Educators...'If we lose on this, it's Katy bar the door what they do next. ... It's about our way of life.'

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2011/05/07/teachers-union-oks-54-assessment-to-aid-referendum-on-collective-bargaining-law.html?sid=101

Teachers union OKs $54 assessment to aid referendum on collective-bargaining law

OEA assessment to aid collective-bargaining referendum

Columbus Dispatch, May 7, 2011
By Alan Johnson

The Ohio Education Association will assess active members $54 apiece and support-staff members $25 to generate $5 million as fuel for a referendum to repeal the state's new collective-bargaining law.

The decision was made yesterday by about 1,000 delegates attending the teachers union's Spring Representative Assembly at Veterans Memorial.

Police and firefighters unions also have approved assessments to help raise money to support an issue expected to be on the ballot this fall to repeal Senate Bill 5. Signed into law by Gov. John Kasich this year, the law would restrict collective-bargaining rights for public employees and limit taxpayer costs for government workers' health care and pensions.

The vote of the assembly, representing 718 local teachers unions, was not disclosed. However, a union spokeswoman said there was "an overwhelming majority" in favor of a one-time $54 dues assessment for active regular members and a one-time $25 assessment for education support-staff members. Student and retired members will not be assessed.

The OEA represents 128,000 teachers, faculty members and support-staff members at public schools, colleges and universities.

Jay McDonald, head of the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, said his union is not assessing individual members but has asked each of its more than 200 local lodges to pay $50 for each member. That would come out to be about $1 million, he said.

Firefighters union officials have said they will raise a similar amount, McDonald said.

Speaking at the OEA meeting yesterday, U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown urged teachers to rally for the referendum campaign and "make this personal."

"You can talk all the statistics you want, but tell your personal story. Tell people why you're a teacher,"the Ohio Democrat said.

"If we lose on this, it's Katy bar the door what they do next. ... It's about our way of life."

ajohnson@dispatch.com

Dennis Leone on another topic: Anti-bullying bills

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2011/05/06/anti-bullying-bills-are-ill-considered.html

Anti-bullying bills are ill-considered

Columbus Dispatch, May 6, 2011
BY DENNIS A. LEONE

Three anti-bullying bills are quietly moving forward in the General Assembly that would increase the likelihood of litigation against public school districts and transfer yet more parent responsibility into the hands of educators and school-board members. They may become new laws before you know it. Here they are:

• House Bill 155 — This proposed bill would expand the current definition of bullying in Ohio law to include an “electronic act (a.k.a. cyber-bullying) committed through the use of a cell phone, computer or other personal electronic communication device.” But here’s the catch: The bill would require school boards to have a policy stipulating that a student may be suspended at school for electronic acts or alleged bullying that occur off school property at night and over the weekend. This bill also would command principals to first determine whether such will “materially and substantially disrupt the school.”

Do we really want principals trying to decide on Monday morning what really happened over the weekend, who really started a neighborhood fight and what really triggered mean-spirited Saturday night electronic communications between students on their Facebook accounts?

• House Bill 116 — Some lawmakers may think that current law is insufficient even though it requires school boards to implement anti-bullying policies and disciplinary consequences for students. Now, proposed House Bill 116 would require “age-appropriate instruction” about bullying for “each student enrolled in the district.” The bill does not say “all students,” it says “each student.” So, large-group student meetings may no longer be sufficient to communicate such policies.

• House Bill 208 — This bill, if passed, would redefine harassment and bullying as “any act that is based on an actual or perceived trait of a student.” Nineteen “traits and characteristics of a student” will apply, including race, gender identity, ancestry, political beliefs, and something called “family status.” Will principals be expected to become mind readers to determine, for example, whether a student’s decisions off school property were motivated by the political beliefs of another student?

Some parents and lawmakers forget that current Ohio law says that harassment really isn’t bullying unless it has occurred “more than once” and unless it has been “sufficiently severe, persistent and pervasive.” It is clear that what used to be known as teasing, name calling, banter, pushing, shoving, insults and playground misconduct now are defined as bullying by many parents and students. Parents have been given a new weapon to defend their children that they’ve never had before.

Lost in the discussion about these bills is the fact that parents should be held legally responsible for what their children do off school property. Some years ago, the legislature deemed it proper to pass a law (Ohio Revised Code 3321.38) that enables the juvenile court to prosecute parents and fine them $500 if their children are habitually absent from school. If you really want to stop cyber-bullying off school property, then hold the parents legally responsible and require them to take away the electronic devices they purchased for their children.

Another current Ohio law (ORC 3109.10) holds parents liable for a fine of up to $10,000 if their children maliciously assault someone. Courts have imposed larger fines on parents if their children commit acts of ethnic intimidation against another person. It is even possible for parents to be charged with “contributing to the delinquency of a child,” pursuant to yet another Ohio law (ORC 2919.24). None of these laws ever attempted to transfer the parents’ responsibility to the public schools.

These bills would put more on the legal plate of public school educators — who already are expected to warn students about dating violence, to teach them about venereal disease, to promote abstinence and, of course, to raise achievement test scores. I am waiting to see the lawsuit by a mother who wishes to blame the school district for her daughter’s pregnancy and her premarital sexual activity because enough wasn’t taught beforehand by her teachers.

And wait until you hear about proposed House Bill 109. If passed, it will impose $50 fines on parents from lower-performing school districts if they fail to attend parent-teacher conferences. Sounds great, doesn’t it? But guess what? The bill requires the school administrator — not the courts — to somehow collect the money and further requires the school administrator to waive the fine if the parent can show “good cause” for not attending the conference. Would you like to be the administrator who is supposed to make that judgment?

Dennis A. Leone, a former school superintendent, is an assistant professor of educational administration for Ashland University.

Mr. Governor, why do you try to control our right to know?

From John Curry, May 6, 2011

And...why didn't the Dispatch run an editorial like this one....after all...they are so much closer to Columbus, aren't they? John

P.S. Didn't former Supreme Court Justice Brandeis say, "Sunshine is the best disinfectant"?

There should be no deal on advertising that could compromise government integrity, and no effort to make it harder for Ohioans to find public notices they need to see.

http://toledoblade.com/Editorials/2011/05/06/Public-notice.html

Public notice

The Ohio House of Representatives has taken a big step toward ensuring that government will continue to notify citizens of public matters in timely and accessible fashion.

State Rep. Randy Gardner (R., Bowling Green), led a bipartisan House effort to resist proposed changes in the way that public notices, on issues from tax delinquencies to local elections, are published. Gov. John Kasich's administration tried to substitute government Web sites for local newspapers as the places where such notices first, fully appear. That plan would have carried too much risk of citizens missing important notices.

Newspapers such as The Blade make money by printing public notices. But it is safe to say that most citizens are more apt to see such notices in their local newspaper than on government Web pages.

When Internet use is universal, citizens may no longer have to depend on print media to relay public information about official business. Until then, access to public notices continues to require a medium that can reliably deliver data to a wide variety of people.

Another administration proposal would allow government agencies to sell commercial advertising on their official Web sites. That prospect would create conflicts of interest among governments who deal with potential advertisers with business before them.

There should be no deal on advertising that could compromise government integrity, and no effort to make it harder for Ohioans to find public notices they need to see.

Mr. Gardner and his colleagues deserve credit for recognizing the public interest in official transparency.

It's about time (May 5, 2011) that ORTA decided to wake up!

From John Curry, May 6, 2011

(Click image to enlarge)

After all these months of prodding, poking, encouraging, shaming and other forms of embarrassment, ORTA FINALLY DECIDED TO TAKE A STAND ON SB 5 (see #3 below)!

ORTA, have you really (and finally) realized that SB 5 is hurting public education and retirees' pension benefits or am I still dreaming? Please, someone, pinch me!

John

At its May 5, 2011 Board Meeting ORTA passed the following resolutions:

1. A recommendation by the ORTA Legislative Committee to the ORTA Executive Committee that ORTA address each piece of legislation that directly or indirectly affects the State Teachers Retirement System.

2. A recommendation from the ORTA Legislative Committee that the ORTA Executive Committee adopt this position statement: ORTA reaffirms our strong support of public education as a basic right of all Ohio children.

3. The ORTA Legislative Committee recommends to the ORTA Executive Committee that ORTA supports the SB5 (Senate Bills) referendum.

[Happy Cinco de Mayo from ORTA!!]

Rare discovery.... a Superintendent with courage to speak out against Teach for America!

From John Curry, May 6, 2011

Thank you, Middletown Superintendent Rasmussen!

“I’d like to believe the teachers who are specifically trained to be teachers, with the skills and background they get through a more traditional teacher-training program, are the kind who will be best prepared to work with our students,” Rasmussen said.

Thank you, educator Richard Packert!

Richard Packert, a seventh-grade teacher at Vail Middle School and president of the Southwestern Ohio Education Association, said the program is a “slap in the face” to students who went to college specifically for the profession.

“Would you go to a surgeon that only had five weeks of training?” Packert asked. “I understand their mission, but I think school districts can attract quality, qualified teachers (themselves).”

http://www.middletownjournal.com/news/middletown-news/educators-wary-of-teacher-program-1153973.html

Educators wary of teacher program

By Andy Sedlak, Staff Writer
May 6, 2011

MIDDLETOWN — It’s too early to say if Teach For America — a competitive program that places teachers in low-income urban and rural classrooms — will reach Middletown schools.

A TFA spokeswoman last week gave no indication of how many teachers the organization will hire in Ohio, or in which school districts it will operate. This came after Gov. John Kasich signed a bill on April 27 to allow TFA to operate in Ohio.

The program has placed 8,200 top college graduates in the classrooms of 39 underserved regions across the country. Members of the highly competitive program — who may or may not be seeking long-term teaching careers — are sent to schools for a two-year job with starting-level pay.

Kasich has stated the program will bring “new blood” into classrooms. Greg Rasmussen, superintendent of Middletown City Schools, said he needs more information.

Rasmussen said he prefers the usual methods of training that teachers receive in colleges and universities over the preparation TFA members receive before they are deployed to their schools.

TFA applicants must pass subject-area tests and complete a five-week summer training program. Applicants must have a 2.5 or better grade point average and come from an accredited school.

“I’d like to believe the teachers who are specifically trained to be teachers, with the skills and background they get through a more traditional teacher-training program, are the kind who will be best prepared to work with our students,” Rasmussen said.

Rasmussen said he couldn’t make a definitive comment regarding the program’s effectiveness, or any potential it has to serve Middletown schools.

“I think there might be a way we could fill some hard-to-fill positions ... specialty positions, maybe,” he said.

Richard Packert, a seventh-grade teacher at Vail Middle School and president of the Southwestern Ohio Education Association, said the program is a “slap in the face” to students who went to college specifically for the profession.

“Would you go to a surgeon that only had five weeks of training?” Packert asked. “I understand their mission, but I think school districts can attract quality, qualified teachers (themselves).”

Welcome to Ohio's open sewer called charter school legislation....

From John Curry, May 5, 2011

"Put another way, a for-profit operator could start a charter school on its own, and then via the mere transfer of funds, public money would become private money, effective monitoring cast aside."

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/opinions/121140499.html

House of excess

Speaker Batchelder and his colleagues do charter schools no favor by relieving for-profit operators of so much public accountability

May 3, 2011

Even many charter school advocates are furious with provisions slipped into the budget plan put together by Speaker Bill Batchelder and fellow Republicans in the Ohio House. Consider the widely reported words of Terry Ryan of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which sponsors seven charter schools in the state. He warns that the provisions would set back the charter movement in Ohio, returning to an era of weak oversight when the state was a national ''laughingstock.''

Whatever the arguments for and against charter schools, the concept is here to stay. What Ryan and others have sought, and achieved, in recent years is improved accountability, working to the advantage of effective charter schools and rightly placing in jeopardy failing efforts. The House budget plan thumbs its nose at such thinking. It would erode oversight, and dramatically so.

Here is a moment for John Kasich to use that voice he enjoys deploying, the governor standing up for charter schools by calling for the House to abandon this exercise in excess.

How excessive?

Currently, charter schools are formed through sponsoring organizations, a process designed to achieve accountability, the principle of a check and balance. The House budget plan would allow for-profit entities to establish charter schools — without a sponsor. More, a school's governing authority would be permitted to delegate any or all of its rights and responsibilities to the school operator. And the public money that flows to the for-profit operator of a school? It no longer would be viewed as public funds, anything purchased with the public money would become the property of the operator.

Put another way, a for-profit operator could start a charter school on its own, and then via the mere transfer of funds, public money would become private money, effective monitoring cast aside.

The House plan further proposes that the renewal of a contract between a charter school and its sponsor must have the approval of the operator. These and similar provisions amount to a substantial shift in power, for-profit operators gaining at the expense of sponsors. No other state in the country allows charter schools such leeway. Why in Ohio? Speaker Batchelder and his allies invite the impression they are eager to help David Brennan, an Akron businessman and the state's largest operator of charter schools. Oh, and the past decade, Brennan has donated more than $4 million to Ohio Republicans.

Couple these gifts to Brennan with proposals to expand the presence of charter schools, and the Terry Ryans have good reason to worry about lax oversight, leading to poorly performing schools, even scandal, all harming the reputation of the charter concept. At best, the House would yank these provisions from its budget plan as it prepares for a floor vote this week. If not, then the governor and Republicans in charge of the Senate must make the repairs. Listen to the many advocates of charter schools. They don't want this burden.

Even many charter school advocates are furious with provisions slipped into the budget plan put together by Speaker Bill Batchelder and fellow Republicans in the Ohio House. Consider the widely reported words of Terry Ryan of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which sponsors seven charter schools in the state. He warns that the provisions would set back the charter movement in Ohio, returning to an era of weak oversight when the state was a national ''laughingstock.''

Whatever the arguments for and against charter schools, the concept is here to stay. What Ryan and others have sought, and achieved, in recent years is improved accountability, working to the advantage of effective charter schools and rightly placing in jeopardy failing efforts. The House budget plan thumbs its nose at such thinking. It would erode oversight, and dramatically so.

Here is a moment for John Kasich to use that voice he enjoys deploying, the governor standing up for charter schools by calling for the House to abandon this exercise in excess.

How excessive?

Currently, charter schools are formed through sponsoring organizations, a process designed to achieve accountability, the principle of a check and balance. The House budget plan would allow for-profit entities to establish charter schools — without a sponsor. More, a school's governing authority would be permitted to delegate any or all of its rights and responsibilities to the school operator. And the public money that flows to the for-profit operator of a school? It no longer would be viewed as public funds, anything purchased with the public money would become the property of the operator.

Put another way, a for-profit operator could start a charter school on its own, and then via the mere transfer of funds, public money would become private money, effective monitoring cast aside.

The House plan further proposes that the renewal of a contract between a charter school and its sponsor must have the approval of the operator. These and similar provisions amount to a substantial shift in power, for-profit operators gaining at the expense of sponsors. No other state in the country allows charter schools such leeway. Why in Ohio? Speaker Batchelder and his allies invite the impression they are eager to help David Brennan, an Akron businessman and the state's largest operator of charter schools. Oh, and the past decade, Brennan has donated more than $4 million to Ohio Republicans.

Couple these gifts to Brennan with proposals to expand the presence of charter schools, and the Terry Ryans have good reason to worry about lax oversight, leading to poorly performing schools, even scandal, all harming the reputation of the charter concept. At best, the House would yank these provisions from its budget plan as it prepares for a floor vote this week. If not, then the governor and Republicans in charge of the Senate must make the repairs. Listen to the many advocates of charter schools. They don't want this burden.

Statehouse rally this Thursday (May 5) for good jobs and strong communities

http://www.progressohio.org/blog/2011/05/rally-with-thousands-for-good-jobs-strong-communities-at-the-statehouse-thursday.html

Rally With Thousands For Good Jobs, Strong Communities At The Statehouse Thursday

By Dave on May 3, 2011

After passing SB 5, Gov. Kasich and his political allies are focusing their attention on the proposed budget that would continue attacks on working families, eliminate tens of thousands of jobs and cut funding for services, like fire stations, schools, libraries and more, that Ohioans depend on to keep their communities strong.

This Thursday, thousands of Ohioans rally on the West Lawn of the Statehouse at 5PM to take a stand against these assaults and demand good jobs and strong communities for all Ohioans.

SB 5 was only the beginning of Gov. Kasich's attempt to make Ohio into a playground for corporate CEOs and the wealthy to prosper while the rest of us struggle to make ends meet.

Just look at what he and other lawmakers are proposing:

• Cutting nearly 50% from local governments, which will force local elected officials to eliminate tens of thousands of jobs and/or close libraries, schools, fire stations and other services or raise taxes.

• Hand over prisons, including county jails, to for-profit corporations with spotty track records of quality and safety.

• Cut healthcare for seniors and low-income Ohioans.

• Eliminate nearly $2 billion in funding for K-12 schools, universities and colleges.

• Take away power from the Ohio Consumers' Counsel to advocate for customers of utility companies.

• Prohibits charter school workers, community-based correctional facilities employees, Capitol Square Review and Advocacy Board workers for having a voice on the job through collective bargaining.

These kinds of policies will not create good jobs or strengthen our communities.

Join us on Thursday at 5PM on the West Lawn of the Statehouse to demand lawmakers stop trying to balance the budget on the backs of the working and middle class.

CORE to meet May 19, 2011

CORE (Concerned Ohio Retired Educators) will hold its May meeting on Thursday, May 19th, at the STRS building, 275 East Broad Street, Columbus, OH. Parking is available (free) in the STRS parking garage located in the rear of the building, off E. Capital Street.

You are also encouraged to attend the STRS Retirement Board meeting on the same day. It usually begins around 9:00 a.m. in the Board Room on the 6th floor, though the time may vary from month to month. Lately, the meetings have been held most of the day on the following Friday as well as on Thursday. For this reason, we suggest you check the STRS website (www.strsoh.org) to confirm the time.

CORE meeting attendees usually leave the board meeting around 11:30 a.m. to go to the second floor cafeteria to get lunch. We eat in the small room adjacent to the cafeteria, behind the Sublett Room, where the CORE meeting begins promptly at 11:45.

A meeting agenda will be sent out via e-mail before May 19th. If you have additional suggestions for the agenda, please send them to John Curry at curryjo@watchtv,net.

May 19 CORE meeting canceled
Next CORE meeting will be in June.

STRS Board to meet May 18-19, 2011

Details here

A MUST READ FOR EDUCATORS: Mr. Governor, Shut This School District Down!

From John Curry, May 1, 2011

http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/05/01/mr-governor-shut-this-school-district-down/

Mr. Governor, Shut This School District Down!

By Greg On May 1, 2011
[Click images once or twice to enlarge]

Today's story is about the 21st largest school district in the state of Ohio and how district leaders are working to attain financial success while being under attack on multiple fronts. I will not reveal the names of the district or the leadership until nearer the end of the story so as to try and avoid any bias. Please read with an open mind.

The 21st largest district in Ohio provided services to just over 9,000 students in grades K-12 in 2009-2010. Enrollment has increased 139% in the last five years, a rate slightly higher than the Olentangy Local Schools’ rate of 138%, a district frequently cited as experiencing “extreme” or “extraordinary” growth over that period. The district has not provided transportation for students for at least the last 10 years and does not have a food service program. As a result, the number of 633 overall employees is very low when compared to similarly-sized districts (e.g., Worthington City Schools has 1,412 employees).

The district has adopted an organizational structure that has a Chief Executive Officer in addition to a Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, and the School Board. The CEO often takes the lead in making significant final decisions about the program, and also represents the district in interacting with legislative issues that impact the district.

In addition to receiving $$59,978,866 in state funding in 2010, the district will receive combined Federal Funds of $$13,491,027 in 2010 and, as a participating member of the Race to the Top program, $2,890,813 from 2010-2014.

The superintendent has been working for the district since 2002, after he retired with 35 years experience as a principal. As he collected his retirement pay, he received a salary of over $112,757 last year. And the superintendent has done so over these past 9-10 years without ever having an Ohio Superintendent’s license or certificate despite the clear violation of Ohio Revised Code 3319.01 which states “No person shall be appointed to the office of superintendent of a city, or exempted village school district or a service center who does not hold a license designated for being a superintendent issued under section 3319.22 of the Revised Code.”

The assistant superintendent, an elementary and special education teacher since 1978, allowed her superintendent certificate to expire in 2007, since it also apparently wasn’t necessary to receive her $135,000 salary from the district.

A glance down the list of administrators employed in the district will reveal the names of long-retired principals who are collecting their STRS benefits and a very nice salary from the district (the oft-criticized practice of double-dipping and targeted by Governor Kasich).

The district reports a wide disparity between average administrator pay and teacher pay.

• 36 administrators = $79,443
• 456 teachers = $34,455

The CEO for the district appears to technically work as a consultant, so his exact compensation is hidden. “Per the management agreement with the district, the consultant’s company is entitled to 4% of all revenues received except federal funding, and is also entitled to .5% interest on any outstanding balance. The management fee for the fiscal year ended 2010 was $2,392,656. As of June 30, 2010, all fees had been paid.” Therefore, we can be project the CEO’s salary as somewhere between $0 and $2,392,656.

The CEO apparently has an entrepreneurial spirit, however, and started up a web-based learning management system through a newly-created company that would be able to serve not just his district, but as a tool he could market to school districts around the country. Not coincidentally, his district was an early adopter and last year they “contracted for the purchase of curriculum services for students. The cost of services for fiscal year ended 2010 was $9,570,623. As of June 30, 2010, $0 was outstanding and payable.”

So that now puts our CEO’s unknown salary at somewhere between $0 and $11,964,279.

Financial numbers aside, how is the district performing in student achievement? Not so well, actually. Below is a chart showing some of the mystery district’s numbers compare to the oft-vilified Cleveland Schools.

.................................................................

And even worse, the district is in “School Improvement Year 8,” a status no other district has attained. The State of Ohio Accountability Notebook only goes up to Year 5:

......................................................

At this point, what should the state do with this district? Or at least, what do you think the state’s plans are for the district? Some ideas from the chart would be to replace the staff, reopen the building as a charter, turn over the building to a for-profit entity, or even turn it over to the Department of Education.

The easy answer might seem to be a state takeover as suggested in December by Kasich as a solution for the Cleveland Schools.

“Kasich has not drafted a specific proposal but said Wednesday that he favors putting a “special master” in control of school districts like Cleveland with chronically low graduation rates and test scores. He did not set a deadline for improvements but said he wouldn’t wait four years, the length of an Ohio governor’s term. “Look, I’ve been thinking about this for 30 years,” said Kasich, who will take office in early January. “You cannot let kids sit in an environment where they are failing, where the system is failing them.”

While that might all seem logical and understandable given the strong words our legislators have for failing schools these days, that would be a wrong guess.

Instead, the legislature has included some different ideas to help our district in the state budget (as explained by the LSC):

• Requires ODE to pay [the district] for serving children with disabilities regardless of whether a child enrolls . . . after the federal reporting date of December 1.
• Exempted from student immunization requirements for admission.
• Permits the school’s governing authority to delegate any or all of its rights, duties, and responsibilities to the [CEO].
• Specifies that funds paid to the [CEO] by the school are not considered public funds and no public entity, including the school, has an interest in assets or property purchased with those funds.
• Exempts the [school district] from provisions of current law allowing a school to be suspended or put on probationary status for (1) failure to meet student performance requirements in the contract, (2) fiscal mismanagement, (3) a violation of law or the contract, or (4) other good cause.
• Specifies that, for state funding purposes, [a district] student is considered automatically re-enrolled the following school year until the student’s enrollment is formally terminated.
• Eliminates the requirement that [the district] spend per pupil on instruction at least as much as the per pupil statewide classroom teacher amount specified under the . . . school funding model ($2,931 in FY 2009)

So what’s this district’s secret for avoiding punishment and actually gaining support through the GOP’s budget? What model should the superintendents of other struggling districts follow?

Donate to your legislator. A lot. No, I mean a LOT.

As in $220,795.00 per year.

Let’s unravel this mystery district if you haven’t already figured it out.

William Lager is the founder of ECOT (Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow) online charter school, the 21st largest “district” in the state of Ohio with over 9,000 students. Because ECOT is online, there are no school buildings, no transportation costs, no lunch needs and only 633 total employees.

A 2010 audit by the state of Ohio and auditor Mary Taylor (yes, now Lt. Governor Mary Taylor) included the following:

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow, Franklin County, Ohio, as of June 30, 2010.

Per the management agreement with ECOT, Altair is entitled to 4% of all revenues received except federal funding. Altair is also entitled to .5% interest on any outstanding balance. The management fee for the fiscal year ended 2010 was $2,392,656. As of June 30, 2010, all fees had been paid to Altair.

ECOT contracts with IQ Innovations, LLC for the purchase of curriculum services for ECOT students. The cost of services for fiscal year ended 2010 was $9,570,623. As of June 30, 2010, $0 was outstanding and payable. IQ Innovations, LLC and Altair Learning Management I, Inc. have the same principal owner.

To reiterate, William Lager is the CEO of both Altair Learning Management and IQ Innovations, LLC. And auditor Mary Taylor found nothing wrong with him directing nearly $12,000,000 in taxpayer dollars straight from the Ohio Department of Education and into the accounts of private companies he owns and operates.

And in the year 2010, William Lager, Ohio charter school operator with an undisclosed salary, managed to donate $220,795 to a variety of election campaigns, most notably:

........................................................

To clearly spell out that donor list for those superintendents wishing to follow this strategy: donate a total of $42,500 to the majority leadership in the House and an additional $30,000 to members of the committee that will be hearing the budget bill (make sure you remember to give double to the committee chair).

$220,795 in donations to Ohio legislators in 2010. What percentage of your income do you donate to political candidates? Is ten percent too high? How about five percent? If William Lagerdonated a generous five percent of his 2010 income to Ohio politicians, then that would place his 2010 salary at an eye-popping $4,415,900. In January, the Westerville School district made news when it was claimed the school board “went ‘overboard’ in its negotiations” with Superintendent Dan Good in granting him a raise to $189,000. Perhaps he should have held out for more, considering his district is considerably larger than Lager’s.

Oh, and there’s that small fact that ECOT actually has a team of administrators, albeit unlicensed, that supposedly run the organization. So what does Lager actually do? Well, despite the fact that the entire organization is taxpayer funded, we have no idea.

So let’s try to summarize this hot mess. The 21st largest school district in the state has had flat or declining test scores for a nine year period; graduation rates of below 35% over that entire time are consistently 20 points lower than Cleveland Schools’ scores, a district that is being discussed for state takeover. Attendance rates are consistently below the state average, while student achievement scores are significantly below state averages. And instead of intervening in year 3 or 4 according to State regulations, the state allowed enrollment to increase at one of the highest rates in the state, allowing a net growth of nearly 2,600 students in the last five years. And instead of taking a financial penalty, the district received 36% more in per pupil funding than the state average. All of this while being run by an unlicensed superintendent and unlicensed assistant superintendent who are each being paid over $100,000 per year (above statewide averages) and teachers are paid an average salary of $34,450, well below the state average of %55,812. And in spite of the existence of these administrative roles, the district is actually managed and operated by CEO William Lager of Altair Learning Management, whose fee for 2010 was $2,392,656. And William Lager, the CEO who is running the district, created a new company, IQ Innovations, who then created a software solution for the district, who then paid IQ Innovations $9,570,623, also for 2010. And again, instead of intervening, instead of conducting inquiries in search of anything from ethics violations to criminal activities, our legislators, aided by $220,795 worth of elbow nudges, are instead using the budget bill to modify state laws in order to help William Lager better expand the scheme of laundering state tax dollars.

That’s right, $12,000,000 per year in Ohio taxpayer dollars funneled directly to William Lager is apparently not enough, so the Governor and GOP-controlled House are going to make it even easier and less transparent for him.

I’d like to recommend that you scan through this post again, now that you know that I am referring to an online community school. I think you may find some of the facts even more shocking through that lens.

I would like to close with a reading from the Book of John (Kasich): Reforms; Page 3, Line 1

“Budgets are about more than money. Budgets express an administration‘s priorities.”

Never has he spoken truer words.

CORE's Nancy Hamant and....."Who in their right mind would want to teach in Ohio?"

From Nancy Hamant, May 1, 2011
Subject: Comments on King Kasich's budget proposal changes....from bad to worse ..

To One and All:

On 4-30-11, John Curry sent out an analysis of Substitute House Bill 153. You need to check on the section titled Teacher Evaluation. The last paragraph in that section (on page 3) is as follows:

"Requires employers to submit aggregate teacher and principal evaluation results to ODE. Grants civil immunity to the board of education (or other governing body), its members, and evaluators for conducting evaluation in accordance with the adopted policy"

Does this section mean that teachers or principals will lose the right to sue regarding their evaluations? A legal determination needs to be made on this section immediately! House Bill 153 and SB 5 are turning Ohio into a state in which teachers and also principals have no rights--and are being treated like slaves. Who in their right mind would want to teach in Ohio?

Nancy Hamant

I'll tell you why ORTA won't form such a group: the Akron EA 'gets it'; ORTA doesn't!

John Curry to RH Jones, May 1, 2011

Subject: Re: ORTA needs to form a legally separate Political Action Group

Bob....you wonder "why ORTA has not formed such a group?" I'll tell you why...it's because they are only a luncheon bunch and are led by many who don't want to criticize when ultra conservative politicians set out to destroy public education along with public pensions. In 10 words or less...NO GUTS!

John

From RH Jones, May 1, 2011
Subject: ORTA needs to form a legally separate Political Action Group

To all:

The AkronEA has a fund raising site to back politician action that is in the best interest of its members. It is called, the Akron Teachers Political Action Committee (ATPAC).

They are having a fund-raising drive to fight SB 5. Contributions of $20 are being asked to contribute.

The ATPAC is a private group, separate by law from the AEA, organized to elect political candidates or to advance political issues. Political action committees exist because it is illegal under federal and state law for interest groups, like AEA.

I wonder why ORTA has not formed such a group? SB 5 will severely impact our STRS’s ability to fund our pension, HC/Rx & 3% COLA that is non-compounding.

RHJones, an elder Life Member of ORTA