Charter Initiative; LEV, Why So Quiet?
If you were a prominent education advocacy group and you joined a coalition of groups for a major initiative to be put on the ballot in November, don't you think you might actually have some information on your website? I mean given your address is the address of record and your chief of staff is the public info contact for the initiative.
Not LEV. Odd.
So the News Tribune has a good story with both press releases from the coalition group and the WEA. I had to smile at Rep. Pettigrew's statement:
“This initiative will finally bring Washington into the 21st century in terms of educational opportunities for public school students,”
Charter schools are the most cutting edge thing you can do in education today? If that's true, we're in real trouble.
What I didn't realize (and this is useful) is how tight the timing is to get the signatures (so that means spending a heck of a lot of money just to get on the ballot):
Supporters acknowledge they won’t be able to start gathering signatures for about a month, giving them just a couple weeks to canvass. That’s not much time, unless supporters are willing to spend money at Costco-like levels.
Fleshed out at the Secretary of State's office, it sounds like this:
It takes several weeks to process an initiative and for the Attorney General’s Office to prepare a ballot title. Challengers then would have one week to ask Thurston County Superior Court for changes in the ballot title. After that, sponsors would be able to print petitions sheets and circulate them.
So they probably won't be able to start the petition going until maybe, late June and the deadline is July 6th. I can say with certainty that there will be that one week lost where a challenger will step up for changes in the ballot title.
Interesting.
Not LEV. Odd.
So the News Tribune has a good story with both press releases from the coalition group and the WEA. I had to smile at Rep. Pettigrew's statement:
“This initiative will finally bring Washington into the 21st century in terms of educational opportunities for public school students,”
Charter schools are the most cutting edge thing you can do in education today? If that's true, we're in real trouble.
What I didn't realize (and this is useful) is how tight the timing is to get the signatures (so that means spending a heck of a lot of money just to get on the ballot):
Supporters acknowledge they won’t be able to start gathering signatures for about a month, giving them just a couple weeks to canvass. That’s not much time, unless supporters are willing to spend money at Costco-like levels.
Fleshed out at the Secretary of State's office, it sounds like this:
It takes several weeks to process an initiative and for the Attorney General’s Office to prepare a ballot title. Challengers then would have one week to ask Thurston County Superior Court for changes in the ballot title. After that, sponsors would be able to print petitions sheets and circulate them.
So they probably won't be able to start the petition going until maybe, late June and the deadline is July 6th. I can say with certainty that there will be that one week lost where a challenger will step up for changes in the ballot title.
Interesting.
Comments
Think back to the legislative period. I'm suspect they have some type of a trick they will pull out of their sleeve.
The whole shebang is a bunch of white middleclass women with An Agenda for the Poor Black and Brown Kids. OK, there's apparently some Roundtable affirmative action person on LEV's staff but that's not exactly From Our Community.
In fact, The Community smacked League of Education Voters down last year for using Eric Pettigrew as a poster boy for "fixing" RBHS when The Community has done the heavy lifting for itself, thank you very much.
This Charter Initiative has racial implications that these so-called reformers have no credibility addressing. They talk at us not with us. We don't need em. Most of us don't want em.
We don't need our community divided further. We don't need our schools segregated more. That's what this push will do. Shame on them.
Southie
Interesting use of language I just noticed. The Times charter article headline is "Advocacy groups file initiative to put charter schools on November ballot".
Ed Voter
This is entrenched Times/civic elite bias. The big $$ groups (and with apparently $5 mil to get names onto a ballot, these people qualify) get the kindly advocacy name while dissenters get the oh-so-horrifying-to-business activist title.
And Point #2: If the $5 million number is correct ($4 mil from Gates $1 mil from Nick Hanauer), how does this compare to the usual annual budget of League of Ed Voters, or WA Stand, or DFER.
I would like this blog, or the Times or TNT or whoever. Stranger? to supply a comparison. Because my gut says this funding is hugely out of line with their general operating funds. I tend to reject out of hand initiatives being pushed by a handful of special contributors. So, to me, if this is the case here, it is a reason to reject the initiative. If that's not the case, then I stand corrected.
I also tend to agree with Southie in that good intentions in one area can result in bad outcomes in other areas. I think charters would do more harm than good to Washington, in part because of how they seem to pit community members against each other in the major cities where they do exist.
Ed Voter
Unfortunately this is the way of the political world and we have a couple on the school board who exemplify the same credo.
Dickerso once billed herself as a "Labor" elected official but went south quickly. After voting for Zarelli/Hobbs public employee pension "gutting" this year, I would believe anything about her retirement activities right about now.
Did she ever have a moral compas?
Tired of Having to Fight This Fight Again
Succeed or not, it will align with progress for charter supporters.
Oompah
I think they may have had a back-and-forth and made this decision late. They can't blame anyone but themselves for the short timeframe.
If they lose this on at the ballot box, I doubt they will try it in the Legislature again. One, because it will have the big red "L" of loser all over it (4 times!) and two, they know if they do pass it, it will only go to the (now-furious) voters again.
It's a bold gamble on their part, I can say that.
Stand has it on their blog but not their homepage.
It's funny because there is not one staff person's name on their website but I see one for this effort. Why do these groups never have any human beings attached to their web pages?
"But backers of the plan believe public sentiment has shifted to their side, said Chris Korsmo, the chief executive officer of the League of Education Voters. Supporters of the measure plan to enlist volunteer and paid signature-gatherers, and they expects other advocacy groups and education activits to lend their support in the weeks and months to come, she said.
"Once the voters have an opportunity to see what these schools can provide, they'll support it," Korsmo predicted."
Full story here: Charter backers chasing signatures in Washington State
My attention keeps turning to this paragraph. Does anyone know about "ballot titles"?
Will there be attempts to pass this initiative using wording such as "Equitable Education". Must the word "charter" be used? What wording will be asked by those collecting signatures?
The would definitely want to be on the 2012 ballot, rather than an off-year election, so if they don't go now, they have to wait til 2016.
Here is why I think 2012 is best for them:
Presidential elections have a higher turnout because of lots more young and uninformed voters. Those voters tend to be less skeptical and easily swayed by simple campaign messages. That is good for charter schools.
This election also will likely have gay marriage on the ballot. That will bring out more conservative voters, who tend to support charters.
They have to have a lot of money lined up. And clearly their polling tells them their chance is now. It will be interesting to see if they are right.
-North end mom
Their other option was to have an initiative to go to the legislature. That would have given them until November to get the signatures and take it ot the Legislature. But they chose voters.
Education is key to defeating this initiative. The other side can say "help poor kids have better schools" and that's pretty powerful. But there are things on the no charters side as well.
And, while there are more voters, it is a very crowded ballot AND they need to get the attention to even get it on the radar.