Archives for the month of: February, 2019

Over the past decade, Michigan has become a national symbol of charter failure. As choice expanded, public school funding declined. Michigan’s NAEP scores fell from the middle of the pack to the bottom 10. Michigan is the only state where 80% of charters operate for profit. Most charters are concentrated inDetroit, which is the lowest performing urban district in The nation.

Betsy DeVos Just awarded $47 million to Michigan to open more charters.

Why does she stay Ina job when she has become a laughing stock? Because Congress gives her more than $400 million to hand out to charters.

 

Help Guide the Launch, Expansion & Replication of Great Charters!


The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) was recently awarded a $47 million Charter Schools Program grant from the U.S. Department of Education. The main goal of the grant is to award subgrants up to $1,250,000 to applicants that are prepared and ready to successfully launch, expand or replicate innovative and effective schools that will provide quality options for underserved populations.

To help accomplish this goal, the MDE has engaged the National Charter Schools Institute to assemble and coordinate a team of experienced and highly skilled professionals to serve on three-person application review teams. 


Each reviewer will be responsible for analyzing up to four applications and calibrating their individual assessment with those of their three-person review team, so a consensus report containing constructive feedback can be provided to each applicant prior to submitting their official grant application to MDE. 

 

This just in:

 

Mike Myslinski

Headquarters Communications

California Teachers Association

1705 Murchison Drive

Burlingame, CA 94010

650-552-5324

408-921-5769 (cell)

www.cta.org

 

NEWS RELEASE  

February 4, 2019

 

Oakland Education Association

272 East 12th Street

Oakland, CA 94606

510-763-4020

www.oaklandea.org

 

Contact: OEA President Keith Brown on cell at (510) 866-8280.

On Twitter: @oaklandea, #Unite4OaklandKids, #WeAreOEA, #RedForEd #WeAreCTA

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

With 95% ‘Yes’ Vote Tally, Oakland Unified Educators Give OEA Union Right to Call a Strike, If Necessary

Strong Solidarity Vote Makes it Clear that Educators Will Do What it Takes to Fight for Students –Tuesday Rally to Ask Oakland City Council for Support

 

OAKLAND – In a tremendous vote for public education and against the continued gutting of Oakland public schools, 95 percent of educators who cast strike authorization votes last week voted “yes” to allowing leaders of the Oakland Education Association to call a strike, if necessary, the OEA union announced today.

 

The vote allows OEA leaders call a strike to win the smaller class sizes, living wages for educators and additional student resources that educators are fighting for – including more counselors and school nurses for the district’s 37,000 students. Educators at all 86 Oakland Unified School District sites voted over four days last week. Of the 2,311 legal votes cast, 2,206 educators voted yes, or 95.45 percent.

 

“No strike date has been set – but without a very serious proposal by the school board, we expect to be on strike by the end of the month,” OEA President Keith Brown said at a news conference today. “If the school board won’t act, we will act.”

 

OEA is also alerting the public about its 4:30 p.m. rally on Tuesday, Feb. 5, at Frank Ogawa Plaza/City Hall where hundreds of educators will urge the City Council to adopt a resolution on its agenda supporting teachers and opposing school closures (the district plans to close or merge up to 24 schools over five years). Educators will speak out at the rally, and then pack the City Council meeting at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday. Read the City Council resolution here (click on the “view report” tab to see entire resolution).

 

The OEA is affiliated with the 325,000-member California Teachers Association. So far, at least 17 other Bay Area CTA chapters of teachers’ unions have pledged nearly $20,000 to the OEA strike fund to assist teachers facing financial hardships during a strike, with more pledges continuing to be received. In addition, OEA has launched a Go Fund Me account drive to help teachers cope during a work stoppage. See more ways to help Oakland teachers here.

 

Friday, Feb. 1, was the second and final day of a hearing with a state-appointed neutral fact-finder, Najeeb Khoury, who is tasked with helping to resolve the contract negotiations crisis by issuing a non-binding report, which is expected on Feb. 15. After the report is issued, the Oakland Education Association, which represents 3,000 educators in the Oakland Unified School District, can legally strike, if necessary. The detailed and revealing OEA presentation made during the fact-finding hearing is here. Watch for more updates atwww.oaklandea.org

 

Oakland educators are fighting to end the district’s teacher retention crisis as many teachers leave the district for better salaries elsewhere. Starting pay for beginning Oakland teachers is about $46,000, and educators are among the lowest paid in Alameda County. Educators have been working without a contract since July 2017, and seven sessions with a state mediator were fruitless.

 

Winning more student resources is one of the top priorities for OEA in this showdown. The student-to-counselor ratio is too high at 600:1, while the student-to-nurse ratio is a dismal 1,350:1. Keeping neighborhood schools open is another crucial priority.

 

Frustrated Oakland educators are part of a national wave of teachers protesting poor public school funding, a lack of student resources, inadequate salaries and other conditions. This includes the recent successful six-day strike by members of United Teachers Los Angeles in Los Angeles Unified, and in several other states, that are part of the #RedForEd movement.

 

The strike vote results were announced at a news conference with scores of Oakland educators at the OEA union’s Representative Council meeting at 4 p.m. today at Oakland Technical High School. Of all ballots cast, 94 were considered illegal, and another six ballots were blank. There were 105 “no” votes cast.

 

Media can also watch the archived news conference coverage on the Oakland Education Association Facebook page here.

 

###

The Oakland Education Association represents 3,000 OUSD educators, including teachers, librarians, counselors, nurses, psychologists, psychiatric social workers, therapists, substitutes, and early childhood and adult teachers. OEA is affiliated with the 325,000-member California Teachers Association and the 3 million-member National Education Association.

 


Angie Sullivan teaches first grade children in Clark County, Nevada (Las Vegas). Most of her students are low-income and Hispanic. She regularly writes letters to her legislators.

She writes:

Close it down we need to walk out. We all need to fight for money together. We can only dance if everyone is wearing shoes.

No more lectures about teachers improving. You do not have many teachers left. For good reason. Lecturing us – does not work – hasn’t for two decades.

Try something new. Follow the law.

Clean up the central office money.

Clean up the central office financial quagmire.

It is the law.

85-15

You just purchased the $17 million financial software? What has been the issue for two years? Who is going to answer for that mismanagement?

No numbers for the legislative session?

You will soon ask School Building SOTS to cut $50 million?

It’s your turn Central Office.

Cut that $50 million from that marble area.

Time to dismantle everything downtown except the skeleton and central office folks find a home in a vacant classroom. Meets the law and cleans up the corruption. Kids need a teacher not a marble office building.

No more downtown kingdoms.

How are you going to ask the legislature for the $500 million you need to meet contracts?

No one will give it to you. No one throws good money after bad.

Cannot see anything that is not in schools. Even those numbers are questionable since the central office “charges” schools for things schools do not have – like teachers.

The whole state will fight for $300 million this session. This is heavy lift and nothing real has happened in the central office yet.

The listening tour is nice.

Get ready for the session please.

Hard to dance with a partner who doesn’t have sense enough to wear shoes.

Clean up your money mess.

Newsflash: Folks love their teachers. They do NOT like the central office or the Trustees. For good reason.

Next time you address your army – make sure your financial house is clean.

Put your shoes on.

Keep the lecture. And give it to your friends. It is offensive to the team working for kids.

We are fully dressed and ready to march.

You are barefoot.

I am mad.

All I can do is weep.

We are ready for leadership. Leadership is not a lecture about data – that is not going to raise money.

Make moves to get money.

Do what you can to get money.

We need $2 Billion. Telling us to get data is not going to get money.

The heavy lift is money.

Rally your team.

It is about money.

Get your shoes on.

Close it down. We need to walk out. You need to come with us. Clean it up. Shut it down.

The Teacher

Angie

CCSD Central Office needs to be dismantled and reorganized to meet the law.

We need new educational leadership at the highest levels who will improve neighborhood public schools instead of promote charters.

No more business deals and/or tax credits that rob the DSA (Dedicated School Account).

No more cuts at the school level.

Pay your own bills. Raise the funds to cover the bills.

We want adequate total funding for CCSD programs to open equitably – like preschools

Attrition money needs to be returned to the individual schools. If a vacancy is not filled – the school needs the money saved to support kids.

We want the reorganization law to be followed and all of the 85 to be pushed to school level.

We want the pot money.

We want the room tax money

We want our fair share of the education money 80%.

We want ability to raise money locally.

We want money to get to kids

We want weighted funding.

We want our fair share of mining proceeds.

We want the southern caucus to fight for our kids. Quit allowing everyone else in the state to grab our student money.

We need additional money for each and every “great idea”.

We have significant needs.

Teachers being silenced has not worked.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CCEAFOS

 

Michael Hiltzik, columnist for the Los Angeles Times, writes that America is tiring of its selfish, greedy billionaires.

The billionaires are upset that Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez-Cortez wants to raise taxes on incomes over $10 million a year and that Elizabeth Warren is proposing a wealth tax for the fabulously wealthy. How terrifying!

Bit Anericans are not frightened by these proposals. Billionaires are.

https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-billionaires-20190201-story.html

What do you think about a man who spent $100 million on a 305-foot yacht, who already owns a 220-foot yacht? That’s Daniel Snyder, owner of the NFL Redskins.

”At the same moment, hedge fund owner Ken Griffin was disclosed as the buyer of the most expensive home in America, a $238-million Manhattan penthouse. According to Bloomberg, he already owns two floors of the Waldorf Astoria hotel in Chicago ($30 million), a Miami Beach penthouse ($60 million), another Chicago penthouse ($58.75 million) and another apartment in Manhattan ($40 million).”

How many homes does one man need?

Hiltzik writes:

Our emerging political debate over taxing the rich seems to be getting bogged down in details — how high a tax rate, should we tax income or wealth, etc., etc. But this fixation on nuts and bolts is obscuring what may be the most important aspect of the discussion: America is becoming fed up with its billionaires.

That sentiment is long overdue. It has begun to surface in the suggestion by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez that the top marginal rate on high incomes shift back to what it was in the 1950s or 1960s, and in Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s proposal for a wealth taxon those with high net worth.

Since the Reagan administration, the political establishment has strived to convince Americans that extreme wealth in the hands of a small number of plutocrats is good for everyone. We’ve had the “trickle-down” theory, the rechristening of the wealthy as “job creators” and their categorization invariably as “self-made.” We’ve been told, via the simplistic Laffer Curve, that if you raise the tax rate you get less revenue.

There are three main subtexts of these arguments, all of which show up in the email in-box whenever I write about wealth and taxation. First: The extreme wealth of the few creates wealth all along the income scale, for the masses. Second: It’s immoral — confiscatory — to soak the rich via taxation, at least above a certain level that never seems to be precisely defined. And third: If we torment the wealthy with taxes, they’ll pack up their wealth and leave us, whether for some more accommodating nation on Earth or some Ayn Randian paradise.

Experience has shown us that the first argument is simply untrue — extreme wealth begets only more inequality. The second argument begs the question of where reasonable taxation turns into confiscation, although the level of taxation of high incomes today is nowhere near as high as it was in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, when economic gains were shared much more equally with the working class. As for the third, Warren’s answers to capital flight include stepping up IRS enforcement resources, which have been eviscerated by political agents of the wealthy, and imposing an “exit tax” on any plutocrat renouncing his or her U.S. citizenship to evade U.S. taxes.

Why are billionaires beginning to be treated so skeptically?

One reason surely is the evidence that extreme wealth has a corrosive effect on the economy. Wealth inequality places immense resources in the hands of people unable to spend it productively, and keeps it out of the hands of those who would put it to use instantly, whether on staples or creature comforts that should be within the reach of everyone living in the richest country on earth.

Multimillionaires and billionaires love to describe themselves as “self-made,” but the truth is that every fortune is the product of other people’s labor — the minimum-wage workers overseas who assemble Michael Dell’s computers or the low-wage baristas in Howard Schultz’s Starbuck stores, or the taxpayers who fund the roads, bridges and airports that help keep their businesses profitable….

The issue of how many billions are too many billions has been placed in high relief by the presidential campaign of Schultz, the ultimate billionaire vanity project. Schultz condemns calls for higher marginal tax rates on the wealthy and, typically for his species, portrays himself as a man who has gotten where he is today by taking advantage of America as the land of opportunity — so what’s keeping you layabouts from doing the same. But he also mentions, in passing, that he grew up in federally subsidized housing in New York. So someone, somehow, gave him a leg up using tax revenue.

It’s proper to question why people like Schultz and Dell feel so strongly about a marginally higher tax on their marginal income.

People like Schultz “live what is, for almost all practical purposes, a post-scarcity existence,” Paul Campos observes aptly at the Lawyers, Guns & Money blog. “If you have three billion dollars, then you can buy almost anything without even bothering to consider what it costs, since what it costs is, to you, practically indistinguishable from ‘nothing.’ Given that everything is for you already basically free, why would you even care if your tax bill goes up? Especially given that you live in a society in which, despite what is by a historical standards an almost inconceivable amount of total social wealth, lots of people still have to worry about getting enough to eat, not freezing to death in the next polar vortex, etc?”

 

Legislation introduced by an influential Republican state senator would require charter schools to disclose more about their finances. But the bill contains a large loophole that would allow the state’s biggest chains like Basis Charter Schools and Great Hearts Academies to avoid revealing how they spend their money.

State Sen. Kate Brophy McGee, R-Phoenix, said Senate Bill 1394 would accomplish the biggest reform to charter schools since they were created by the Arizona Legislature in 1994.

“It’s an enormous amount of progress, and this is not my last stop,” she said.

She said there’s bipartisan support for the measure, which follows a yearlong investigation by The Arizona Republic that revealed how charter operators have exploited the state’s lax charter regulations to become wealthy from the taxpayer-funded schools.

Brophy McGee acknowledged, however, that her bill would not prevent charter chains from giving large, no-bid management or construction contracts to their founders. Nor would it prevent charter CEOs from paying themselves exorbitant amounts, as Primavera online charter Chief Executive Damian Creamer did by receiving $10.1 million from the school over the past two years.

Democrats, whose past efforts to more tightly regulate charter schools have failed, and Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s Office both said the bill is a step in the right direction. But they said it needs additional work.

Arizona’s 500-plus charter schools are largely privately owned and the choice of more than 200,000 students, or 17 percent of public school students. The state spends $1.2 billion a year funding them.

State law doesn’t prohibit conflicts of interest in charter-school contracts or impose the strict reporting of expenses as it does for district schools. Charter school boards can also be staffed with the friends and relatives of school executives. And there’s no limit on how much money charter schools can spend outside the classroom.

Brophy McGee’s bill, which has not been scheduled for a hearing, could change some of that. It would:

  • Require every charter school to have at least a three-member governing board, with no more than two immediate family members serving. Family members cannot constitute a majority of the board.
  • Prohibit in, certain instances, buying goods or services from a charter owner or family member, governing board member or a related business.
  • Require that any purchase of more than $50,000 be in the “best interest” of the charter school and follow generally accepted accounting principles.
  • Prohibit charter schools from retaliating against an employee who reports violations. Currently, nearly all charter employees can be fired at any time for any reason.

The new procurement regulations, however, would not apply to management contracts between a charter holder and a management company. Charter management companies, popular with major charter chains like Basis and Great Hearts, also would be exempt from the procurement regulations.

Loopholes in the bill

That loophole for charter management companies gives Democrats heartburn, said Rep. Reginald Bolding, D-Phoenix.

Charter operators could avoid the new requirements by simply transferring all or nearly all of their state funding to a management company that runs their schools, he said.

Ryan Anderson, a spokesman for Brnovich, said the attorney general also has concerns about the exemption, as well as language that would require prosecutors to get permission from a charter sponsor in order to investigate wrongdoing.

“We still have a lot of questions,” Anderson said, adding that this is a work in progress.

Brophy McGee said it was not her intent to allow charter operators to avoid procurement restrictions, and she would consider fixing the language. She declined to say whether the Charter Schools Association, which has blocked past reform efforts, or major charter operators with powerful allies in the Republican establishment had inserted the exemption language in her bill.

She said the legislation is a work in progress that ultimately won’t make everyone happy. But, she said, the charter school industry needs more oversight.

Matt Benson, a spokesman for the Charter Schools Association, said the intent of the exemption was “to protect the school brand so that the founder of a charter school doesn’t risk losing control of his/her creation.”

Benson acknowledged the bill may be too broadly worded and that the association will work with Brophy McGee to refine the language. He said the association would oppose any law that requires charter operators to accept open bids for management contracts, as school districts are required to do.

Bolding said the loopholes will allow charter operators to continue self-dealing and enriching themselves. The bill also won’t stop charter operators from using Arizona tax dollars to expand outside the state, he said.

Basis, which has some of the top-ranked high schools in the country, transfers nearly all of its state funds to a management company owned by its founders, Michael and Olga Block.

Basis officials have stated because a closely tied private company, Basis.ed, runs the schools it isn’t required to disclose how much the Blocks or other executives are paid.

Basis has used its Arizona schools as collateral to fund operation of its schools in Texas and Washington, D.C.

The Attorney General’s Office also has expressed concerns that the legislation does not give its office enough additional power to investigate charter schools.

Brnovich wants subpoena power over charters and broader authority for the auditor general to investigate charter finances. Further, Brnovich wants charter schools to segregate public funding from private dollars in businesses related to the charter school.

“The big question is what happens with the public’s money,” said Anderson, the AG spokesman. “The bill does not appear to deal with that issue…We now have difficulty on the civil (enforcement) side on investigating misuse of public money when all money is commingled together.”

Benson said the legislation allows the Attorney General’s Office to investigate procurement related complaints. However, that would not occur for private management companies.

More disclosure?

Bolding said he likes that Brophy McGee’s bill requires charter schools to disclose more information about their finances and governance.

The bill would require charter operators to post on a public website the names of voting members of the governing body, the number of independent voting members, total annual state revenue, as well as expenses, assets and liabilities.

Charter schools already are required by state law to disclose much of that information to the Arizona State Board for Charter Schools. That information is available on the Charter Board’s website.

The bill also would require charter operators to adopt a conflict-of-interest policy and to provide a written statement that describes the services provided by a management company and the cost.

The bill, however, does not require a charter operator to release the actual contract or precise financial expenditures of its private management company. Further, the bill does not require the private management company to disclose how much its executives are paid with public tax dollars.

School districts, which receive less in per-pupil state funding than charter schools, have to abide by much stricter procurement and disclosure laws.

Brophy McGee said she will not seek to have charter management companies disclose financial information, stating that they are private companies and should not be subject to that level of transparency. Republicans in past years have blocked Democrats’ efforts to force charter management companies to comply with state public records law.

The bill also requires the state Charter Board to provide training courses on the state open meetings law, public records requirements, enrollment laws and regulations, applicable procurement rules and discipline.

Charter schools already are required by law to follow the open meeting law and public records requirements. The Republic has found some schools refuse to comply with those laws.

Reach the reporter at craig.harris@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-8478 or on Twitter @charrisazrep.

 

 

John Blake, a CNN writer, has a different take on the controversy surrounding Virginia Governor Ralph Northam and the recently discovered photographs from his medical school yearbook of one student in blackface, the other wearing a Klan outfit.

He writes:

What more do you need to know? The damage to Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s credibility is so beyond repair that some critics say he has to go.
But here’s an uncomfortable truth that photo won’t reveal:
Some of the biggest champions for black people in America’s past have been white politicians who were racists.

Some of our best friends were racist

A pop history quiz:
Who was the white Southerner who used the N-word almost like a “connoisseur” and routinely called a landmark civil rights law “the n—– bill.”
That was President Lyndon Baines Johnson, the greatest civil rights champion of any modern-day president.
Who was the white judge who joined the KKK, marched in their parades and spokeat nearly 150 Klan meetings in his white-hooded uniform?
That was Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, who incurred the wrath of his fellow Southerners when he voted to abolish Jim Crow segregation in the court’s landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision.
And who was the white politician who also used the N-word freely, told racist jokes and said African-Americans were biologically inferior to whites?
That’s Abraham Lincoln, the “Great Emancipator” and arguably the nation’s greatest president.
The point of these examples is not to offer a historical loophole for any leader caught being blatantly racist.
What happens to Northam is ultimately up to the people he serves and to his conscience.
But what I’m saying is that what matters to some black people — not all, maybe not even most — is not what a white politician did 30 years ago.
It’s what he’s doing for them today.

Who would pass the racist abstinence pledge?

I’m wary of those commentators who say they speak for an entire race of people. When a white friend sometimes asks what black people think of an issue, I sometimes tell them, “I don’t know, I missed the Weekly Meeting for All Black People in America.”
Yet I feel confident in saying this: Most are not shocked to hear that a white politician who is a purported ally is accused of doing something racist…
If black people only worked with white allies free of any racism, bias or past mistakes, we would be alone.
Before the yearbook incident, Northam won the support of Virginia’s black community. He forcefully denounced the 2017 white supremacist rally in Charlottesville that took the life of a young woman. He successfully pushed for the expansion of Obamacare in Virginia. Former President Barack Obama campaignedfor him. He won almost 90% of the black vote in his successful run for governor in 2017.
That might help him, or it may not be enough.
What matters for some is not one act from a person’s life but the entire play. Do they push for equality in the end?…
One of the reasons Johnson was such an effective champion for blacks is that he understood the Southern mind better than most. He was fighting against the same demons that he grappled with. He knew what buttons to push against the racist politicians who stood in his way.
Yet there is not much room for a politician to evolve in today’s environment. There is a “rage industrial complex” that fixates on the latest racial flashpoint: an outrageous video, remark or image that’s passed around social media like a viral grenade.
Meanwhile those banal acts of racism that don’t get caught in a photo or a tweet go by unremarked.
Here’s when I know there’s genuine racial progress.
It’s not when a white politician is caught being racist and people demand his or her head. It’s when people show the same amount of public outrage over the everyday acts of racism — voter suppression, racial profiling, redlining — that define so much of our everyday lives.
Now that would be shocking.

 

News from Chicago Teachers Union:

 

Charter operator CICS would rather spend public dollars on scabs than on student needs.
That’s wrong – and we can do something about it.

We learned this weekend that the management of CICS – Chicago International Charter Schools – has made arrangements to hire in scabs to break a planned Tuesday strike for smaller classes and no cuts to student programs, social workers or counselors. CICS bosses are currently sitting on $36 million in hoarded public dollars – more than half ‘invested’ with a company owned by its co-founder. Yet it says it doesn’t have a penny to provide to classrooms or student needs.

This is wrong, and you can help stop it!

This is wrong, and you can help stop it!

We’ve been bargaining for months with this greedy operator for living wages for our paraprofessionals – some of whom have masters degrees yet earn barely $30,000/year. Management has offered low-wage teachers an 8% raise for the first year of a new contract, but only if we agree to cuts in social workers, counselors and student programs – and throw paras under the bus by agreeing to a 1% ‘raise’ that doesn’t even keep pace with the inflation rate.

CICS siphons off close to 30% of public dollars it collects for top management costs and ‘reserve’ funds. CICS’ CEO Elizabeth Shaw earns more than $230,000 a year to run 14 schools – almost as much as CPS CEO Janice Jackson earns to run more than 500 schools. This is naked management greed, and it comes at the expense of students, their families and our school communities. Take action, join us and say no to CICS’ scheme to put management greed ahead of student needs.

 

The Southern Poverty Law Center reports that people in some states areimprisoned because they can’t afford to pay fees and fines. The U.S. Supreme Court already ruled that this practice is unconstitutional. It continues.

SPLC writes:

The people incarcerated in Corinth, Mississippi, have a phrase for it: “sitting it out.” We have another name for it: “debtors’ prison.”

Since the 1970s, the Supreme Court has been clear that it’s unconstitutional to jail people simply because they can’t afford to pay fines and fees.

But in states across the South — and across the country — that’s exactly what cash-strapped municipalities are doing.

Take Glenn Chastain. He owed $1,200 to the city of Corinth for expired vehicle tags. Because he missed a hearing, he was denied the chance to pay a partial fine. He spent 48 days in jail.

Jamie Tillman, without a lawyer, admitted to a public intoxication charge punishable by a $100 fine. She didn’t even have $10 — and had no family member she could call for help. But a judge told her $25 would be knocked off her fine for every day she stayed in jail, so that’s what she did until her balance was down to $0.

“I thought, ‘Because we’re poor, because we’re of a lower class, we aren’t allowed real freedom,’” Tillman recalled to Matthew Shaer for The New York Times. “And it was the worst feeling in the world.”

We opened an investigation into Corinth’s practice of jailing of low-income defendants in 2017. Micah West and Sara Wood, lawyers in our economic justice practice group, told The New York Times about court sessions “where defendants were permitted to use a landline phone to make a final plea for the cash that would set them free.” As Shaer describes:

The space amounted to an earthly purgatory: Secure the money, and you were saved. Fail, and you’d be sent to jail. “All around us, people would be crying or yelling, getting more and more desperate,” Wood recalled.

That October, she watched a 59-year-old man named Kenneth Lindsey enter the office, his lean arms hanging lank by his side, his face gaunt and pale. Lindsey had been in court for driving with an expired registration, but he hadn’t been able to afford the fines: He was suffering from hepatitis C and liver cancer, and he had spent the very last of his savings on travel to Tupelo for a round of chemotherapy. Until his next state disability check arrived, he was broke. “Can you help?” Lindsey whispered into the phone. 

A few seconds of silence passed. “All right, then. Thanks anyway.”

Finally, around 1:45 p.m., Lindsey managed to get through to his sister. She barely had $100 herself, but she promised to drive it over after her shift was through.

Wood caught up with Lindsey in the parking lot later that day, and after identifying herself, asked if he would consider being interviewed by the S.P.L.C. “I don’t know,” Lindsey said, studying the ground. But soon enough, he called Wood to say he had changed his mind. “I’ve been paying these sons of bitches all my life,” he told her. “It’s time someone did something about it.”

We sued Corinth with the MacArthur Justice Center in 2017. A month later, Corinth ordered its jail emptied of anyone incarcerated for nonpayment of fines.

And last year, after we lobbied Mississippi, both houses of the state Legislature unanimously passed a bill prohibiting any resident from being jailed for a failure to pay court costs or fines. It went into effect in July.

But wealth-based detention is far from solved.

“This is a massive problem, and it’s not confined to the South. It’s national,” the SPLC’s Economic Justice Project Deputy Legal Director Sam Brooke told Shaer.

Even in Corinth, Lindsey is still trapped in a web of arrests and court fees, nearly all of which he can trace back to his vehicle. His registration and driver’s license are expired, but to pay off those expiration fees, he needs to drive to work.

“I would estimate that I’ve spent a quarter of the last year behind bars,” he told Shaer. Could he calculate exactly what he owed? “$10,000?” he responded. “$11,000?” The way he said it, it might as well have been a million dollars. “I ain’t never going to pay it down,” he said. “Never, ever. I’m going to be paying it down until I die.”

The Editors

 

In the Public Interest, a nonpartisan organization that fights privatization of public assets, reports good news from Louisiana:

 

ExxonMobil is the world’s largest publicly traded oil and gas corporation, often cutting deals with authoritarian leaders in countries like Angola and Equatorial Guinea. Its fourth-quarter profit last year nearly quintupled to $8.38 billion after President Trump’s tax cuts.

Louisiana’s East Baton Rouge Parish School Board has a $30 million budget deficit and teacher shortage. Its school buildings and buses are crumbling. Ninety-seven percent of its students, the majority of which are black or brown, qualify for free or reduced lunch. Teachers and school employees haven’t had an across-the-board pay raise since 2008.

Yet, ExxonMobil has received $700 million in local property tax exemptions from the parish over the last 20 years.

Not anymore.

Earlier this month, the school board narrowly voted against giving ExxonMobil two property tax breaks totaling about $2.9 million over a decade, one for a refinery and one for a chemical plant. Both facilities have already been built, which left some school board members scratching their heads.

“I would be a lot more receptive for a new project, something that’s going to bring in new business, new jobs,” one board member said.

But this isn’t just a story of elected officials making a rational decision based on the facts. It’s also one about democracy— and one that rings out even louder after striking teachers in Los Angeles, California, just won more resources and support for their students.

A teacher walkout threat set the stage in Baton Rouge. Last October, teachers and school support staff voted overwhelmingly to hold a one-day school shutdown to demand that the school board reject ExxonMobil’s request. Within hours, the requests were taken off the agenda for a forthcoming board meeting. Then, after last week’s board vote, ExxonMobil dropped the bids for good.

A company representative says that losing the tax breaks could make them hesitate to invest in the local plants because of a “lack of predictability” and “confusion.”

But the teachers know something much bigger than one corporation’s future is on the line. “The survival of public education is at stake,” said the president of the East Baton Rouge Parish Association of Educators back in October.

She’s right. The idea that taxes should be perpetually cut on corporations and the wealthy — known as “trickle-down economics” — is gutting public education nationwide, falling the hardest on poor, black, and brown communities.

Total state and local K-12 funding per student is still well below what it was before the 2008 recession. Seventeen states actually send more education dollars to wealthier districts than to high-poverty ones. Over 1.5 million students attend a school that has a law enforcement officer, but no school counselor. Spending on prisons and jails has increased at triple the rate of public education funding in the last three decades.

Until we get real about how out of whack our tax system is, more and more students are going to go to schools with no heat, aging pipes, few supplies, and few adults other than police officers and underpaid teachers.

And the quickest path to getting real is more democracy, teachers fighting and making their voices heard alongside parents and communities for what’s best for all public school students.
 

Please help us share this story on social media.
 


Thanks for reading,

Jeremy Mohler
In the Public Interest

 

 

State Senator Janet Cruz introduced a bill to ban for-profit charters in Florida. Nearly half the charters in the state operate for profit. They give campaign contributions to key legislators. They are related to legislators. Senator Cruz is a brave woman.

The League of Women Voters supports her bill.

So does government watchdog Integrity Florida.

Itwill beipposed by Academica, Charter Schools USA, and Imagine, the big for-profit chains. It will be opposed by Jeb Bush, Governor DeSantis, and Betsy DeVos. It will beopposed by profiteers and grifters.