I sent the following email up to Tallahassee this afternoon to Attorney General Bill McCollum regarding what I personally feel is a troubling ethical matter (trend) involving the Broward School School Board.It's one that I'd yet to see written about or discussed on local TV or radio in the two weeks since I first came across it, as the first day of school in Broward draws near and plenty of parents go to the School Board's website for information of one sort or another.Well, what do you know, there's something written here here about the upcoming election and the proposed amendments to the state constitution.It may seem like a small thing, but I for one am not in favor of looking the other way when elected officials and govt. employees decide they'll use taxpayer funds or taxpayer-financed resources to lobby on behalf of political issues that will be voted upon in an election.You'd think they'd have higher standards at an agency that's supposed to help instruct children in making good sound choices about what's right or wrong.Nope!!!____________________________The Hon. Bill McCollum, State Attorney GeneralOffice of Attorney GeneralThe Capitol PL-01Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050 The Hon. Kurt S. Browning,Secretary of StateFlorida Department of StateR. A. Gray Building500 South Bronough StreetTallahassee, FL 32399-0250 The Hon. Michael SatzState Attorney's Office201 SE 6th Street Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Dr. Brenda C. Snipes, Broward County Supervisor of Elections OfficeGovernmental Center 115 S. Andrews Ave., Room #102Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Mr. Albert P. Massey, IIIChairman, Florida Commission on EthicsP.O. Box 15709Tallahassee, FL 32317-5709 August 12th, 2008 Dear Fellow Floridians: I am writing this letter today to make a formal complaint about what I as a taxpayer view as rather self-evident violations of Florida's Ethics and Election Laws by the Broward County School Board, which is currently using taxpayer funds and resources to urge Broward County voters towards a particular political position in the vote on proposed FL ConstitutionalAmendments in November's election. I stumbled upon the information -below- two weekends ago, completely by accident, as I was looking for information on some other matter entirely.At first, I did a double-take.Surely I must be imagining things. The Broward County School Board and their superintendent couldn't really be using the taxpayer-funded School Board website to publicly urge the defeat of these amendments, could they?But I wasn't imagining it.It was right there in front of me, staring back at me in plain sight, almost daring me not to notice. But that wasn't enough. No, not content to have four web pages on the Broward CountySchool Board's website, full of one-sided arguments against these proposed amendments -and NEVER showing the actuallanguage of the amendments as they'll appear on the ballot, or even having a link to the language at a govt. website- the School Board has also produced a video -at taxpayer expense-that runs on the School Board website, featuring Broward Superintendent James Notter, Board Chair Robin Bartleman and Board Member Maureen Dinnen. Not so surprisingly, the latter two are also running for re-election. So, is it a video about Broward County School Board education policies or procedures, or, one pleading for greater parental involvement with their child's school, besides showing up for the occasional ballgame or school play?No, not quite.If ONLY it were THAT high-minded! No, instead they're publicly urging voters to vote against these proposed ballot amendments and using taxpayer-funded resources -the use of the website itself and the use of govt. employees-to do it.If these particular individuals want to spend their own money advocating a political position about something that'll appear on the November 4th ballot, they're perfectly free to reach into their own wallets and purses and grab a checkbook to do so.No one is stopping them from doing so. If they want to fund that effort individually, or, in conjunction with an organized political committee that is properly registered with State or County officials, so that periodic reports can have the appropriate level of public transparency and scrutiny, fantastic.They can knock themselves out for all I care! But as a citizen of the State of Florida, I have to ask you something Mr. Attorney General: when exactly was it decided that it was perfectly acceptable behavior for elected public officials and govt. employees in the State of Florida to use taxpayer-funded resources to advocate political positions they personally favor in an election?Honestly, I'm a devout news junkie, but I don't ever remember THAT announcement coming out of Tallahassee.And I seriously doubt that Broward County is the only place where this sort of thing is happening.But this is where I live, and regardless of my own opinion as to the relative wisdom of any of the proposals, I don't like the idea of my taxes being used to lobby me. For purposes of explanation here, I have copied and pasted the URL's for the specific School Board web pages I reference, and to the best extent I could, have copied the information so that you could see it, though it is, of course, best viewed on your own computer.-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not shown below is the video on the right side of this web page. 1. Broward School Board website urges votes against FL Constitutional Amendmentshttp://www.browardschools.com/info/amendments.htmProposed Amendments Could Devastate Public Education in FloridaProposed state constitutional amendments 5-7-9 would eliminate one of the main funding sources for public education – the required local effort property tax -- that generates billions of dollars a year for public schools. These amendments would also reinstate vouchers and eliminate restrictions on using taxpayers' money to support private and religious schools.
All three proposed state constitutional amendments contain major unknown elements that would not become apparent until after passage, including a comparable alternative source for education funding; where taxpayers' money would be diverted by the voucher proposal; and how private and religious schools would be held accountable for the tax money they potentially would receive.
Public education is already funded in Florida at 50th in the nation – dead last! State funding cuts for public education over the past two years have caused many school districts to lay off employees – including teachers – and cut educational programs. The proposed state constitutional amendments 5-7-9 combined with Florida's current last place standing in the nation in per pupil state funding for public education are seriously shortchanging our children's educations.
Broward County Public Schools earned district-wide 'A' grades from the state in 2006 and 2008 based on the performance of its students. This stellar achievement happened despite chronic under-funding from the state and persistent unfunded and under-funded state mandates relating to class size reduction and accountability requirements.
The proposed state constitutional amendments 5-7-9 are slated to be on the November 4th ballot. Now that you know the facts, you should be in a good position to make an informed decision regarding these proposed measures on behalf of the children of Florida.
------------------------------------------------
2.
Broward School Board web page marked Proposed Florida Constitutional Amendments (pdf)DOESNT give the actual text of the proposed Amendments, or even link to an official government website that does.http://www.browardschools.com/info/pdf/amendments.pdfPROPOSED FLORIDA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTSAMENDMENT 5This proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution would effectively eliminate state required school property taxes that provide a substantial portion of the funding for public education.
While this measure does stipulate that public education would be "held harmless" from a funding perspective, it does not identify a definitive and secure funding source to make up for this major loss of secure revenues for public education. A provision in the measure to raise state sales taxes and eliminate certain tax exemptions to compensate for these lost revenues would not make up the total funding – amounting to billions of dollars -- that would be lost to public education by elimination of the property tax.
AMENDMENT 7This proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution would remove current language from the state constitution that specifically prohibits the use of taxpayers' money for religious and other sectarian purposes and institutions. The proposal is similar to a measure approved by the Florida Legislature ten years ago that would have permitted taxpayers' money to be used to pay tuition costs at private and religious schools by use of vouchers. That measure was declared illegal by a state appellate court. This proposed amendment uses different language to accomplish the same thing.
AMENDMENT 9This proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution resurrects the old vouchers issue to provide taxpayers' money to fund private school tuitions. It would also require school districts to allocate a minimum of 65 percent of their total state education funding directly to classroom instruction. The language of this measure leaves open to interpretation exactly what would be included in this 65 percent category, including but not limited to various services and materials that directly support classroom instruction such as guidance counselors, social workers, security personnel and technology. Under most criteria, Broward County Public Schools already allocates more than 65 percent of the state funding it receives directly to classroom instruction. Hidden in this measure is a provision to provide public funding to various alternatives to public education – the so called voucher initiative – which would drain additional state funding from public education and channel it to private schools through tuition vouchers.
COMMONALITIES AMONG THE AMENDMENTSAll three proposed amendments contain major unknown elements that would not become apparent until after passage, including alternative education funding sources for Amendment 5; unknown destinations for taxpayers' monies associated with Amendment 7; and an undefined clear definition for what would be included and excluded for Amendment 9. These unknowns render all three proposed constitutional amendments open to wide interpretations and definitions after passage that could prove devastating to public education in Florida. ###
------------------------------------------------
3.
Broward School Board website page marked Amendments Q & A (pdf)http://www.browardschools.com/info/pdf/amendments_qa.pdf AMENDMENTS 5-7-9 Q&AAmendment 5Q. – What percentage of the state's public education budget is funded by the state required school property taxes?
A. -- Approximately 50 percent of current state funding for public education is provided by the state required property taxes. It currently totals billions of dollars.
Q. – The proposed amendment includes increasing the state sales tax by 1 cent to partially replace elimination of the required local effort property tax. How much money is this measure expected to generate?
A. – A one cent sales tax increase is not expected to generate enough money to make up for the revenues to education that would be lost by the elimination of the required local effort property tax.
Q. – Does the amendment require the state to makeup for the total funding for public education that would be eliminated by doing away with the state required local effort property tax?
A. – Replacing the funding that would be lost by the elimination of the state required local effort property tax would be at the discretion of the state legislature. There is nothing in the measure that would compel state legislators to totally replace this education funding on a dollar for dollar basis.
Amendment 7Q. – How would the transferal of state funding for purposes other than public education be managed?
A. – The state legislature would have discretion over how these funds would be used. There is no language in the proposed amendment that restricts how state funding is spent.
Q. – If state funding was diverted to private and religious schools, would they be held accountable for complying with state education standards as the public schools currently are? A. – Again, that would be at the discretion of the state legislature. Private and religious schools are not required to comply with state student performance and financial accountabilities like public school districts are.
Amendment 9Q. – How would the proposed amendment regarding the use of vouchers work?
A. – The First District Court of Appeals ruled in the past that a voucher program is illegal and unconstitutional. By bringing back this measure, the state legislature would have the ability divert funding from school districts for other purposes, including funding tuitions for private and religious schools.
Q. – Is there a clear definition of what constitutes classroom expenses relating to the so-called 65 percent rule that would require school districts to allocate 65 percent of their state funding directly to classroom instruction?
A. – There is no clear definition of what the state would allow to be included in this 65 percent category. Currently, most if not all school districts in Florida allocate at least 65 percent of their state funding directly for classroom instruction by their own established definitions of what is included in this category.
Q. – Does implementing a 65 percent rule have any documented direct impact on student performance?
A. – Independent research has established no definitive correlation between allocating at least 65 percent of state education funding to classroom instruction and increased student academic performance. ###
------------------------------------------------
4. Broward School Board website marked DISTRICT BUDGET UPDATE, JULY 2008http://www.browardschools.com/info/budget_status.htmDistrict Budget Status
DISTRICT BUDGET UPDATE
JULY 2008
Broward County Public Schools has been notified by the Florida Department of Education to expect a 1-to-2 per cent holdback on its anticipated state education funding allocation for the 2008-2009 school year. While the exact amount of the state funding holdback has not been specified, it could be in the range of $20 to $30 million. The exact amount of the funding holdback may not be specified by the state until later this year.
The District's 2008-2009 operating budget is currently balanced due to proactive financial measures initiated by the Superintendent at the direction of the School Board. Efforts to trim the budget were initiated several years ago prior to the current national and state economic downturn. These efforts include but are not necessarily limited to controlled hiring and purchasing measures that were later replaced by hiring and purchasing freezes; the elimination of most overtime; and a curtailment in the use of contractors.
The effort to control costs and balance the budget also included substantial cuts to school and department budgets, as well as cuts made to the organizational chart, as detailed below:
$25 million in cuts to administrative departments
$25 million in cuts to the schools $4 million in cuts to the District organizational chart.
Additionally, the District's capital budget, which funds construction of schools and other facilities and technology purchases, has also been impacted by legislative initiatives, including passage of Amendment 1. The total impact to the District's capital funding program is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. This situation has already impacted decisions to fund new construction projects, including building new schools.
It is anticipated that this dismal financial situation will continue at least through the 2009-2010 school year, as the economic downturn continues and could be further impacted by potential passage of proposed amendments to the Florida Constitution. These measures, which are slated to go before voters on the November ballot, have been officially opposed by the School Board of Broward County. The so-called "5-7-9 Amendments" are detailed below.
PROPOSED FLORIDA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTSAMENDMENT 5This proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution would effectively eliminate state required school property taxes that provide a substantial portion of the funding for public education. While this measure does stipulate that public education would be "held harmless" from a funding perspective, it does not identify a definitive and secure funding source to make up for this major loss of secure revenues for public education. A provision in the measure to raise state sales taxes and eliminate certain tax exemptions to compensate for these lost revenues would not make up the total funding – amounting to billions of dollars -- that would be lost to public education by elimination of the property tax.
AMENDMENT 7 This proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution would remove current language from the state constitution that specifically prohibits the use of taxpayers' money for religious and other sectarian purposes and institutions. The proposal is similar to a measure approved by the Florida Legislature ten years ago that would have permitted taxpayers' money to be used to pay tuition costs at private and religious schools by use of vouchers. That measure was declared illegal by a state appellate court. This proposed amendment uses different language to accomplish the same thing.
AMENDMENT 9This proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution resurrects the old vouchers issue to provide taxpayers' money to fund private school tuitions. It would also require school districts to allocate a minimum of 65 percent of their total state education funding directly to classroom instruction. The language of this measure leaves open to interpretation exactly what would be included in this 65 percent category, including but not limited to various services and materials that directly support classroom instruction such as guidance counselors, social workers, security personnel and technology. Under most criteria, Broward County Public Schools already allocates more than 65 percent of the state funding it receives directly to classroom instruction. Hidden in this measure is a provision to provide public funding to various alternatives to public education – the so-called voucher initiative – which would drain additional state funding from public education and channel it to private schools through tuition vouchers.
COMMONALITIES AMONG THE AMENDMENTSAll three proposed amendments contain major unknown elements that would not become apparent until after passage, including alternative education funding sources for Amendment 5; unknown destinations for taxpayers' monies associated with Amendment 7; and an undefined clear definition for what would be included and excluded for Amendment 9. These unknowns render all three proposed constitutional amendments open to wide interpretations and definitions after passage that could prove devastating to public education in Florida.
AMENDMENTS 5-7-9 Q&AQ. – What percentage of the state's public education budget is funded by the state required school property taxes?
A. -- Approximately 50 percent of current state funding for public education is provided by the state required property taxes. It currently totals billions of dollars.
Q. – The proposed amendment includes increasing the state sales tax by 1 cent to partially replace elimination of the required property tax. How much money is this measure expected to generate?
A. – A one cent sales tax increase is not expected to generate enough money to make up for the revenues to education that would be lost by the elimination of the required local effort property tax.
Q. –Does the amendment require the state to makeup for the total funding for public education that would be eliminated by doing away with the state required local effort property tax?
A. –Replacing the funding that would be lost by the elimination of the state required local effort property tax would be at the discretion of state legislative leaders. There is nothing in the measure that would compel state legislators to produce a mechanism to totally replace this education funding on a dollar for dollar basis.
Q. – How would the proposed amendment regarding the use of vouchers work?
A. –The First District Court of Appeals ruled in the past that a voucher program is illegal and unconstitutional. By bringing back this measure, the state legislature would have the ability divert funding from school districts for other purposes, including funding tuitions for private and religious schools.
Q. – How would the transferal of state funding for purposes other than public education be managed?
A. –The state legislature would have discretion over how these funds would be used. There is no language in the proposed amendment that restricts how state funding is spent.
Q. – If state funding was diverted to private and religious schools, would they be held accountable for complying with state education standards as the public schools currently are?
A. –Again, that would be at the discretion of the state legislature. Private and religious schools are not required to comply with state student performance and financial accountabilities like public school districts are.
Q. –Is there a clear definition of what constitutes classroom expenses relating to the so-called 65 percent rule that would require school districts to allocate 65 percent of their state funding directly to classroom instruction?
A. –There is no clear definition of what the state would allow to be included in this 65 percent category. Currently, most if not all school districts in Florida allocate at least 65 percent of their state funding directly for classroom instruction by their own established definitions of what is included in this category.
Q. – Does implementing a 65 percent rule have any documented direct impact on student performance?
A. –Independent research has established no definitive correlation between allocating at least 65 percent of state education funding to classroom instruction and increased student academic performance.
© 1998 - 2008 Broward County Public Schools 600 SE Third Ave. Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 USA Phone: (754) 321-0000
---------------------------------
One of the factors that's caused me to send this complaint is my own clear memory of something that took place locally in January, prior to the January 29th vote on Amendement One.(Yet another issue the Broward County School Board was opposed to.) That evening event was focused on Amendement One and was scheduled to be held at Hallandale High School, under the auspicesof the Broward League of Cities, which also publicly opposed the amendment.
After having seen a League advertisement for the event in local area newspapers, I telephoned their HQ the day before the event to find out who'd be speaking, figuring they'd divide the time evenly between each side of the argument.
(I already knew that Michael Putney of Local10/WPLG was slated to be the moderator.)
But when I finally reached someone at League HQ and asked who'd be there representing the "pro" Amendment One side, I was told overthe telephone that there wouldn't be "anyone."It seems that the Broward League of Cities idea of a "public" event at a Broward public high school consisted of only having people opposed to Amendment One speaking.
I don't know about you, but that sounds more like a pep rally!
H-m-m-m... I seriously doubt that's the example of the American democratic political process that Broward parents and taxpayers want their kids to be taught during the day.
But in the end, who okayed the use of the the public high school for what seem destined to be a deliberately one-sided political event, pretending to be an open event?
Yes, the Broward County School Board.
The very same crew I'm complaining about now.
Looks like nothing's changed!
Frankly, absent someone doing something to stop them, I have no reason at all to doubt that the Broward School Board will again attempt to arrange other such "public" events at their schools in the coming months as the November election draws near.
No doubt they will again be the sort of one-sided events that represent the public position taken by the Broward County School Board and Superintendent Notter.They do have a track record after all. I've been sitting on this letter for a while now, but today's Broward Politics blog of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel carried a post that made me decide that time was wastin', and I ought to get this issue before you now.
http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/broward/blog/2008/08/school_board_member_starts_political_action_committee.html#moreSchool Board member starts political action committee
Posted by Anthony Man at 10:18 AMCitizen Maureen Dinnen - and not the Broward School Board vice chairwoman - is starting a political action committee to fight three constitutional amendments on the ballot this November.
As a School Board member, Dinnen is restricted in what she can say against the amendments, one that would eliminate property taxes for schools and two that would allow public money to be used for private school tuition vouchers.
But Citizen Dinnen can speak her mind - and urge people to vote against the amendments that she personally believes "are intended to privatize education in the state of Florida."
"As a private citizen… I am very, very concerned about these amendments," Dinnen said.
"I am scared to death that they are really just going to turn public education on its head."Dinnen said Monday she was filing papers "as we speak" to start the committee, called Floridians for Quality Education.
She's already recruited retired educator Dorothy Orr to serve as the committee's treasurer, and lined up George Platt, a partner in the Shutts & Bowen law firm and former Broward County commissioner, to serve on the group's steering committee.
More from Education Writer Kathy Bushouse:
She said she's also reached out to different groups, such as the Broward Teachers Union and the Parent Teacher Association, to recruit committee members.The group has hired a West Palm Beach political consulting firm, and will start raising money soon. Dinnen said her committee responsibilities and board duties would remain strictly separate.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Ms. Dineen has quite a Chinese Wall separating her personal and professional responsibilities if that video is any example. I'd be happy to speak with you and your staff about this complaint, and would greatly appreciate your responding soon as to your course of action on this matter of public interest.As Attorney General McCollum is the ONLY one of you who has his office email publicly listed on a govt. website, rather surprising in the Year 2008, I will either be mailing or personally delivering copies of this letter to the others.Sincerely,DBS
