Republicans already outnumber Democrats on the Douglas County Board of Education 6-1 – not that that’s ever mattered before since school board elections have traditionally been non-partisan.
But county Republican party officials broke that custom this summer when they endorsed four candidates for the four seats up for election in November, in an all-mail-in-ballot election. And the four GOP-favored candidates just happen to be the ones NOT endorsed by the Douglas County teachers’ union, the Douglas County Teachers Federation.
Dan Gerken, Doug Benevento, Meghann Silverthorn and incumbent John Carson are running together as a conservative bloc, under the banner of more parental choice, more charter schools, more transparency in district spending and less autonomy for district administrators. This has a lot of folks nervous, and wondering just what changes such a bloc would bring to county schools should they all win.
Carson, by the way, was the sole board member to vote against taking the district’s $395 million bond request to voters last year. That bond issue ultimately failed.
Rumors are flying that with such a majority, the board would convert all county schools to charter schools, thus diminishing the power of the teachers’ union; and appoint ex-Congressman (and current president of the State Board of Education) and right-wing darling Bob Schaffer to succeed departing superintendent Jim Christensen.
Meghann Silverthorn, one of the GOP-endorsed candidates from Parker, scoffs at such notions.
“It’s just not true,” she says of the charter-only and Schaffer-related allegations. “If Mr. Schaffer wants to apply, we’d consider him, but I don’t know what his qualifications are. I think that since Mr. Schaffer is a conservative person, people are trying to whip up some fear that he would change the curriculum to promote creationism or be anti-science somehow. That’s just not true.”
Silverthorn, by the way, has degrees in aerospace engineering and political science and works as an analyst for a Department of Defense agency. “One of my personal issues is math and science achievement,” she says.
Disputing the facts
But her chief objection to her opponent, incumbent Emily Hansen, is Hansen’s vote to exclude charter schools from getting any bond money had the bond issue passed last fall. “She doesn’t seem to be keen on including charter schools in everything,” Silverthorn says. “I don’t agree with her at all on that.”
Hansen, the lone Democrat on the board, insists she has nothing against charter schools and nothing against transparency in spending, another frequently-cited talking point among the GOP-endorsed candidates. GOP officials are miffed by the school board’s refusal to endorse a controversial bill introduced in the State Legislature earlier this year by Sen. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch. The bill, which was gutted in committee, would have required school districts to post their checkbooks online for public scrutiny.
Hansen says she feels that focusing on choice and transparency diverts voters from more important issues. “My greatest concern is that that state’s fiscal picture isn’t good,” she says. “We’re looking at a billion dollars the state needs to cut from its budget, and 43 percent of its budget is in K-12 education – and Douglas County makes up 8 percent of the 43 percent. That’s a very large number. Having experience and knowledge about what we’ve already cut, and knowing what the values of the whole community are, those will be important things as we faces this challenge. It’s a big mess, and frankly, it will take some leadership to stand up and make tough choices.”
“It’s frustrating to me to be arguing about whether we support choice when we obviously do, and arguing about things like transparency,” Hansen says. “I know that’s important, but to make that a point in an election when the issues are so much bigger, it’s frustrating. These others are good at keeping to their talking points and staying on message, but they’re not really addressing what’s coming down the pike.”
Hansen also bemoans the partisan feel of this election, and the implication that if the four GOP-endorsed candidates are running as a slate, then their four opponents must also constitute a slate. “And we’re not running as a slate,” she says. “We’re independent candidates who just happened to get the endorsement of the professional education organization. They’ve turned that into a partisan thing.”
“In a place like Douglas County, you’re going to get a heavily Republican school board regardless of how this shakes out,” Hansen says. “But what I hear from moderate Republicans is that they’re not happy about the things that are happening. They’re frustrated because some candidates were pressured out of the race. It’s almost like they don’t give party members credit for being able to choose on their own.”
Hunting RINOs
Sue Catterall, running against incumbent John Carson, is even more blunt. “Party affiliation is irrelevant,” she says. “The race is supposed to be non-partisan. I believe people should be making their decisions on school board candidates based on their educational values, not their party affiliation.”
But county party chairman John Ransom sees nothing wrong with the party involving itself in school board elections, and he will recommend the practice continue.
“The short answer on why we did it is because it was the right thing to do,” Ransom says. “The longer answer is more complicated. There’s an increasing feeling in the community that both the school administration and members of the school board – more so the school board – are out of touch with the needs of the community. They haven’t done a terrible job, by any means. We have good schools. But a lot of that has to do with the fact of the demographics of Douglas County, which support high achievement in education.”
Ransom holds particular disdain for board president Kristine Turner, whom he accuses of pandering to whatever group she appears before. “She hasn’t kept her promises and we don’t know exactly what she stands for,” Ransom says. “We’re not comfortable with the way she’s governed as board president.”
Privately, party officials are said to be targeting moderate Republicans they believe are RINOs: Republicans In Name Only. They put Turner in that category.
Ransom says he thinks the primary issue in the campaign ought to be school choice, and he accuses the existing board of dragging its feet on approving new charter school applications.
“We certainly support neighborhood schools,” he says. “But if we introduce more choices for parents, we believe that ultimately student achievement goes up. We selected candidates that we believe not only believe that philosophy, but will support it with actions. And the candidates we’re not supporting will not.”
Comments like that leave candidate Kevin Leung scratching his head. Leung, a businessman and longtime Republican and school district activist, believes his conservative credentials are impeccable. Yet the party endorsed one of his opponents, Dan Gerken, a leader in the Mitt Romney presidential campaign in Colorado in 2008.
“I’ve been a Republican since 1993. I’ve been a delegate to the county Republican convention three times. But I was branded as not as good a Republican as my opponent,” Leung said. “It’s funny. I own a small business that was named Colorado Retail Business of the Year in 2007. I’m a fiscal conservative. Two of the candidates endorsed by the party are lawyers who never ran a business, yet they claim they are the fiscal conservatives. One of them doesn’t even have kids in the school district. It’s bizarre.”
Leung and Turner have issued a joint press release calling on their fellow Republicans to buck party officials.
“We Republicans do not need our party boss to tell us what to do and who to vote for,” says the release. “For our party boss to use our resources to take sides in a non-partisan election without adequate input from the rank and file members only helps our enemy to make a case that ‘our party is out of touch with the sentiments of our citizens.’ … The party boss will promote our opponents heavily using all available resources. However, we want to let you know that you have other Republican choices in this race.”
“Party boss”?
I find it interesting that these two are objecting NOW to the Republican party’s involvement in this race. They weren’t complaining back in the summer when THEY were seeking the party endorsement!
John Ransom is wrong. School board is about dedication and commitment to the district not party affiliation or any sort of political philosophy. The Republican candidates endorsed by the party will not do what is in the best interest of the tax payers, the students or the district but will only act in the best interest of the Republican party.
This is a Party takeover of a non-partisan race. The Party is not concerned with the kids of the school but rather the ideology of the school district board. The Party pushed out all of the moderates and are now left with four puppets. It is sad that politics have become more important than the kids and staff of our school districts.
Where is the discussion about educational issues? Dan Gerken admitted at one school board forum (the one he bothered to show up to) that he had no idea what NCLB (No Child Left Behind) is!! Meghann Silverthorn dubbed herself “a tax-payer with no children” and who admitted she’s never even set foot inside of a Douglas County School prior to her first forum! Hmmm what do you think her focus is on – educating our students or keeping on eye on her money? John Carson only voted on issues that applied to Charter Schools while in office. Are these people who want the job because they have the have our students’ interest at heart or are these people running on their own agendas?
I have attended two forms in which all candidates were present. What upsets me most about this election, is the lack of understanding by the four candidates backed by the GOP of how the district works, how the district gets funding, and the affects of limiting future funds into our district. It is a fact that Douglas County, while one of the richest counties in the country, are the lowest funded district, in the Metro area, at the State and Federal levels. It is a myth that its teachers make the most money in the city. I have experienced first hand the impact of the district having to cut roughly $58 million the past two years.The loss of 262 employees, all staff development (some candidates want more staff development, but it had to be cut in the last round of cuts), loss of district educational experts, who guided the curriculum and direction of our district, changes in the bus routes as well as larger class sizes. Many schools are seeing 25-30 students in the elementary schools and 35+ at the secondary levels There are more cuts to come. Douglas County has been doing well with little funding, but we can not continue to expect good results with less and less money. If our board can not come up with creative ways to fund the district, and taxes are not an option, than our district will continue to loose the quality we have all come to expect. We are not talking about products that can be made cheaper, we are talking about quality education and our most important resource, our students. Our next board will be making the hard decisions which will affect our students. This election is not to be taken lightly. I urge all people voting to educate themselves on all the candidates and what they know about running a school district, and how their visions can improve our district and come up with creative way to fund the education in this district.
[...] (See this previous EdNews story for more background on the candidates and the issues.) [...]
Well the rubber is meeting the road here. All eight candidates have huge problems. The four candidates the GOP endorsed need to show everyone the truth is that partisanship and ideology do in fact play a role in education of Americans (children and adults). Political puppets are currently in control of our nation so this term is not effective regarding this situation. Unfortunately, many Americans have awakened in recent years to the fact that ideology and education are joined at the hip. As unfortunate as it may seem, it is a fact. Since Douglas County is considered as wealthy as it is on a national level and since it has been run by the same board members who claim to be the overwhelmingly qualified candidates, then why have they not provided results that the citizens expect and overwhelmingly will continue to elect? They have had time to get ‘results’ and present those results to the public to prove their worth, instead of continuing to provide only their credentials, board and committee involvement and implementation of this or that. Transparency, choice and budget are more than words. Show the people the money trail and the ‘results’ that can and should accompany that money. Throwing more money at anything is not the answer. Why would the AFL-CIO back four of the candidates and not the other four? There is always a reason and the teachers union is a real problem in America. This is a ‘political’ microcosm of the ‘political’ macrocosm in America. The four candidates backed by the GOP will need to work hard to prove to the citizens that the GOP has learned a lesson and that is that the “public” school system is a “government” institution and long been used by some to implement an agenda and ideology vs. growing minds to compete in today’s world. The GOP needs to prove they can obtain results providing quality education to Americans without making it about money and bureaucracy only. If the GOP cannot make something work on a local level, then they will loose credibility with their constituency that they can make things work on a state and national level. Let us ‘hope’ they truly have perspective in order and that is to obtain ‘change’ with results. I am torn regarding these candidates, but am leaning towards the GOP endorsed candidates with the exception of Leung. Actions speak louder than words. I have written many of the GOP endorsed individuals expressing my recommendations and concerns (which mirror some or yours). We are living in critical times.
[...] center for information and videos about the Denver races. Learn more about the Dougco board fight in this backgrounder and this story on campaign [...]
D Powers: DCSD schools have fantastic standardized test scores. Most schools rate “High” or “Excellent” in terms of CSAP. How are those for “results” ?
More money may not be necessary–but the same amount of money is required to maintain the same quality of education, and DCSD is receiving less and less state/federal funding. And anyway–where did “more money” come up? If the School Board wants more money, they have to ask for it. They can’t just take it. You can always say no then. Wouldn’t you rather have someone who knows something about schools running the school district and determining if asking for more money is the right course of action than someone who doesn’t know anything about Bush’s NCLB Act that was initiated early on during his first term, and someone who doesn’t even have kids?
Those Board members dealt with some serious budget cuts last year, and they did a fine job of keeping those cuts out of the classroom. They cut Performance Pay for teachers, busing, and a chunk of district administration. Class sizes are bigger. Resources are more difficult to come by, but the majority of cuts did not impact DCSD students.
Also– Douglas County puts the least amount of county money into education of any Colorado county–and that’s saying something. Also: Douglas County gets less federal/state funding because it is a wealthy community with low numbers of low income families and special programs (ESL, IEP, 504, etc)
It is done, right or wrong, now the board members have to come up to speed and maybe just maybe more Dougco folks will take a closer look at what the board does and does not do. If voters acted like sheep and did what they were told by any group and they fall off a cliff then so be it. At the same time, the board meetings are open to the public–so attend-know the issues and by all means influence those that were elected to represent you.