Despite all the buzz about the importance of this year's Charlotte-Mecklenburg school board race, campaign finance reports indicate a big ho-hum from donors.
The 16 people seeking three at-large seats in November were supposed to file a mid-year report on donations and spending by July 29. The reports on file with the Mecklenburg County Board of Elections show Elyse Dashew leading the pack with almost $12,000 raised (her biggest donations are from out-of-state family members).
Update 4 p.m.: Aaron Pomis's report shows him with almost $10,000. But as an alert caller suggested, those numbers were actually money that he raised and spent in his 2009 district campaign. Pomis says the Board of Elections instructed him to repeat those numbers; he's now trying to figure out if he got bad advice, and if so, correct his report.
Beyond that, nobody reports more than $1,000 coming in, and some haven't updated their reporting since the early months of the year.
Granted, campaign energy tends to crank up about now. But consider the contrast: This time in 2009, first-time candidate Eric Davis (now board chair) had filed a 57-page report detailing almost $28,000 in contributions. He ended up raising and spending $58,000 to win the seat representing the compact District 5 in south/central Charlotte.
The current pack have to make their names and views known throughout this sprawling county. With all three incumbents stepping aside, there was talk early in the year that this would be a big-spending race, with newcomers having a real shot at leadership in public education.
So, what's up? Is the lingering recession squelching big donations, or will they just land later in the year? Are candidates focusing more on social networking and public forums? If the landscape of school-board campaigns has shifted, who will win and lose? Will CMS employees or any other interest group turn out in numbers large enough to tip what's usually a low-turnout off-year race?
I guess we'll find out this fall.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
No big bucks in CMS race
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
39 comments:
Candidates for public office should be forced to campaign in the nude.
...and what did spending $58,000 by Eric Davis do for us?
Does $$$ equal a better candidate?
I don't have a clue how much Mary McCray has raised nor until this article did I know how much Dashew, Babbidge or Bumgardner has raised.
What I do know is who supports these candidates and what they stand for based on recent interviews, articles and what they have posted in commentary online.
Campaign money is immaterial.
There are candidates who favor a return to busing and some want to continue to throw more money at the same programs like Bright Beginnings that are a waste, continuing the status quo.
You get what you vote for.
Make sure you know where these people stand on the issues versus how much money they have or what "ED" or "ACTS" group they belong to....
To: WC
“Campaign money is immaterial.” Tell that to all the Presidential candidates who dropped-out because they didn’t have the change to fill the tank of the tour bus.
Money is everything, especially to the candidates who aren’t incumbents. We have laws that control campaign funds because those dollars are so powerful.
But to answer your question, $58,000 for Davis got him elected and the chance to be the Board chair, which happened. $60,000 got McGarry elected and a chance at the chair, which didn’t happen. Money works best when it has a clear message.
Money and words are important. I try to use both. I do recommend contributing to campaigns. It bets the heck out being unhappy with the results for the next four years.
Not contributing would be like strapping an Acme Co. rocket onto your back and trying to cross the Grand Canyon in the air.
Bolyn McClung
NextSuper.com
Pineville
Bolyn,
I disagree.
Obama got elected and received votes from some people who have only two active brain cells (works the same for Republicans) and couldn't tell you why they voted for him.
Does the fact Obama or any other candidate have money or more money equate to doing a good job? I think not.
If giving money to a candidate makes you feel better then by all means go for it.
I have something you cannot put a price tag on and that's my vote. A candidate has to earn it.
Neither Obama or McCain got my vote because neither deserved it.
HAving an ACME rocket rocket on my back is better than some politician trying to shoot one into an orifice.
Maybe everybody finally realizes there is no hope for CMS. It is what it is, regardless of who is on the school board, who serves as superintendent, etc.
The district is a failure, regardless of whether they bus kids across the county or continue to throw money at the problem. The kids and parents who value academics continue to flee the district for private schools, another district or home school. What's left does not have a lot of potential.
I think this is more of case of people not understanding the intricacies of elections. In 2009 the Filing date was Mid July. Giving the candidates (Davis) more time to raise money before the midyear report was do. This year the filing date was Mid Aug. So comparing 09 to 11 is not a fair assessment.
The real story is that one candidate has out raised the entire field so far. Which is impressive considering the players in the field. (unless Pomis really does have $10,000)
And in Mr. Pomis case Ann seemed to go out of her way in calling him either a) incompetent or b) dishonest. Guess that is a warning that she is going to scrutinize the accuracy and integrity of the reports.
I think what most folks finally have realized is that the district and at large setup keeps reasonable folks from being elected. Additionally, when you have the left wing Charlotte Observer compliant to character assasinations and spreading half truths, you get little "real" information out to the public.
My best hope is the "good" people of Mecklenburg County will continue to rise up like last year and vote in those candidates who mirror their "fed-up" feelings with this lousy "giverment".
I guarantee the chamber of commerce backed candidates, Tim Morgan, ms. Eschew, Ms. Stewart and Mr. Rankin, will receive mich more money now that the filing deadline has passed. They will have a huge blowout media assault in the few weeks leading up to the election trying to fool people into believing they are truly for education and children.
THEY ARE NOT!!
First the chamber needs to stay the h3ll out of this election.
Second people need not forget how Tim Morgan has consistently for FOR testing and FOR a non-existent pfp plan - blatantly against the wishes of his constituency. (why else run for an at large seat unless he knows his district will remove him next year?)
The others are simply reactionary candidates who honestly believe they are right...frankly they have had too much kool aid and mustn't be allowed to drag down this district.
12:22, Tim Morgan does not have to worry about losing his seat next year, as the district races don't take place again until 2013. When making pronouncements about a candidate's motivations it is always wise to use accurate information.
Hey Bolyn, Davis became chair bc A board member smartly backed out of a deal to make Herr Merchant chair.
And how can you honestly back ms. daschew for school board? She is a tool for the chamber of commerce and will do nothing but kowtow to the current 5-4 majority. Another Rhonda Lennon we do not need!
I see that "Tool of the Chamber of Commerce" is a front runner in the "Talk Radio generated, devoid of actual meaning , repeated ad nauseum by the great unwashed during the election cycle" phrase of this year.
Sorry about next year, you are correct Mr. Morgan, you have until 2013 before you are removed. And if you had any clue about how much district 6 dislikes their turncoat rep you'd add more to the discussion than correcting the timeline.
12:08 pm, filing for school board was first two weeks of July this year (city of Charlotte was later). And not trying to call Aaron Pomis anything -- there's a whole lot of midterm paperwork from various candidates that leaves unanswered questions.
One thing that has crossed my mind: In previous years, CMS was doing tens of millions in construction projects each year, and a lot of the big donations came from firms and individuals connected with that business. Now that CMS building has tapered off, are some donors less motivated?
Good grief, Ann, you just said you're not implying anything about Aaron Pomis and now you turn around and make another implication. It's one thing for a general blogger to do this; quite another for the "education reporter" of the paper to do the same.
Ann,
You can't change a system that is fundamentally broken and virtually every aspect of running it is based on erroneous data.
Seriously, the number of FRL students increases every year yet other data does not support those numbers.
As long as the system keeps operating that way and everyone pretends it doesn't exist, nothing will change except the amount of money being thrown at problems and projects.
If you have no expectations, then you have no failures.
Not only is Tim afraid of losing his seat in 2013, he hopes to help keep the current 5-4 majority on the board by winning and at large seat then help the current board majority choose his replacement. Such a person would certainly be aligned with those who favor testing and pfp.
Money will count in the end because it will simply allow candidates to reach more voters who are looking for a set of names to remember when they enter the voting booth - if they decide to go vote.
There are clearly candidates who are willing to meet the devil at the crossroads to accept business interest money - they want the power of the board and are willing to maintain the curent path to get there.
Too bad the Observer is one of those interested in maintaining the status quo.
There are other candidates, maybe 3-4, who are not bought (maybe not yet?) that are concerned about students and teachers. It'll be interesting to see how much media attention they get.
I'm looking for candidates with ideas, not endorsements and slick campaigning.
12:22 You stated that Tim Morgan has consistently been for testing and pfp - and that this is "blatantly against the wishes of his constituency."
What evidence do you have to show that the reforms that Mr. Morgan has supported are against the wishes of his constituency? The Gates survey in fact showed broad support for the policies that Mr. Morgan has helped to push. Cite your evidence please.
5:05 PM, I sense you desire but I worry even if the right 3 are elected, Eric can still steer everything away from correcting these deficiencies in CMS. Additionally we have the spoken word from a number of minority elected officals that there are greater powers in this town controlling where money is spent. Additionally, the BOE is then sent through this Broad training every 2 years so they end up with this distorted thinking.
6:06 PM, the proof has already been made of the misinformation and misleading questions in this survey. Forget about refering to it anymore. While folks may have agreed to some method to better evaluating teachers, no one was asked about solely using student scores.
5:05--There are also clearly candidates willing to "meet the devil" to gain the endorsement of certain advocacy groups. Check out the Swann/Meck ACTS videos of the candidates. See which candidates tell the interviewers that they are willing to seek assignment based on diversity (yet strangely enough you won't find a word about that on these candidates' webpages). .
Anon 6:20...
Is that "assignment based on diversity" based on race or income?
With CMS' racial makeup being over 67% minority, I would say we're in the reverse discrimination area racially.
Since most of the "progressives" keep blaming low performing student's ills on where they live, they seek to dilute these kids by dispersing them throughout the system.
6:41 PM, they tried that for 30 years before and we can see where that got us.
Anon 6:45...
I think you missed the point.
Busing for those 30 years was to achieve racial integration.
Since that is no longer allowed, household income has become the rationale.
Busing is busing, no matter what the reason is...
So how much should one pay to get a hold of the billion dollars at CMS?
I mean it it only takes a few hundred thousand then it might be a great deal to get the right five people on the school board.
Is that not what we have been seeing from all these many new and established groups over the years?
Oh and if you note from day one, I have asked people to donate directly to a Teacher and not to this waste of people running for office.
In fact as I said I am donating my salary back once I am on the board.
Maybe we can get a new way of electing the board and get rid of the groups and the influence they pay.
WC, no, that is my point. It is the same thing no matter how you package it.
I have worked for CMS for over a decade and can tell you firsthand that this district is in major trouble with its "new leaders for new schools and TFA recruiting service."
9:39 I've been in and out of the system for three and half decades and couldn't agree more. West Meck's new long term fully scripted lesson plan rollout (another classic Gotcha and more piling on of electronic CYA data) is another example of data first, teaching further down the list.
People on this message board should stop talking about busing. Busing is done and it's not coming back. Who cares?
8:44...
Busing in the traditional sense is dead yet there are those who want to see it make a comeback.
Yesterday, busing was based on race. Today, income is the new excuse for gerrymandering kids within the system.
We've already seen where the new Executive Director of Project LIFT has stated: said Watts. "I grew up just like many of these kids, so I feel morally and professionally obligated to work towards ending the dual system of education based on a child's zip code."
8:44--"Why talk about busing since it's done" has been a sort of mantra for some. And most younger parents today, especially those new to Charlotte, just assume that naturally their kids will be going to schools within their local communities. However, some local advocates (actually a very small number with disproportionate influence with the media)still are hopeful for a return to some sort of diversity based assignment (as Wiley says, probably based on socio-economics). The UNC Chapel Hill Center for Civil Rights continues to make this into a rights issue--the no sound basic education without diversity theory, thus hoping to bring in the federal government to force this onto districts. Swann Fellowship and Meck ACTS really push for a commitment to this from candidates in their candidate interviews.
You can pooh-pooh the concern over a return to busing all you want, but it would behoove everyone to pay attention to what Swann (and by extension Meck ACTS) is saying, as they work closely with UNC Chapel Hill Center for Civil Rights (part of the law school) and with various national advocates for diversity based assignment.
Swann's webpage archive includes an article on "What Type of Leader" is needed to replace Dr. Gorman. It says "The fundamental flaw in our direction for the schools is to believe that we can succeed at educating all children well, or even achieve the N.C. constitutional mandate of a "sound basic education" for all, in settings that separate our children by their parents' race or socioeconomic status." Take from that what you will about their intent.
11:11...
Great post, spot on.
Thanks, Wiley. I think some of these advocates have been very clever to jump on the anti-PFP bandwagon and thus gain supporters for their groups over this issue. They have not been upfront about what their real goal is--to gain enough influence on the board to make Tom Tate chair and alter assignment policies. Again, listen to the Swann/Meck ACTS candidate interviews and then beware!
8:44, Good points. When you say that Swann and Meck ACTS have "disproportionate influence with the media", are you referring to the Observer?
A couple of useful links:
http://www.law.unc.edu/centers/civilrights/default.aspx
Check out "legal and advocacy agenda".
http://www.swannfellowship.org/ Scroll down to "the candidates" to link to interviews.
Anonymous 8:44--not so sure about how much influence Swann has with the Observer, although the press has never been eager to examine exactly what they stand for; nor did the Observer publicize a Swann/UNC Center for Civil Rights/Harvard Civil Rights Project conference held at the Westin in the summer of 2003 for the purpose of examining legal means of returning busing to Charlotte, although at least one Observer editorial writer was in attendance.
But Meck ACTS' influence? Who were the Observer's main "go to" sources during the spring PFP frenzy? And what group has frequent columns published on the editorial page, setting the writers up as experts on various policy issues?
Observer reporters and editors may claim that Meck ACTS members are the ones most frequently involved in policy issues and so are most frequently quoted. But the truth is, most parents, citizens, taxpayers don't have time or knowledge or desire to be constant policy wonks. Is it fair for a small group of people with a very narrow agenda to hold so much sway with the local newspaper just because they are easily accessible?
I suspect the vast majority of CMS parents believe in neighborhood type schools, assume their kids will keep attending their nearby schools, and probably don't have an inkling that a small group is determined to change policy. So most people are not forming groups, putting out policy statements, posting on Facebook, or trying to prove how unequitable CMS is. Thus ordinary people busy living their lives are not getting the attention of the press. Don't know what the remedy for this situation is--perhaps a little less obsession with sensationalized education reporting?
Post a Comment