Mercedes Schneider notes that Indianapolis is the target of a corporate reform takeover.
She describes the situation, then notes that this election offers voters a chance to vote out a school board member who supports privatization.
She writes:
When it comes to killing traditional public education in favor of market-based ed reform models that remove the community control from its own schools, market-based ed reformers means business– and the public would do best to believe that there is a market for the usurping of community influence over schools….
Granted, it is easier to discuss this issue from 2018 hindsight; however, the candidate who serves as the focus of the remainder of this post, Mary Ann Sullivan, is running for reelection on November 06, 2018, and there is still time for unsuspecting Indiana voters to educate themselves about what she was and is before heading to the polls in November 2018….
Let the lessons begin.
First of all, beware of those deflecting attention away from “school type” in the name of
improving educational opportunities for children,” especially if the candidate offering such advice is drawing quite the trove of funding to support her campaign.
Second, check for out-of-state contributions. According to Sullivan’s October 10, 2014, pre-election filing, she already had $51.4K in her campaign chest, including $2,000 in contributions from California billionaire Reed Hoffman, founder of Linkedin, and his wife, Michelle Yee, plus $1,100 from Manhattan, NY-based Democrats for Education Reform (DFER).
One might think that one or two out-of-state, ed reform contributors really doesn’t matter, but it does, and where there are a couple, there will likely be more:
According to Sullivan’s 2014, end-of-year filing, her campaign received a total of $73.7K for a local school board election– including $2,500 from former New York City mayor, billionaire Michael Bloomberg, and $2,500 from Connecticut billionaire and OxyContin heir, Jonathan Sackler.
Out-of-state billionaires spending money on school board elections is a hallmark of the ed reform preference of ushering in charter schools while snuffing out community schools.
Finally, where there is market-based ed reform, there is likely notable support from a business entity. In Sullivan’s case, it’s the political action committee (PAC) of the Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce, the Indy Chamber Business Advocacy Committee (BAC).
In 2014, Indy Chamber BAC supported Sullivan for a total of $18.8K ($10.5K cash; $8.3K in-kind).
Stop and think about that for a second: A candidate for school board has the $18.8K support of a business advocacy committee. it makes sense if one considers that ed reformers view education as a business and charterization of entire districts as an ultimate goal.
So, here we are, Indianapolis, in October 2018.
IPS is now marketized via the likes of the Mind Trust, which Sullivan endorses, and Sullivan is running for re-election.
Sullivan’s 2018 contributions (also here) to date are more modest than in 2014: $11K total, with $8.7K coming from the business PAC, Indy Chamber BAC.
Converting neighborhood schools to the portfolio model is part of the business of ed reform, and Sullivan is a conduit for ed reform in IPS.
Okay, Indy voters: Now that you know who is financially backing Sullivan, will you reelect her or send her packing?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
One of the great things about the NPE conference for me, as one who has been out of education for 20 years and the classroom for almost 30, was becoming more fluent in issues and places than I would otherwise have been. Meeting some of the bloggers, especially Mercedes, gave me a better sense of their motivations. I knew about these stories before. Now they mean a great deal to me and I see how they are connected to my little world. All these local stories together reveal the authenticity, diversity, and substantive nature of the movement that we are building together. It makes me happy to consider that the people I saw in Indianapolis are the “mob” that our Dear Leader and his minions fear so much.
The same thing is happening in California:
Tuck vs Thurmond.
Autocratic billionaires from the Alt Right from across the country are outspending Thurmond’s campaign with the intent to buy the state education department and subvert democracy.
The goal of Tuck’s campaign is to fool enough voters for him to win and then the hell with the people, parents, teachers, and children of California because those autocrats will, in their heads, own the state.