Should parents be compensated for their active role in promoting public school referendums?

The question before the house is, should parents be paid $$$ directly or indirectly for their role in promoting or consulting referendum steering committees? 

Advertisements

28 responses to “Should parents be compensated for their active role in promoting public school referendums?

  1. lastDEconservative

    Depends. Are you inquiring on behalf of the average parent, virtually comatose from years of the lullaby, who has barely enough synapses left to recruit a few other completely unaware zombies in on a Tuesday to pull the lever someone points to, or a parent who still has a gleam of awareness in the eye and happens to be cognizant of what’s going on, but is willing to recruit, cajole, and draw in others nonetheless?

    PS: don’t forget to divide the booty according to all the proper (approved) subdivisions of humanity. Equitably.

    Like

  2. I believe state law should require the board to select parents, Community Civic Groups leaders and Senior Citizens to be on a referendum steering committee, with administrators being required to provide information to the committee. This committee with members of the school board should determine what information should be provided to the committee and than hold informational meetings, with administrators being available.
    Informing property owners how and where current local funds are being used, and how and where additional funds will be used would be required.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Correction–should be provided to the committee, should read, should be provided to the community.

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      So from the body of available information, what is provided to the community should be edited twice, as long as care is taken as to who does the editing. After granting the administration (potentially previous occupants of the Group W bench)* the first edit. And you imply self qualification to name the secondary editors. Got it.

      *h/t Publius

      Like

  4. Publius e decere

    Such a paradox, Kilroy. If being a parent were to disqualify a person from being a provider of services to a District, then we should debate the inference — why childless* persons should be given a monopoly on the provision of services to a district. And the deriviative paradox inferred here is that we should be child-blind in selecting services in order to help children. Is it after noon somewhere nearby?

    Publius

    *Not to be confused with “childish ” persons, a whole different kettle of fish. But let’s try and ignore that obvious Sole.

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      “Is it after noon somewhere nearby?”

      It is.

      But one might believe it’s 5:00 (some)where you are. 😉

      Like

  5. delawarepublicschoolshenanigans

    Paid to help on a referendum? with taxpayer dollars? I would think the overwhelming majority would find that despicable, particularly if it was secret.

    Like

  6. The way Red Clay runs referendums, I’m surprised parents aren’t paid for their actual votes.

    Like

  7. Mike, the parents have been paid quite handsomely with 2 magnet 6-12 schools, 2 exclusive charters, 3 shiny new elementary schools. The board has given its strongest voting block exactly what they want.

    Like

  8. Should Parents be compensated for their active roles in promoting referendum? No! Unless school districts want to take on the added burden of declaring that they have hired lobbyists and ensuring those lobbyists are making the legally required disclosures?

    Bigger Question: Has a Delaware district already compensated parents for their active roles in promoting referenda?

    And what is your definition of compensation? Good grades for a year, preferential choice placement? fat cash?

    What a truly ugly slope.

    Like

    • Hmm… how exactly would you know this Elizabeth? Do you have first-hand knowledge of something? And given a few things, I have to question your motives here…

      Like

    • Just listening in, Kevinarino. My motives? That hurts 😦

      While the big dawgs are here to argue their menagerie of inter-personnel conflict, I prefer to boil it down to practicalities.

      Did it?
      Is it?
      Will it?
      How?

      Like

    • Publius e decere

      “Should parents be compensated for active roles in promoting referendums?”
      — No if they merely volunteer and then expect to be compensated;
      — Yes if they are expressly hired by the district to do so.

      As for the “lobbyist” comment, it is completely irrelevant.

      As for compensation, let’s define compensation as The Benjamins. Not as the in-kind variants you propose.

      Publius

      Like

    • Publius e decere

      Of course, we should not disrespect Parents as a class. If one should be disqualified from being hired as a district advisor merely becuase one is a parent, then that would leave the district to choose among DINKs and singletons. How fair is that?

      Publius

      Like

    • Publius e decere

      Maybe we could eliminate help from any parent, DINK or singleton. That would leave us with — who? Kilroy? Publius? LDC? “Mike O”? God help us, KO’s alter-ego?

      I say a district should be free to hire any professional or competent individual– regardless of their parentage or lack thereof — to help them achieve their objectives. And if the public disagrees with that perogative then the public can vote the district rascals out of office.

      Publius

      Like

    • OK to vote rascals out, but not OK who they voted in. You’re a pretty special kind of elitist there.

      Like

    • Didn’t a charter school board get rid of one of those dinks last fall?

      Like

  9. Mike and Break, you’ve failed to acknowledge that RC voters aren’t being “PAID”. They are the ones PAYING the bills of the district. That’s the funny part about those who attempt to advocate for redistribution. The demand is to provide for “all” by utilizing the money of only a portion of the stakeholders. The RC residents who are primarily funding the district wanted neighborhood schools for their children. NOT for racist reasons but because parents don’t want kids bused and they don’t want their kids in bad environments- both of which our other districts have been prone to. It sounds like you are bitter that the ones paying actually got what they asked for? vs. donating the funds to others who are deemed more “needy or worthy”.
    Should there be Wilmington MS and HS? Yes there should be. Who should be paying for them? Folks in Pike Creek, folks in Newark, OR folks whose kids will go to those schools? Again, redistribution and transfer payments only work so long until you run out of “other people’s” money.

    Back to kilroys post question: Should parents be paid for service for referendums? My question is why is it that the “District”, with a paid Superintendent, paid administrative staff, paid school principals, paid teachers, and with DOE resources, needs a “local” volunteer steering committee? All those professionals should be capable of identifying what the district needs. No? Isn’t the the “tell”. The residents are paying for all these professionals to handle the business of education and the professionals manage to routinely muddy the waters enough that they need the public’s “input” to get an acceptable outcome.

    Like

  10. M Ryder, I am not a redistribution guy at all. You mischaracterize my statement first can we agree that the premise of this article is total non-sense? And LDC I have zero issue with majority rule at the ballot. Just keeping the fig=fig thing going. RC makes grand proposals to their most vocal and likely to vote residents and by in large delivers for them.
    The hs and ms are filled with pike creek and hockessin kids …

    Like

    • Agreed, they should not be compensated nor should they have to volunteer / contribute/ referendum committee steer to get the districts to acknowledge and oblige the interests of the residents.
      My apologies for any mis-characterization. Merely the observation that RC residents are not being paid. They are more akin to stakeholders or investors and for their contribution, they are being presented with a return on their investment/ payment – services (education they want) rendered. If that is characterized as simple payment to RC residents then what are their taxes and votes? Bribes to the district? It is a very sincere distinction. Taxes are mandatory, Bribes are voluntary.

      Like

  11. “Again, redistribution and transfer payments only work so long until you run out of “other people’s” money.”

    That theory is convenient given the current district boundaries, which have been artfully managed to make clear who are the “other people.” But if NCC were merged into a single district, it wouldn’t be other people’s money any more, it would all be our money.

    Like

    • Mike
      So you are calling the judge who created these gerrymandered boundaries specifically to blend groups of people together, a class warfare advocate? Funny, I thought they were created to socially engineer diversity and racial integration, not establish economic zones.

      I am all in for one district, but just because there might be one district you’re still trying to redistribute or make transfer payments from one economic group to another. You’re just using a bigger geographic pie. And it still means those paying in may not be getting a return on their contribution (they may in fact be getting penalized). A la- Obamacare.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      ” … it wouldn’t be other people’s money any more, it would all be our money.”

      Methinks it would be more accurate (not to mention stylish) to say “it would all be THEIR money.”

      Like

  12. Absolutely not.

    Taxpayers paying a salary to someone whose job it is to convince them to pay more taxes? For some reason, I don’t think that would be a popular concept with a lot of people.

    And who decides what level of involvement determines salary worthiness? It is a slap in the face to all community members past, present, and future who VOLUNTEER time and energy to support public education.

    Like

    • Publius e decere

      If you want to eliminate salary for administrators (because they support a referendum) then just say so. Or maybe you are suggesting that anyone whose salary is derived from tax revenue has a conflict of interest? I’m not sure that DSEA would agree. Maybe others would. Let’s sidestep this minefield for another.

      I think this is a marketing question. Do the administrators and boards of districts know how to properly present and market the merits of a tax increase? (We could argue based on last-year’s history that RC does and CSD does not). Or should districts hire someone who knows how to do this. Hardly lobbying, this seems to be basic consulting or advisory work.

      I say it is all about the Benjamins. Taxpayers at least deserve a competent case being made before the fiat of confiscation. Just like a district throws “street parties” to build bonhomie with its potential customers — but I digress. A consultant can help a district make its case for a tax referendum. A DIY district night see failure after failure. Because a district on its own is in the business of schooling, not fundraising. So they should be able to bring on an advisor for a limited term to advise them on things they need competent advice on. As LDC would say — without meaning to hurta yer years — “capisce”?

      Kilroy incorrectly presents the argument as a red herring. It is not about being a parent (if it was, the vast majority of people would be disqualified). It is about whether or not a district should engage (with pay) an advisor to help them best position the merits of a referendum. Regardless of whether that advisor is a parent, a DINK, a singleton, or otherwise. It could even be a Publius or a Kilroy. Others would be disqualified on general Marquis of Queensbury Rules.

      Let’s watch the upcoming referendums and see who prevails “on the merits”.

      Like

    • propaganda much?

      Like

  13. How cryptic.

    Like