A press release from Our Future Montgomery, a new coalition formed by MCEA, MCAAP, and SEIU Local 500 formed to fight for more funds for MCPS
SCHOOL WORKERS REACH OUT TO COUNTY RESIDENTS AROUND MCPS BUDGET CUTS
Unions representing 21,000 school employees hope to raise awareness about drastic cuts to K-12 education being considered by County Council
Rockville, MD (May 9, 2011) – As the Montgomery County Council considers the unprecedented step of rejecting nearly $30 million in state education aid in order “reset” education funding levels in the county, permanently lowering per-pupil investments, stakeholders are mounting a campaign to educate voters on the consequences of such proposals.
The first mailing from the group, who call their initiative Our Future Montgomery, will reach Montgomery County residents early this week (it can be viewed at http://ourfuturemontgomery.org/files/2011/05/Education_Matters.pdf).
A wave of online activity including social media outreach, online advertising, and calls to action around Mother’s Day and the education budget have already garnered thousands of visits to the group’s website www.OurFutureMontgomery.org and hundreds of emails to members of the Montgomery County Council.
“So many families locate in Montgomery County because of the quality of public education here. They’re education voters, and they need to know that the decisions being made right now in Rockville could affect their children’s education and their property values,” explains Doug Prouty, President of Montgomery County Education Association.
“This is an issue of fairness. Because schools employees have found ways to work together to absorb year after year of budget cuts, the official spin is that MCPS hasn’t taken a hit. Well, that’s just not true,” explains Merle Cuttitta, President of SEIU Local 500. “In particular, when my members, who don’t make a great deal of money in the first place and who have seen their hours slashed over the past three years, are told they haven’t sacrificed, we have to push back against that!”
“Ultimately, this comes down to the kids and protecting their interests. They don’t have a voice in the political arena, particularly those kids who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. The support these kids receive that is closing the achievement gap in the county and helping MCPS be a model for the nation – that’s at risk with these budget cuts. We can’t abandon them now,” explains Rebecca Newman, President of Montgomery County Association of Administrators and Principals.
###
Made up of parents, teachers and other school system employees, students and other stakeholders, Our Future Montgomery seeks a way forward out of our temporary – though dismal – economic circumstances and toward a brighter future for our great county. This path must involve wise and adequate investments in our institutions and our communities and most of all in our children – for they truly are Our Future Montgomery.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Our Future Montgomery
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Teachers for Ida Ruben, 1986
MCEA's mailers for various County Council and state legislative candidates drew a lot of attention this year, but they are nothing new. Here is a mailer starring MCEA all the way back from 1986 on behalf of Delegate Ida Ruben (D-20), who successfully won a seat in the Senate and held it for 20 years. MCEA was with her to her final race.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
MCEA/SEIU Mailer for Karen Montgomery, District 14 Senate, 2010
Here's a joint independent mailer from MCEA and SEIU on behalf of District 14 Senate candidate Karen Montgomery, who narrowly defeated incumbent Rona Kramer in this year's primary. Montgomery benefitted from a LARGE independent effort by labor and environmental groups.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
MCEA/Sierra Club Mailer, District 19 House, 2010
Here's a joint independent mailer sent by MCEA and the Sierra Club on behalf of District 19 Delegate candidates Bonnie Cullison and Jay Hutchins this past summer. Both candidates were endorsed by both groups, making the collaboration possible.
Monday, September 20, 2010
The Post vs. MCEA: Primary Results
The Post editorial page started going after MCEA back in February, trying its best to affect the appeal of the union's support. Well, the primary returns are in and the endorsements can be compared. So who had the better record - the Post or MCEA?
The newspaper and the union disagreed on fourteen positions. Here are the results of their choices.
So when the Post and MCEA went head-to-head, the union won in 11 of 14 races.
Here are their records from 2006 through 2009.
So during this period, when the Post and MCEA made opposing endorsements, the union won in 8 of 11 races. This means that the result of the Post's anti-MCEA campaign has been to increase the union's comparative winning percentage.
Monday, September 13, 2010
More From MCEA (Two Updates)
This kind of mailer is why so many of MCEA's endorsed candidates are mad at them. The title of this mailer, which arrived in District 19 on Saturday, is "See Who Teachers Have Recommended." But it is only a partial list of their recommendations which includes just the candidates who have paid to be in the mailer. Becky Wagner is the only at-large candidate to appear, potentially leading readers to believe that she is MCEA's only at-large endorsee given the title of the mailer. We are hearing serious rumbles of a backlash by MCEA's own endorsed candidates after the primary.
Update: Based on what we are hearing, we are questioning whether all of these candidates have paid to appear in the mailer.
Update 2: Council Member Nancy Navarro has told us that she has never paid MCEA but she is in the mailer.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
MCEA Pushes Back Against Anti-Berliner Mailer from Hopkins
Council District 1 challenger Ilaya Hopkins has sent out this negative mailer against incumbent Roger Berliner.
The mailer quotes MCEA political strategist Jon Gerson as saying of Berliner, "...we wish Mr. Berliner had been a stronger voice for our schools and students." Gerson's full quote from the 8/13/09 Potomac Almanac article sourced by the mailer was, "There have been times we wish Mr. Berliner had been a stronger voice for our schools and students. His position on next year’s school budget will be telling." (Incidentally, your author was quoted in the same article as saying, "He's one of the more civil personalities on the Council.")
The problem with spotlighting a quote from Gerson is that Berliner has been endorsed by MCEA, so his performance on the last budget must not have been so bad. MCEA President Doug Prouty sent us the following comment on the mailer:
In contrast to a recent mailer from his opponent which misrepresents our position, the Montgomery County Education Association wants all voters to understand that Roger Berliner has our unequivocal support. Roger has been a steadast supporter of the students and employees of the Montgomery County Public Schools during his first term as a County Council member. His advocacy for our schools have helped make the public schools in Maryland first in the nation two years in a row, according to Education Week. The use of an incomplete and outdated quotation from a member of our staff in the mailer reveals more about the means to which his opponent will stoop than it does about Roger. MCEA is proud to support Roger and we look forward to working with him to keep our schools strong in the next four years.Just tell us that most campaigns could not have seen that coming.
Thursday, September 09, 2010
MCEA Mails, Politicians Wail
MCEA’s political program started going into high gear last week. Some politicians like it, others hate it, but everybody is talking about it. And of course, that means MPW is talking about it too! (Would you expect anything less?)
MCEA is best-known for its Apple Ballot, a poll piece mailed to Democratic voters and distributed by MCEA members at the polls. The Apple Ballot prompted us to call MCEA the “800 lb Gorilla of MoCo Politics” in our very first blog post. But MCEA does much, much more for its endorsees. Much of it is financed with its members’ PAC contributions, which is the conventional model used by everyone else. But some of it is financed with money contributed by the candidates themselves.
In a pair of emails sent to us by our omni-present spy network, MCEA political strategist Jon Gerson explained the program to the union’s endorsed candidates. (Both are marked “confidential.”) Here’s Gerson discussing the Apple mailing as well as other programs on July 5:As in 2006, MCEA is once again planning to direct mail the die-cut Apple Ballot (19 different versions, based upon the Council/Legislative District) to every Democratic Primary voter in Montgomery County. In addition, over the past few weeks, we have been working closely with individual/team campaigns who have contacted us to explore other ways to help ensure voters in their district are aware of our support. While every candidate will be featured on the Apple Ballot, the nature and character of any additional outreach (e.g. supplemental mail pieces, neighborhood letters, phone banking, lawn signs for teachers’ homes, coffees, photo/graphic support, etc.) will be unique to each candidate. If you have any questions regarding our program/priorities or want to discuss working together on a specific initiative, please contact me as soon as possible.
Gerson went into more detail in another email to the endorsed candidates on August 24:This year, MCEA will once again direct mail the die-cut Apple Ballot (19 different versions, based upon the Council/Legislative District) to every Democratic Primary voter in Montgomery County. The entire cost of this mailing (which is considerable, as its unique shape requires processing by hand and delivery to each post office in the county) is paid for solely by our members’ PAC contributions; no outside funds are associated with the cost of producing/mailing/distributing the Apple Ballot. In addition, our members cover the cost of those die-cut Apple Ballots which are distributed at the polls on Election Day (including the Early Voting sites)…
To his credit, Gerson is being very direct with the candidates. MCEA is doing a large number of things with member PAC money alone: Apple Ballot mailings, Apple Ballot poll distribution and ads in the Gazette and other publications. But supplemental help was to be given at the option of the candidates, and was to be financed by the candidates themselves. Translation: if you want extra, come to us, work it out and pay for it. Every endorsed candidate was given this opportunity. Some took it, while others – some of whom were intimidated by the Post – did not. In fact, in their endorsement calls to candidates, Washington Post editorial writers asked point-blank whether MCEA-endorsed candidates intended to contribute to MCEA’s PAC and strongly hinted that those who did would probably not be supported by the Post.
MCEA is promoting our recommended candidates to key voters in other ways as well. We have purchased advertisements in the upcoming issues of Bethesda Magazine (see attached), Washington Jewish Week and other targeted publications, which are scheduled to hit homes/newsstands next week. In addition, our interactive ads on Gazette.net (Home and Montgomery pages) will begin appearing this coming Wednesday, as visits/traffic to the site increases during the election season. Finally, included in each of the 266,000 copies of the September 8th print edition of the Gazette newspapers will be MCEA’s full-color, eight page supplement insert, featuring articles/photos on education, our recommended candidates and other information of interest to voters.
In addition to promoting all recommended candidates, we have been working closely with individual/team campaigns who have contacted us to explore other ways to help ensure voters in their district are aware of our support. While every candidate will be featured on the Apple Ballot, the nature and character of any additional outreach (e.g. supplemental mail pieces, extensive voter id calling, targeted email outreach, social media advertising, neighborhood letters, phone banking, lawn signs for teachers’ homes, coffees, photo/graphic support, etc.) are unique to each candidate. Including the Apple Ballot, MCEA will be sending out over 350,000 pieces of direct mail in the upcoming Primary Election campaign. If you have any questions regarding our program/priorities or want to discuss working together on a specific initiative, please contact me as soon as possible.
So last week, MCEA mailers started going out. Here’s a version from District 39.
Delegate Charles Barkley (D-39) and at-large council candidates George Leventhal, Marc Elrich and Hans Riemer are not in the mailer even though they were endorsed by MCEA.
And here’s a version from District 16.
District 1 Council Member Roger Berliner and at-large council candidates George Leventhal, Marc Elrich and Hans Riemer are not in the mailer even though they were endorsed by MCEA. House challenger Ariana Kelly received a bigger picture than Delegates Susan Lee and Bill Frick.
This week, MCEA purchased an eight-page insert in the Gazette. It contained four articles on MCPS and education topics, a quarter-page listing of every MCEA-recommended candidate and advertisements touting the union’s School Board candidates, Council Member Marc Elrich (two ads), County Council candidates Craig Rice (two ads), and Becky Wagner (two ads including a half-page on the back), Senators Jennie Forehand and Mike Lenett, Senate candidate Karen Montgomery (two ads), Delegate Anne Kaiser and Delegate candidates Bonnie Cullison (two ads), Shane Robinson and Ariana Kelly. Presumably, these candidates plus those listed in the mailers paid for their placement. But when we asked them, two candidates who were not School Board Members or state-wide candidates said they had not paid.
Those politicians who have not been supported by the Teachers are predictably resentful. But even some who have been endorsed despise the program. They believe that the candidate-financed mailings may be perceived by the public as evidence that MCEA favors some of its endorsed candidates over others, or perhaps has not endorsed some whom they have indeed endorsed. One angry MCEA endorsee told of getting a phone call from a relative who received one of MCEA’s mailers, saw that the endorsee was not listed, and asked if the Teachers had retracted their endorsement.
Have you ever bought a new car? First, there is a base price for your model (and different base prices for sub-models). Then, there are prices for add-ons, like mud flaps, stripes, floor mats, GPS, satellite radio and more. All of these prices are negotiable, including your trade-in price and even a loan interest rate. So if you know what you’re doing, you haggle over all of these items and see if you can strike a deal. That’s what MCEA’s program resembles.
But no one wants to go through the hassle of being a car buyer, especially not harried, insecure and paranoid politicians. Here is the typical mindset of a politician dealing with an endorsing organization.Are you with me? If you are, great. Give me money and help me get more money. You don’t have a lot of money? Then get me bodies, or door-knock, or do an independent expenditure. If you give me a little extra, great, but don’t give anyone else more than you’re giving me. If you’re not with me, I’m disappointed, but don’t endorse my opponent. And if you do endorse my opponent, then don’t help them go negative on me or I’ll never forgive you.
The above represents the level of sophistication of 90% or more of the candidates in this county. And that’s the G-rated version!
MCEA’s response to grumbles from politicians, whether endorsed or not, about their political program is essentially “Tough Twinkies!” And it’s their right to say that and to run their program any way they wish. But politicians don’t deal with any other organization that acts this way, and they’ll remember it – likely at a very inconvenient time for the union.
Friday, August 27, 2010
MCEA Buys Ads on the Gazette's Website
Check out the rotating banner ad at the top left. The article covers a District 19 candidate forum.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
MCEA's Ad in Bethesda Magazine
This is part of MCEA's campaign to maintain its standing with the public and fortify the value of the Apple Ballot.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Council At-Large Geography, Part Three
MCEA’s Apple Ballot had a lot of success in 2006, beating both the Post and Gazette endorsements on win rate in contested races. What impact did it have specifically on the at-large race?
Last time, incumbent George Leventhal and challengers Marc Elrich and Duchy Trachtenberg were listed on the Apple Ballot. Incumbents Nancy Floreen and Mike Subin and a host of lesser challengers were not.
Here are the vote totals of the above five candidates in 2006.
Leventhal: 52,364
Elrich: 47,574
Trachtenberg: 46,975
Floreen: 44,580
Subin: 38,896
And here are the precinct vote totals for these five candidates. While MCEA does mailers on behalf of its endorsees, the Apple Ballot’s main effectiveness comes from its distribution at polling places.
Leventhal: 46,073
Elrich: 41,778
Trachtenberg: 41,334
Floreen: 38,973
Subin: 34,066
The above data illustrates that Leventhal finished first by a comfortable margin, Elrich and Trachtenberg were virtually tied after him, and Floreen trailed those three but beat Subin significantly. The Apple Ballot was just one factor in this performance, but it was a factor. Consider that the Post endorsed Leventhal, Floreen, Subin and Bo Newsome while the Gazette endorsed Floreen, Subin, Newsome and Reggie Felton.
The key to understanding the Apple Ballot is knowing that is not equally effective in all areas of the county. To gauge its effectiveness, we calculated the combined vote totals of its three at-large endorsees – Leventhal, Elrich and Trachtenberg. They ran three very different campaigns. Leventhal stuck to the same pro-growth positions that he had as a member of the 2002 End Gridlock team and had lots of money. Elrich and Trachtenberg ran on platforms of limiting development. Elrich had lots of volunteers and little money. Trachtenberg had lots of money and few volunteers. The only thing that all three shared was their support by many labor unions, and more specifically, presence on the Apple Ballot. We calculated their combined votes as a percentage of all at-large votes cast to serve as a proxy for Apple influence. This is an admittedly imperfect statistic, but it does produce some interesting results.
Following are the combined precinct vote percentage of the Apple at-large candidates by Congressional District, State Legislative District, Council District and locality.
Overall, Leventhal, Elrich and Trachtenberg combined to receive 44.0% of all votes for at-large candidates cast at polling places, but there are WIDE disparities across the county. The Apple’s popularity was greatest in Downcounty areas like Takoma Park (58.3% of at-large votes), Downtown Silver Spring (48.9%), Kensington (47.7%), Bethesda (46.0%) Chevy Chase (45.6%) and Potomac (45.2%). These are mostly politically liberal areas where education is usually the number one issue.
Takoma Park is an outlier because of the popularity of former City Council Member Marc Elrich, who was a strong supporter of Trachtenberg in 2006 as well as today. (If Vladimir Putin ran on a slate with Elrich, he would win in Takoma Park). What makes Takoma Park’s respect for the Apple in the at-large race even more remarkable is that the city voted to eject Apple-endorsed Senator Ida Ruben in favor of Jamie Raskin even as it led MoCo in Apple fealty at the county level.
The Apple was weakest in Upcounty areas like Burtonsville (37.0%), Clarksburg (37.7%), Germantown (37.8%), Laytonsville (38.5%), Poolesville (39.6%), Montgomery Village (39.7%) and Damascus (39.8%). Non-coincidentally, Nancy Floreen and Mike Subin tended to perform well in these areas. Upcounty is more politically moderate than Downcounty and a few precincts even lean to the right. This should be cautionary information for MCEA’s efforts to elect Craig Rice to Council District 2.
The Apple’s skewed success rate is going to have an impact on the 2010 at-large race. We’ll explore that further as we analyze the individual candidates later in the series.
Tomorrow, we’ll present the overall precinct results for the four at-large winners in 2006 as well as Mike Subin.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Endorsements 2010
Want to know who's endorsing whom? You have come to the right place!
Following are the endorsements of MCEA, the Post, SEIU, Progressive Maryland, Equality Maryland, the Sierra Club, the Maryland League of Conservation Voters and NARAL for all MoCo Democratic primaries in which there are more candidates than seats.
Notes:
1. The Post has not yet endorsed in state legislative contests.
2. Progressive Maryland, Equality Maryland, LCV and NARAL have not yet endorsed in County Council races. The latter three may not endorse in those contests at all.
3. Equality Maryland, the Sierra Club and LCV have not finished making endorsements.
4. So far, just ten candidates have swept all available endorsements in this group. They are:
Roger Berliner, Council District 1
Marc Elrich, Council At-Large
Hans Riemer, Council At-Large
Anne Kaiser, D-14 House
Bill Frick, D-16 House
Susan Lee, D-16 House
Ana Sol Gutierrez, D-18 House
Tom Hucker, D-20 House
Heather Mizeur, D-20 House
Kirill Reznik, D-39 House
Riemer is the only challenger in this list.
5. We will add these endorsements to our tabulation as they become available: MCGEO, Fire Fighters, Police, AFL-CIO, Progressive Maryland (council), Post (state legislative), Gazette and the MoCo Business PAC, as well as updates to the above. We are not adding NOW as they often endorse far more people than there are seats (including eight D16 Delegate candidates). And we are not going to include "groups" that are little than more five people sitting around a table endorsing their buddies, or worse, each other. Fuhgedaboudit!
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Post Endorsements Challenge the Apple
The Post has released its endorsements for County Council and they are a direct challenge to MCEA in two ways.
First, the Post has endorsed a rather different group of candidates than have the teachers. Compare their picks:
At-Large
Post: Marc Elrich, Nancy Floreen, Hans Riemer, Duchy Trachtenberg
Apple: Marc Elrich, George Leventhal, Hans Riemer, Becky Wagner
District 1
Post and Apple: Roger Berliner
District 2
Post: Royce Hanson
Apple: Craig Rice
Half the time, the Post has picked opposite from the teachers. The Post’s choices are constrained by the relatively small number of viable candidates, but when they had a real option, they chose it.
Second, the Post’s endorsements are remarkably early. In the last two cycles, their council picks were announced on September 1 and September 4. It appears that they are making early picks this time to allow their supported candidates to spread word of their backing and to throw in a couple extra editorials to hammer their message home. Make no mistake: the Post’s editorial board is not a disinterested observer; they want to be a real player in our elections. They have an ideological agenda against the public employee unions rooted in their operation of private schools and their own union-bashing history. Their attack on George Leventhal for “leading the charge” on “coddling the unions” reflects this.
Past elections in MoCo have been characterized by battles between developers and civic activists. This time, we will see the Post duke it out with MCEA. It will be an election like no other.
Thursday, July 01, 2010
MCEA Finishes Endorsements
MCEA has issued its final endorsements in the Democratic primary. In addition to its previous recommended candidates, the union is supporting Aruna Miller for Delegate in District 15 and incumbent County Executive Ike Leggett.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
MCGEO Targets Schools in Questionnaire
The Municipal and County Government Employees Organization (MCGEO), which represents most county employees other than police officers, fire fighters and school workers, has included the following six questions in its questionnaire for County Council candidates.
Question 4.
The County Council cannot force the School Board to equitably share in the furloughs - this year or next. However, it is apparent to the Police Officers, Firefighters and MCGEO represented county employees that the council was collectively unable/unwilling to summon the political courage to cut the school budget deep enough to force the council to distribute equitable furloughs. While some councilmembers postured for a deeper cut (2%), it was never brought to a vote. In fact, some councilmembers seemed to turn weak in the knees when dealing with the Superintendent of schools. You all collectively sought the shelter of the “lowest common denominator” and cut only $24.4 million out of a $2-billion dollar budget. This lack of leadership resulted in the council willing to confine the furloughs to the only side of the budget which accounts for just 1/3 of the employees funded by it. This devalues our service and the services we provide. OUR MEMBERS ARE YOUR EMPLOYEES!
If you are an incumbent, please explain:
• How do you justify this?
• Do you admit that Jerry Weast is a better negotiator than you?
• What, if any, regrets do you have?
• Can we expect the same response next year?
If you are a challenger, please explain what you would do differently:
• Would you cut the school budget?
Question 5.
The County Council makes decisions to allocate resources that fund both the school board and county services. The school board currently gets 56-57% of the total funds allocated by the council.
Do you think the share should: (Circle One)
(A) Be increased
(B) Stay the same
(C) Be reduced to a more equitable balance
Question 14.
The current economic crisis is placing substantial pressure on the County budget which funds both County and School Board services. If the State mandated Maintenance of Effort (MOE) is not waived then the County side of the budget must absorb the vast majority of budget cuts, layoffs and furloughs. If the MOE is waived, then the resulting impact of cuts, especially number of furlough days could be more equitably distributed across both County government and School Board systems resulting in fewer furlough days per employee regardless of employer.
Would you waive MOE in order to more equitably distribute the sacrifice across the employers?
Yes No (Circle One)
Comments:
Would you temporarily waive MOE and disperse the pain more equitably?
Yes No (Circle One)
Comments:
Question 15.
Montgomery County has a system where all school board members are elected county wide, although 5 must live in a district and 2 can live anywhere in the County. Do you favor electing school board members by single member districts?
Yes No (Circle One)
Question 16.
Do you think it was fair that only county employees were asked to do furloughs and the school system refused to do so?
Yes No (Circle One)
Question 17.
If endorsed by our Union, will you commit to writing a $4,000-$5,000 check to our PAC, like you would to MCEA, to assist our Union’s campaign on your behalf?
#####
The intent behind these questions is obvious. MCGEO sees the budget as a zero-sum game between the county government (which also includes the police and the fire fighters) and the schools (which have three other unions including the teachers, supervisors and support staff). MCGEO is apparently trying to lock in County Council candidates to support its priorities even at the direct expense of the schools. So if any candidates agree with MCGEO, they put their endorsements from the teachers and the other school unions at risk. (To be fair, the teachers advocate for their budget too, but their questionnaires are not so heavy-handed.) And looming over all of this is the Washington Post, which is pressuring candidates to reject all public employee union support.
This is creating an impossible situation for any county-level politician who would like to deal reasonably, but not slavishly, with labor. We would not be surprised if more than one candidate refused to complete this questionnaire.
Friday, June 04, 2010
The Apple Drops, Part Two
Here’s what the Apple means for the County Council races.
District 1 Endorsement: Incumbent Roger Berliner
This is a mild surprise as Berliner and MCEA have not been on each other’s Christmas card list. MCEA supported Republican incumbent Howie Denis over Berliner in 2006 and Berliner voted for “labor savings” in the 2008 budget debate.
But two factors operated in concert to bring the parties together. First, Berliner is not ideologically anti-union. He has never emphasized his opposition to the unions as have Council Members Phil Andrews and Duchy Trachtenberg. Second, there is a growing sense that Berliner is going to win his race against challenger Ilaya Hopkins. So MCEA faced a choice: make no endorsement, thereby ensuring continuous up-and-down relations with Berliner, or endorse him and hope that things will be better. The teachers are a pragmatic group so they chose the latter option. We will see if it pays off.
This is a serious blow to Hopkins. She was hoping for union support to help her uphill race, but now the most electorally influential union has thrown in with the incumbent. Berliner is on a roll now. He started out with a big chunk of cash in the bank. Then he rolled out a huge supporter list and a boatload of incumbent endorsements. Next came the revelation of Hopkins’s recent entry into the Democratic Party. Did we mention that Berliner is running his third race in the district while Hopkins is running for the first time? If the Washington Post endorses Berliner, this race is totally over.
District 2 Endorsement: Craig Rice
Incumbent Mike Knapp did not complete a questionnaire or report for an interview. Rice did both and did so as a council candidate. Dooley’s lopsided loss in 2006 affects perceptions of her as a candidate and Rice has done a good job as Delegate, so this endorsement was expected.
District 3 Endorsement: None
Incumbent Phil Andrews has been an opponent of the unions for many years, but he has no challenger. Even if he did, he would be certain to return to Rockville.
District 4 Endorsement: Incumbent Nancy Navarro
Former school board member: check. Past MCEA endorsee: check. No declared opponent: check. Woman of color: check. Apple Ballot: check.
District 5 Endorsement: Incumbent Valerie Ervin
Former school board member: check. Past MCEA endorsee: check. No declared opponent: check. Woman of color: check. Twenty-five years in the labor movement: check. Apple Ballot: check!
Additionally, we hear that Kensington Mayor Pete Fosselman will not be running against Ervin. An easy re-election will position Ervin for a County Executive run or maybe something even higher up.
At-Large Endorsements: Incumbents George Leventhal and Marc Elrich, challengers Becky Wagner and Hans Riemer
This is the most fateful set of endorsements on the Apple Ballot and will have a very large impact. Following is our assessment of the implications for each candidate.
George Leventhal: The two-term incumbent is now firmly in the driver’s seat. Leventhal will have all the money he needs, almost all the big endorsements (except possibly the Post’s) and will wage a solid campaign. We expect him to finish first in the at-large race for the second election in a row. If that happens, Leventhal will be a top contender to be the next County Executive.
Marc Elrich: Looks stronger every day. Elrich won last time with a dual base in the civic and labor communities. He has lost none of that support and is only adding to it. Elrich always has money problems due to his rejection of developer contributions, but he also has more ground troops than any other at-large candidate. We now believe that he will be going back to Rockville.
Becky Wagner and Hans Riemer: The conventional wisdom once was that only one of them would get the Apple, and that person would be in the best position to oust an incumbent. Now both have received the Apple. That means that each will be getting more endorsements, more money and more momentum. Could both of them win?
Duchy Trachtenberg: She was never going to be endorsed by MCEA or any other county employee union as she has done nothing but vote against them despite their invaluable aid to her in 2006. In fact, Trachtenberg told the unions to take a hike before they could tell that to her! The new wrinkle for Trachtenberg is that two challengers, not just one, now have the Apple and all the prestige it brings. Trachtenberg has tons of money and is certain to flood the county with tons of positive mail about herself, but she will have few endorsements and almost no ground troops. Is that enough for her to come back?
Nancy Floreen: Until this year, Floreen had been voting with the public employee unions almost every time this term. We still expect at least some of them to support her. (The police, fire fighters and SEIU backed her last time.) But what changed this year was that Floreen was the Council President, and she was responsible for the budget.
The overwhelming majority of our informants – and not just in labor – knocked Floreen’s handling of the budget. Most people close to the process say she did not do a good job in regularly touching base with the other Council Members, finding out what was acceptable to them, coordinating action with the schools and the Executive Branch and communicating effectively with the public. One influential official said, “Those who worked with Floreen on budget issues were confronted with nothing but platitudes and little willingness to actually engage on the specifics. As Chair of the Council, this was Floreen’s opportunity to provide leadership, yet leadership is the last descriptor that would come to anyone’s mind in this case.” Another high-ranking player described her as a “deer in the headlights” and advocating positions in negotiations that had not been vetted with the rest of the council. Floreen has her defenders and some of this criticism may be unfair. What other Council President has ever had to close a billion dollar deficit? But many Rockville players found Floreen’s performance to be disappointing and that helped edge her out of the Apple Ballot.
There is an element of Shakespearean tragedy here. Floreen wanted to be Council President so badly that she shoved aside former Vice-President Roger Berliner to get the job. If Floreen had been a back-bencher this year and was not saddled with the budget disaster, she may have squeaked through for an Apple. Now Berliner, of all people, has the Apple and Floreen has problems. Sometimes in life, you get what you want and it hurts you.
But Nancy Floreen is a female incumbent with money who has won twice before without the teachers. She is FAR from through.
Jane de Winter and Fred Evans: De Winter has been running since last summer and has not gained any traction. Evans just got in. No one sees either as likely to win.
That’s all for now, folks!
Thursday, June 03, 2010
The Apple Drops, Part One
The endorsement of the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), which is distributed by teachers on election day as the “Apple Ballot,” is a seminal event in any MoCo election cycle. In the last election, the Apple outperformed the newspaper endorsements and most politicians rate it as more important than support from the Post. Most Apple endorsees are reliable incumbents with good voting records who are almost certain to win. But in every cycle, there are surprises and the Apple can make a big difference. Here’s what caught our eye in this year’s endorsement round.
District 14 Endorsements: Senate challenger Karen Montgomery, Delegate Anne Kaiser, Delegate candidates Craig Zucker and Eric Luedtke
No surprises. Incumbent Senator Rona Kramer has a woeful labor record and Karen Montgomery should sweep the unions. Kaiser and Luedtke (a former MCEA board member) are no-brainers and Zucker is a heavy favorite to win. MCEA will take some criticism for not endorsing a black candidate, but few people think that former WSSC Commissioner Gerald Roper or home minister Vanessa Ali will run viable campaigns.
District 15 Endorsements: Senator Rob Garagiola, Delegates Brian Feldman and Kathleen Dumais
Again, no surprises. MCEA is leaving open a Delegate endorsement because incumbent Craig Rice may be running for County Council and the field to replace him has yet to materialize.
District 16 Endorsements: Senator Brian Frosh, Delegates Susan Lee and Bill Frick, Delegate candidate Ariana Kelly
Frosh, Lee and Frick were locks. We hear ten candidates came in to interview for the open seat vacated by former incumbent Bill Bronrott. Most were no-names. Kelly stood out because of her long record of advocacy on women’s issues. She is going to face a vigorous contest from Kyle Lierman, the son of former Democratic Party Chairman Terry Lierman. Young Dems President Scott Goldberg has an outside chance if he can put together a big campaign.
District 17 Endorsements: Senator Jennie Forehand, Delegates Kumar Barve, Luiz Simmons and Jim Gilchrist
The incumbent Delegates have no declared Democratic challengers. MCEA’s endorsement of Forehand is intended as a message for other incumbents: if you have a good voting record on our issues, we will not abandon you in your time of need. The teachers endorsed former District 20 Senator Ida Ruben for the same reason in 2006 despite the fact that challenger Jamie Raskin was running a much stronger campaign at the time. The Apple is helpful to Forehand, but by itself it cannot hold off Cheryl “Energizer Bunny” Kagan. Forehand has a lot of work to do.
District 18 Endorsements: Delegates Ana Sol Gutierrez, Jeff Waldstreicher and Al Carr
Senator Rich Madaleno’s exclusion from the Apple Ballot sends a different kind of message to the other incumbents. Madaleno was the staff author of the Thornton Plan, a 2002 law that has spread hundreds of millions of dollars of state money to school districts across the state, including MCPS. He has been with MCEA on every issue since until this year, when he proposed a plan to send part of the state’s teacher pension obligations down to the counties. This was an unspeakable heresy for MCEA because MoCo could never bear the resulting colossal liability. So while Madaleno will definitely be re-elected, MCEA is warning the other incumbents not to stray on the issue. If they can withhold the Apple from their former best friend over pensions, they can withhold it from any other apostates too.
The incumbent Delegates have solid labor records and were natural endorsees. (Disclosure: the author is the incumbent team’s Treasurer.)
District 19 Endorsements: Senator Mike Lenett, Delegate Ben Kramer, Delegate candidates Bonnie Cullison and Jay Hutchins
The message on the Senate side is the same as in District 17: MCEA does not abandon helpful incumbents even if they face quality challengers. The difference is that Mike Lenett, unlike Jennie Forehand, is an aggressive campaigner who will take full advantage of the Apple. District 19 voters are going to be so buried under Apples with Lenett’s name on them that they will have to eat cherry pie for a year after the election.
The Delegate decision has lots of implications. Cullison is MCEA’s former President so she is an automatic endorsee. Kramer would win re-election with or without the Apple. But MCEA is telling him this: we will be with you if you want to go back to the House, but we will oppose you if you want to go to the County Council. We’ll find out in a month what Kramer wants to do. Hutchins is a big winner as the Apple gives him instant credibility. Sam “Hunk of the Hill” Arora has a lot more money and has been more active on the campaign trail than any of the other Delegate candidates. Hutchins needs to get into high gear to hold him off.
District 20 Endorsements: Senator Jamie Raskin, Delegates Sheila Hixson, Heather Mizeur, Tom Hucker
Total no-brainer. All four are great on labor and education and are destined to return.
District 39 Endorsements: Senator Nancy King, Delegates Charles Barkley and Kirill Reznik, Delegate candidate Arash Shane Robinson
King is a longtime MCEA ally who helped to hire MCPS Superintendent Jerry Weast when she was on the school board. The teachers were never going to throw her overboard for challenger Saqib Ali. Barkley is a former MCEA Vice-President and Reznik has done well since his 2007 appointment. Robinson is a complete unknown who just left the Green Party to become a Democrat, but the teachers preferred him to former Republican Bob Hydorn. Robinson is an ally of Saqib Ali and spoke at Ali’s Senate kickoff. Will Ali steer money to him? Hydorn is the President of the Montgomery Village Foundation and is a name in his part of the district. He needs to run an aggressive campaign in the rest of the district or Robinson could squeak in.
We’ll cover the County Council tomorrow.
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
And the Apple Goes to…
The Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA) decided its endorsements tonight at its Representative Assembly. The winners of the Apple Ballot are…
District 14
Senate: Karen Montgomery (challenger)
House: Anne Kaiser, Eric Luedtke (open seat), Craig Zucker (open seat)
District 15
Senate: Rob Garagiola
House: Kathleen Dumais, Brian Feldman, no endorsement for vacated third seat
District 16
Senate: Brian Frosh
House: Bill Frick, Ariana Kelly (open seat), Susan Lee
District 17
Senate: Jennie Forehand
House: Kumar Barve, Jim Gilchrist, Luiz Simmons
District 18
Senate: No endorsement
House: Al Carr, Ana Sol Gutierrez, Jeff Waldstreicher
District 19
Senate: Mike Lenett
House: Bonnie Cullison (open seat), Jay Hutchins (open seat), Ben Kramer
District 20
Senate: Jamie Raskin
House: Sheila Hixson, Tom Hucker, Heather Mizeur
District 39
Senate: Nancy King
House: Charles Barkley, Kirill Reznik, Shane Robinson (open seat)
County Council At-Large
Marc Elrich, George Leventhal, Hans Riemer (challenger), Becky Wagner (challenger)
Council District 1
Roger Berliner
Council District 2
Craig Rice
Council District 3
No endorsement
Council District 4
Nancy Navarro
Council District 5
Valerie Ervin
Board of Education
Shirley Brandman, Judy Docca, Mike Durso, Pat O’Neill
We’ll have more tomorrow morning, folks!
Monday, May 31, 2010
Why the Post Hates MCEA
Once again, the Washington Post has unleashed a screaming tirade against the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA) and other county employee unions. In its latest attack, the Post upholds Fairfax County as a model of good government because it prohibits collective bargaining for public employees and it calls on MoCo politicians to reject all public sector union contributions. And of course, MCEA gets special thrashing for its “outsized electoral clout.”
What accounts for this?
The Post’s basic argument, which it repeats over and over again with little new data to back it up, is that cowardly MoCo politicians are slaves of the teachers union and allowed the county’s budget to bloat because of excessive salaries. We rebutted that theory months ago by demonstrating that MoCo teacher salary increases were not out of line with other jurisdictions and that MoCo’s school budget was less dominated by compensation than the school budgets in Arlington, Fairfax, Falls Church, Loudoun, Manassas and Prince William. The Post knows all this because they read this blog every single day and cherry-picked our data. And while public employee unions are unquestionably influential, they were clobbered this year and are badly divided. Nowhere in its editorial does the Post mention that many county employees are about to be furloughed and that MoCo teachers will now have to endure larger class sizes. The Post is not about to allow facts to interfere with its propaganda.
The real reason the Post hates MCEA and teacher unions across the country is simple: money. The Washington Post Company is not a newspaper. It is a multi-industry conglomerate dominated by its Kaplan Inc. subsidiary, which accounts for a majority of its revenues and employees. The Post newspaper lost $357 million in operating income over the last two years. Without profits from Kaplan, the newspaper might already be in bankruptcy.
Most people think of Kaplan as an education testing company. But in fact, it is a wide-ranging education firm that is continually expanding its services. One of its many business lines is private schooling. Kaplan operates Kaplan Academy, which it describes as “a flexible, results-oriented online high school” in Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon and Washington. That is just one of several private Kaplan schools including:
Kaplan College Preparatory School: “A premium online school for students grades 6-12 with one-to-one college admissions and academic support.”
Kaplan High School: “A self-paced online high school for students grades 9-12 with flexible start dates. Available everywhere.”
Kaplan University High School: “A quality online education tailored to meet the demands of busy adult lifestyles.”
In addition, Kaplan Virtual Education (KVE) “partners with private schools, academies and service providers around the world to offer educational options to students.” It also “works with states, school districts, and other education providers to improve student achievement and increase graduation rates through alternatives to traditional high school… KVE can provide everything from supplemental online curriculum to comprehensive, certified instruction, administrative services, and technical support.” In its last annual report, the Washington Post Company wrote that KVE “operates charter and private virtual schools that offer online instruction to students in grades 6 through 12. KVE also provides instructors and curriculum and manages virtual schools for 19 school districts throughout the U.S. At year-end 2009, KVE was providing courses to approximately 3,850 students.”
That’s right, folks, the Washington Post Company is a direct competitor to public school teachers! Every time it writes an editorial promoting vouchers or charter schools or slamming teacher unions, it is using one part of its business (its newspaper) to promote another part of its business (Kaplan). And it is doing so without disclosing any of the above to its readers. None of this is an accident because of Kaplan’s critical importance to the Post Company’s bottom line. In 2009, Kaplan had positive operating income of $195 million, the most of any company subsidiary. The Post’s newspapers lost a combined $164 million.
In almost every article the Post writes about Facebook, it discloses the fact that Post owner Donald Graham is a member of Facebook’s Board of Directors. So what would happen if the Post began disclosing its operation of private schools in every article or editorial it writes about teacher unions? Why isn’t it doing so already?
Now we all know the answer to that.
Disclosure: Your author has worked for sixteen years in the labor movement, but never for any public employee union.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Consequences of the Budget, Part Three
The school system was not the only powerful institution that was challenged by the budget. Also in the crosshairs were the public employee unions.
Labor
When analyzing the unions, it’s important to keep in mind their differences rather than assume them to be monolithic. There are six county employee unions. MCEA, which represents teachers, SEIU Local 500, which represents school support staff, and the Montgomery County Association of Administrative and Supervisory Personnel (MCAASP), which represents school supervisors, all have members in the school system. They negotiate their contracts with the Superintendent, who sends them to the elected Board of Education for approval. The County Council can set the overall size of the school budget, but they cannot dictate line items in school contracts or specific employee policies (like furloughs). The Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35 represents police officers, the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 1664 represents career fire fighters and MCGEO represents nearly all other non-managerial line workers. These three unions negotiate contracts with the County Executive, which are then approved by the council. The County Council has lots of authority over these contracts, and can reject them, refuse to fund increases contained in them and can even strike individual provisions in them. In most years, the six unions get similar gains, but this year was different.
One significant result of this budget is an angry split between the public employee unions. None of them are getting general wage adjustments or step increases, but in other ways they are being treated differently. The County Executive’s original proposal subjected non-public safety employees to ten days of furloughs each. (The Executive does not have the authority to decide questions related to staffing in the school system.) So of the six public employee unions, only MCGEO – which represents nearly everyone except for police officers, fire fighters and education employees – would have been hit by furloughs.
MCGEO fought back, arguing that they were unfairly targeted and basic fairness held that all employees should be furloughed at the same rate. Four County Council Members agreed with MCGEO in principle at their parking garage rally. Council staff found that if furloughs were spread across the government, each employee would only have to take 1.5 days. This prompted a response from the school unions, who raised questions about the feasibility of furloughs in the schools and argued that changes to the county reserves would be sufficient to prevent all furloughs. But the council, which was under pressure from bond rating agencies, did not buy it. In the end, they chose to implement a progressive furlough structure of three to eight days for non-school employees, with higher-paid workers taking more furlough days. The school system took a budget cut but did not have to take furloughs.
This approach created winners and losers among the unions. MCGEO is a loser, but it did suffer fewer furlough days than under the Executive’s proposal. The police and fire fighters are big losers. The Executive did not propose furloughs for them, but the council implemented them anyway. The school unions successfully held off all furloughs.
Most importantly, the six unions could not agree on a common approach to the budget. While the three school unions largely stuck together, the remaining three county government unions (MCGEO, the police and fire fighters) not only went against the schools, they also went against each other. Next year could see a similar conflict. While there has always been occasional friction between the unions owing to different budget priorities and different styles (especially among the leaders), it has been a LONG time since they were this far apart.
This picture of a public safety worker protesting Council Member Nancy Navarro’s fundraiser says it all about the state of inter-union relations.
The big question is whether the unions’ disagreements over the budget will spill over into their electoral cooperation. Regardless of their squabbling, they are all better off if they make the same endorsements and work together on behalf of their candidates. If not, only their hardened enemies on the council will benefit.
Tomorrow, we’ll look at the long term.
