OUSD Teachers Association Pays For Union Label On Florice Hoffman
Posted by: Jubal | 10/15/2008 10:16 AM
The Orange Unified School District teachers union is going in big time for left-wing Democrat Area 3 candidate Florice Hofffman, throwing a whopping $18,600 in to Hoffman's campaign.Art Pedroza describes Hoffman as "a caring individual who sincerely wants to make a difference at OUSD."
Terrific. School boards are stuffed with people who "care about the children" and "sincerely want to make a difference," and have been for decades.
They are the same folks who, sitting in the passenger seat next to the public school unions and the bureaucracy, have ruined public education.
Hoffman is a left-wing labor lawyer and hard-core partisan Democrat. Maybe that's some OUSD voters cup of tea, but let's at least take a clear-eyed view of her candidacy.
The "issues" section of her campaign website is boilerplate rhetoric you can find on almost any school board candidate website: "fiscal responsibility," genuflection to the class size reduction totem, improve graduation rates, more technology, yada, yada, yada.
If there were a Wikipedia entry for "generic school board candidate rhetoric" it would be a link to Hoffman's site. Not a single word about anything remotely innovative or effective like "expanding charter schools" or "making parental choice a top priority."
That would be explained by the most salient fact about Hoffman's candidacy, which should be illuminated in neon for the benefit of every OUSD voter: she is the candidate of the OUSD teachers' union. As of Sept. 30, they had invested $18,600 in her candidacy. They may have have given her more since then, and this big dollar drop doesn't include however many thousands the teachers union will spend on pro-Hoffman independent expenditures.
Teachers unions don't lavish money because they are moved by the depth of a candidates devotion "to the children." It's an investment on which they expect a return in the form of loyal support for the union's demands on the taxpayers. The OUSD teachers union clearly believes electing Hoffman to the school board if worth a significant investment, which should tell OUSD voters all they need to know about what Hoffman's priorities will be.
OUSD voters interested in a continuation of the same, ossified approach to public education that has ruined a once great California public school system, and who want to ensure union demands have a strong voice on the OUSD Board of Education -- they should vote for Florice Hoffman.
Fortunately there's an alternative. If OUSD voters want a departure from the groupthink that characterizes the OUSD School Board; if they want a candidate who is not beholden to the special interests that dominate public education; if they want a Trustee who will govern for the benefit of parents and children instead of unions, bureaucrats and the status quo -- then they should vote for Alexis Deligianni.
CATEGORY:
2008 Elections, OUSD
Anonymous, you have an excellent point. Sometimes people become annoyed by a person or event, to the extent...
What about the special interests on the other side who continue to view control of local school boards as a way to fight the "culture war"? Florice is a talented candidate who will bring years of experience to the OUSD, a school district that is in desperate need of professionals who understand how things should be done. Moreover, as long as Rocco remains on the school board, the OUSD will be viewed as being ineffective and unable to truly focus on its primary mission that is to ensure that the students receive a well-rounded education provided by quality teachers who are adequately compensated for their skills and talents and to attract talented teachers to the district. Who else is better situated to understand the needs of the district then a mother who has had children attending schools in the district?
Some candidates receive support from teacher's unions, a coalition of parents, with some even receiving support from outside groups. And Jubal, you should know that improvement of local education can come in multiple areas, not just in "expanding charter schools" or "providing greater parent choice" which are just buzzwords for vouchers and privatization.
The OUSD has had school board members in the mold of Alexis Deligianni before in the late 1990's. They ran on the same platform of "fiscal responsibility" and "implementing a back to basics education." (Boilerplate talking points if you ask me) Those members were promptly recalled. We do not need to go down that sorry road again.
This is the experience from a former teacher now turned captain of industry:
"I spent six years in public education in LA teaching junior, senior and adult school. I went in as a left wing liberal right out of university and after seeing all the waste and incompetence I came out as a Ronald Reagan Conservative. Inner city schools get plenty of money so it is a myth that these schools do not have the supplies, equipment etc. that rich districts have; though it is true that many facilities are inferior. The money is going into bloated bureaucracies instead. Public school funding is equalized; though it is true that rich districts in Orange County have foundations that donate a lot of money to local schools, however, those very same schools do not get the federal money going to inner city schools so in the end it is probably a wash. In fact, every May as a program coordinator, I used to call teachers into the library to spend any federal money we had left because it was use it or lose it. Those monies could not be rolled over into the next year. So we ordered all kinds of materials and equipment to get rid of our remaining monies. It was just pork, pork, pork. And, specific to teacher performance, there were many who were completely incompetent and should have been fired. I suspect some of them have retired by now with full pensions which are far better than social security. Teachers get state pensions not social security which is some times equal to 80 – 90% of their last salary if they have taught for 30 or more years. Good teachers and bad teachers get the same salary and benefits which is a real crime. The ability to actually teach kids has nothing to do with compensation. In fact, teacher unions are against merit pay. So public school teachers are measured by the lowest common denominator not the highest. It really is sad. J. Morabiot
P.S. I saw all of this with my own eyes so this is not fiction