families for Excellent Schools” was forced to pay a hefty fine by state officials in Massachusetts, I invited Maurice T. Cunningham to write about it. New Yorkers are familiar with this billionaire-funded group from the time when it made a $6 million television buy to thwart Mayor de Blasio’s plan to establish accountability for charter schools. FES, pretending to be the voice of poor black and brown families, suddenly appeared with bulging pockets to shower millions on TV advertising and politicians, not what one would expect from “families” who live in poverty. As a result of their efforts, charters in New York City got the right to co-locate in public school buildings with no rent ever, and if they preferred a private space, the city was obliged to pay for it. What was certain was that not a one of the billionaires behind FES was planning to send any of their children to charter schools or public schools in New York City.
During the campaign in Massachusetts last fall, Professor Cunningham wrote about the dark money pouring in to influence the Question 2 referendum. Despite the money, opponents of charter expansion lost.
This is what Professor Cunningham wrote:
Families for Excellent Schools Driven Out of Business in Massachusetts
Maurice T. Cunningham
Associate Professor, University of Massachusetts at Boston
Families for Excellent Schools, the hedge funded bully of school privatization, has not only been exposed but driven out of business in Massachusetts.
Last year FES was leading the campaign, through its ballot committee Great Schools Massachusetts, to pass a referendum that would expand the number of possible charter schools in the state. Not only was GSM overwhelmed at the November election by teachers unions, but FES’s wild spending attracted the attention of the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance. This past week OCPF released a Disposition Agreement with FES that found that the group had violated Massachusetts campaign finance laws. FES acted as a political committee without registering with OCPF, and channeled over $15 million from donors “without disclosing the contributors, and by providing funds to the GSM Committee in a manner intended to disguise the true source of the contributions.” (OCPF press release here).
The consequences for FES: OCPF levied its largest fine in history, over $426,000, being the total amount of cash on hand for FES and its political arm Families for Excellent Schools-Advocacy. FESA agreed to dissolve its social welfare group status with the Internal Revenue Service. FES Inc. agreed to forego political activities in Massachusetts for four years.
Not only did OCPF release its Disposition Agreement it also required OCPF to divulge the donors it had promised to hide, and their contributions. FES’s list of funders was eye-popping. Boston hedge fund titan Seth Klarman of Baupost LLC was in for $3.3 million. Bain’s Joshua Bekenstein and his wife chipped in with $2.5 million. Jonathon Jacobson of Highfields Capital Management was good for $2 million. Other contributors came from Adage Capital Management, Summit Partners, and Par Capital Management. Alice Walton of the WalMart fortune kicked in $750,000.
Each of those powerful individuals was promised by FES that their identities would be kept secret, hidden behind the Internal Revenue Code rules for 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. Except this time, it didn’t work. OCPF conducted a thorough investigation and exposed FES for what it is: a dark money political operation.
The Disposition Agreement should be studied across the country and state regulatory agencies pressed to follow its teachings. There is absolutely no reason why citizens should not be informed about who is spending millions to influence their vote. It’s shameful and the dark money train must be derailed if we are not to descend into a plutocracy. OCPF’s action is great news for Massachusetts and great news for democracy.

I glanced at that list and noticed two members of the Fisher family here in San Francisco on it, the widow and son of Donald Fisher, founder of the Gap.
The Fishers have a long history of funding so-called “reforms.” The KIPP charter chain, whose soul is in Houston, is technically headquartered here in San Francisco to be close to the Fisher Foundation. (They keep a low profile here, including their schools, because KIPP’s “no-excuses” practices and philosophy are so very un-San Francisco.) The Fishers also donated to Edison Schools, the failed magical charter miracle of 16 years ago or so, which is baffling since Edison was a for-profit traded on the NASDAQ, so the notion of “philanthropic support” for it doesn’t really compute.
So, there the Fishers are, funding a charter promotion 3,000 miles away.
LikeLike
KIPP has a “soul”? Then can we hope that that soul will soon be where it belongs – in the ninth circle?
And to digress a bit, the interesting thing about KIPP is that they (or at least some of their schools) have been trying to soften their brand lately and thereby acting like they invented progressive education. I read an article a while ago (not sure if I can dig it up) all about how some KIPP school “discovered” the magic of connecting with kids. It was like they suddenly learned that kids have needs and interests and unique personalities and if you address those rather than just dish out the punishment, kids respond so much better. There was this wide-eyed sense of wonder at their own brilliance for this “discovery”. So now KIPP is supposed to be hailed as some kind of innovative progressive force with absolutely no acknowledgment of (a) the harmfulness of their stated “no excuses” practices or (b) the legions of educators and child development experts who have gone before them. I don’t know that it gets much more soulless than KIPP.
LikeLike
It may not be possible to be more soulless than KIPP, but Success Academies and Eva Moskowitz are tied with them.
LikeLike
Massachusetts is expanding personalized learning. See
http://hechingerreport.org/massachusetts-districts-now-trade-notes-best-paths-personalized-learning/
LikeLike
That is what can be expected from a state with a Republican governor and his own state board. Theft of public money.
LikeLike
Way to much money at their disposal . Time for real tax reform . How does a 91% top marginal tax rate sound . With an alternative minimum tax of 70% on that bracket . If they want to move offshore to a Caribbean Island I understand they can get a good deal right now.
LikeLike
too
LikeLike
Hear, hear! Yes! A return to the tax rates that the US had during the administration of those “well-known socialist radicals,” Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon, is long overdue.
The middle class was far stronger and actually expanding, jobs were relatively secure all across the nation and the ideological combat we’ve seen since then was largely non-existant in that era.
LikeLike
“Most students are starting a new school year that is all too familiar. Desks lined up in rows. Their teacher standing in front of the room, framed by a blackboard. They dive into a curriculum written for the “average” student. They follow the same schedule, the same routine—just waiting to be saved by the bell.
It’s a mundane malaise that dampens dreams, dims horizons, and denies futures.”
Despite this publicly-financed propaganda campaign, my son started high school this year. He generally likes school, so we tell him to ignore arrogant billionaires who know nothing about his school and persevere.
Anyway- his english teacher has the kids stow their Chromebooks and phones at the start of the class. She wants them to focus on reading the assigned texts (mostly fiction) and discussing. They do the writing outside of class.
They’re interested in HER now – she really got their attention. They were all chattering about it. My sense is they’re interested in it because they feel she’s somehow not following what’s “expected”.
It is just REALLY funny that to them NOT pushing an electronic device is somehow subversive. It makes sense in a way! They grew up with this- it’s everywhere. Someone saying “not here” really IS unusual.
LikeLike
Diane, everyone knows all charter schools are superior to all public schools.
It’s very scientific.
There should be a disclaimer after the pitch in one of those ultra-fast radio voices “offer not valid in OH, IN, MI, PA or FL”
There are literally more exceptions to ed reform dogma than examples of successes.
LikeLike
we need to address the election for the governor’s office in 2018…. “Charlie Baker uses the same fiscal tricks and sleights of hand that he builds his budgets on to get around the rules the rest of us have to play by, something Standard & Poors called him out on by downgrading our creditworthiness this year for the first time in 30 years. The Boston Globe recently reported that Baker is using legal loopholes to wash dark campaign money—Money that he plans to put to use in his campaign next year.”
LikeLike
So where was New York’s “Office of Campaign and Political Finance” 3 yrs ago when FES poured $6M into ads to push rent-free space for charters? Oh, yeah, NYS doesn’t have one. There is a NYS Bd of Elections, & a NYC Campaign Finance Board (whose advisory opinions include this: “Non-independent third party expenditures pose a serious threat to New York City’s Campaign Finance Program…”). But I suppose those boards relate only to elections, not to lobbying for favorable state legislation.
Perhaps the key diff NY-MA is that MA is one of those states that can put such questions to a referendum. Maybe that’s why they have a board that oversees ‘political’ as well as ‘campaign’ finance?
There are various types of referenda allowed to varying degrees by a large number of states. From what I can glean online, NYS is one of a core of NE/SE/rust-belt states (plus KS & TX) where the public can only be referendum’d on constitutional amendments or sometimes statutes– & only when the state legislature refers an issue to referendum.
Whereas MA allows referenda in several instances & not just when referred by legislature. Which is maybe how a pro-charter Repub govr w/his own state board can get slapped down by common-sense state voters who like their pubschs & don’t like being made to pay to let state-imposed lift on charter cap play havoc w/ local finances.
LikeLike
Seems to me like another possible avenue (besides campaign reform/ overturn Cit-United) for voters stymied by their elected reps consistently voting against their interest: push for expanded state referendums.
LikeLike
“During the campaign in Massachusetts last fall, Professor Cunningham wrote about the dark money pouring in to influence the Question 2 referendum. Despite the money, opponents of charter expansion lost.”
Diane, I’m sorry but I’m a little confused by that. Voters did not support raising the cap on charters in MA, right? So I think the opponents of charter expansion actually won and you probably meant to say that the proponents of charter expansion lost. Maybe your spell check took over and typed in the opposite of what you intended. Or is this just another one of my own senior moments? It’s hard for me to tell.
LikeLike