By Neil Mellen || Spartanburg is a solidly Republican County.
In 2010, 56 percent of general election voters their cast their ballots for Republicans Nikki Haley (Governor) and Mick Zais (Superintendent of Education).
Officials at the local public schools lean a bit further left politically.
Since 2008, the seven district superintendents in Spartanburg County have given over $3,000 in personal political donations to state level Democrats and left-of-center Republicans.
(Click to enlarge)
The money includes direct support for members of the so-called “Spartanburg Six,” a clique of aisle-crossing self-termed “Republicans” who conspired to derail school choice legislation earlier this summer in Columbia. It was a bill that was widely supported by parents and activists across South Carolina.
$3,000 may not seem likely a hefty sum. After all, the combined base salaries of these seven non-teaching school bureaucrats exceed $930,000. The single superintendent in neighboring Greenville County takes home a comparatively modest $218,000 base salary.
(Click to enlarge)
But the $3,000 in direct campaign contributions doesn’t tell the whole story. It’s just the tip of the iceberg. The real issue is their spending of taxpayer money to pursue the same ends …
The same district superintendents – ostensibly “public servants”– have used their positions as major local employers to pressure school employees to engage in political lobbying against school choice, expansion of charter schools, and other reforms to K-12 education they deem as personally threatening.
In early June, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was sent to the seven public school districts in Spartanburg County requesting copies of emails written by the seven superintendents to their staff and boards about H.3407 and S.520, the school choice bills.
The results were staggering. Hundreds of emails were obtained in which superintendents plead with their subordinates as well as their school boards to “please contact members of the committee[s] and urge them to vote against the bill[s].” District Four alone demanded over $1,400 to offset the cost of printing out 7,165 pages of emails to and from Superintendent Rallie Liston and staffers about the legislation.
But there is more; in addition to using public resources to directly pressure their own public employees to lobby, the Spartanburg Superintendents also coordinated with taxpayer funded special interest groups to orchestrate statewide efforts to fight against reforms to the public schools. Each and everyone of them regularly forwarded partisan political talking points and strategy memos from SCEA (an NEA sock-puppet), SCASA and SCSBA with directives for defeating the legislation to school principals and administrators to pass down their respective chains of command.
The emails from the FOIA request offer a peak at how local superintendents, particularly Scott Mercer (District 2), Rallie Liston (District 4) and Jim Ray (District 3) worked with lobbyists at the Administrators’ and School Boards’ Association to plot and plan the taxpayer-funded fight. These groups all use money from the state and the district for their day-to-day operations.
Included in the emails:
Superintendent Scott Mercer shared with District 2 PR woman Rhonda Henderson that Senator Wes Hayes (RINO-York) was weary of moving money away from the Virtual School program and into the Education Finance Act because “Hayes said (privately) that keeping the funding in place would help to slow down the private school voucher [sic] and tax credit movement.” Hayes went on to vote against the school choice bill, effectively trapping it in his Senate Education Committee.
Mercer also enjoyed praise from House Member Steve Parker (RINO-Spartanburg) and an admonishment to keep his teachers “making calls to representatives, getting involved in elections of people they support, writing checks to support people that support them, going to political events, etc…”
Superintendent Jim Ray (District 3) drafted his own detailed talking points and sent them over 60 key staffers begging them to “please call Senator Harvey Peeler, a key member of the Senate Education Committee, before 11 am Wednesday April 20 and ask him to urge them to vote against the tuition tax credit /voucher [sic] bill…” He also provided other superintendents with the lobbying templates.
Ray went on to brag to the other Spartanburg Superintendents that his district’s efforts were “way ahead [of other districts'] in this debate in content and class” after emailing newspaper editorials arguing against the legislation to district and school administrators.
The controversial Superintendent of District 4, Rallie Liston, emailed each and every district employee with links to a State Newspaper editorial railing against the School Choice bill. Several angry employees forwarded the missive onto the Voice who hit “reply all” and suggested it was not Liston’s job to push a political agenda on his staff. Liston then confided in his staff and the other Spartanburg Superintendents that he was “responding at several levels soon.” Liston sarcastically noted that there was “nothing I could do” if someone in the district used a “private email” account to send out attacks on choice advocates to the full district email address book. He also directed staff to create and distribute further talking points against the legislation for distribution among teachers.
District 5’s Scott Turner sent out massive “blind BCC” emails throughout his district with the negative (and empirically suspicious) anti-legislation analysis of Harry Miley who has hired to testify against the legislation by SCASA and SCSBA.
In Darryl Owings’ District 6, local school principals emailed their teachers asking them to “take time to read this [link to SCASA talking points] during your planning [period] or after school. This contains information regarding [the] voucher [sic] tuition tax credit bill and how to get in touch with your legislator.” The link contained pre-written “personal” emails channeled directly to state lawmakers attacking the bill.
District 7’s Russel Booker and his staff created cut-and-paste content for their teachers and links of lawmakers’ phone numbers, email addresses and snail mail addresses in their effort to utilize public school teachers, working on district time and equipment, for political purposes. No word yet if they also pushed for higher spending on grass or golf courses.
No matter your personal feelings on school choice, Charter Schools or other K12 education policies issues, your money is paying for bloated school bureaucracies in Spartanburg that function as political machines for the Superintendents you pay to “lead” them.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: Neil Mellen is director of communications for South Carolinians for Responsible Government (SCRG), a group that supports academic freedom and other limited government reforms in the Palmetto state. To read more of his work, head over to The Voice.
***
By Art G. August 4, 2011 at 11:11 am
Sounds like Tammany Hall politics is alive and well!
They should form a partnership with Clyburn, king of pay-to-play (with others’ money).
By This is the state of things August 4, 2011 at 11:33 am
It’s disgusting that the parasites living off the productive in our society get to use their stolen money to lobby for more….it’s like buying a gun and giving it to the robber demanding money from you for crying out loud.
By Oh Brother! August 4, 2011 at 12:24 pm
Mr. Mellen, the fact that you so solidly support Governor Haley tells the whole story: 1) you must be ignorant, 2)you make up crap, 3)you don’t care about anything except selling your brand of Kool Aid and 4)you are a danger to the future of this state.
I think the Spartanburg Six truly do care about tthe future of their County and South Carolina and the people of Spartanburg have every right in the world to express their opinion – just as you have done in this article. Your claim that tax money was spent is just another of the lies and bombs that your group likes to use to excite and destroy.
By Trey August 4, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Grammar check:
percent of general election voters their cast their ballots
On a side note, almost all of the public education power structure leans toward the left. It is rare to find an admitted Republican in school leadership.
By Duh August 4, 2011 at 12:44 pm
BOB
Huh? Nothing in there is pro or con Haley. She is mentioned as a baseline of party affiliation in the county. If you disagreed with the political agenda of the Spartanburg Superintendents then you would surely object to their actions; making you a crass consequentialist. That is what will destroy this state. School officials ought to administer schools, not play politics through their positions.
By Madam Governor August 4, 2011 at 12:45 pm
I help those who help me.
By PalmettoCPA August 4, 2011 at 12:54 pm
Whoever made your slide obviously has no knowledge of the terms used in governmental accounting.
A brief review of any district’s Consolidated Annual Financial Report (CAFR) would show you that “Support Services” includes not only general administration, but also student transportation, IT services, security, guidance, library, curriculum development, and staff training. Hardly the kind of overwhelming bureaucracy the author claims as unnecessary for running a school.
Go after the over-paid Superintendents all you want, but piss-poor allegations of all support services being “administration” show a complete lack of understanding of any school system and weakens your legitimate commentary. This isn’t a big secret, just sloppy research. I’m a public school graduate and I found it in under 5 minutes.
Full Disclosure: I have no financial interest in public schools, I don’t even live in SC any more. I just get tired of the same tired arguments from private school supporters seeking handouts from the taxpayers.
By Rutledge August 4, 2011 at 1:15 pm
FYI
“Support Services” IS in fact the term for the 200 series of codes (211 through 273) in the Financial Accounting guide issued by the SC SDE governing district reporting of expenditures.
The Handbook and the spreadsheets of expenditures are online on the Departments’s website.
By baker August 4, 2011 at 1:28 pm
I think a strong case could actually be made that school district superintendents not only have the RIGHT but also the RESPONSIBILITY to do a couple things related to all this:
1. to keep their employees informed about legislation that could directly affect their jobs
2. and as education leaders in their communities, to speak out about proposed legislation they believe will have either a positive or negative impact on public education and their students.
Would it be wrong for a municipal police chief, for purposes of analogy, to discuss with his staff officers a proposal that might lead to layoffs or that might, in the chief’s view, affect overall public safety?
Meanwhile, so what if Spartanburg superintendents gave money to candidates of their choice? It’s their money. Is SCRG suggesting that while it’s now Constitutional for giant corporations to give unlimited amounts of money to political campaigns, it’s somehow out of line for individual public employees to give a small amount of their own personal money to a candidate?!?!
By FunkyChicken August 4, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Neil Mellen can kiss my fat ass. It is too bad that his son is not tough enough to go to a public school with normal kids. You have made your choice to attend a private school, now pay your own way. Do not expect my taxes to be increased to pay for your children to go to private school.
By Meow August 4, 2011 at 1:44 pm
Baker is absolutely right. To imply that government officials don’t have the right to support and educate other similarly situated government employees on issues that directly affect their employment is ludicrous. But, since it supports the Republican/Tea Party belief that public education is evil, it’s a convenient argument.
You lost the battle on vouchers. Sadly, eventually you will likely win the war. But for now, shut the hell up.
By Huhhh??? August 4, 2011 at 1:50 pm
SCRG is getting worried that white school teachers and state employees may be slowly catching on that voting R is voting against their own continued employment in R legislative states.
Those employees have been slow on the pick up. They voted for Haley(R) after Sanford(R) tried to throw teachers – just like triple dipping Zais is currently doing – and other public employees under the bus by trying to reject the stimulus funds that kept many of them working for the past 2 years.
When white southerners wake up to how they have been manipulated by the Rs since the Southern Strategy, things will change. The extremism of the libertarian/Tea Party wing is helping this happen.
By Oh Brother! August 4, 2011 at 1:52 pm
baker – you are so right on target. It is the responsibility of school officials to speak out on matters regarding public education. Good post!
By USC August 4, 2011 at 2:05 pm
Private schools are private not public. So they get no public monwy. Besides the majority in SC are white flight schools with minimal requirements for their teachers. Most of their teachers wouldn’t qualify to teach in public schools. Hell most never even took the test.
By rick beltram August 4, 2011 at 2:53 pm
FITS:
Is the same Neil Mellen that filed suit against VMI in 2003 for School Prayer????
It would appear that if this is the same Mellen guy then he has a very LIBERAL background…(please read the court pleadings)….or is it that a pay check changes one’s politics??
Just wondering!
RSB
By Trey August 4, 2011 at 2:55 pm
As long as we run a public education system in South Carolina that 35% of our citizens won’t participate in, you will never have the support necessary for good schools. And this is not just any 35%, they are worth 70% in political influence.
By sally August 4, 2011 at 3:45 pm
Neil:
This is absurd! Howard Rich and his cronies from up north can send in millions to SCRG crowd and you are writing a story about seven voters in Spartanburg who give a measley $3000??? These people live in the district and have every right to support candidates who represent their views. What about the carpetbaggers funding your organization and your salary Neil???
By Sick of Pandering August 4, 2011 at 3:49 pm
To By rick beltram:
I do believe it is the same Neil Mellen that filed that nasty prayer lawsuit against VMI. Soooooooooooooo, I will agree with you on the pay check changes one’s politics. Neil does believe in welfare for the rich which is why is so passionate about the tax credit legislation. Also, Baker is right on point also. Kudos to Huhhh??? for great comments because I,too,think the Tea Party people are waking up a sleeping giant of a voting block. I think people are realizing that you actually look at what a person stands for, not what party is beside his/her name. As for Neil Mellen, he deserves a “bless his heart” and we all know what that means!
By jimlewis,owb August 4, 2011 at 4:15 pm
More power to the seven district superintendents and to the so called Spartanburg Six. Take it all. Shove it in your pants pockets. Shove it in your shirt pockets. Shove it in your underwear. Shove it in your shoes. Please, just shove it.
After y’all have bled the taxpayers dry and kept every kid in the county dumber than a fucking bag rocks it may be your turn.
At some point in the future you may be cruising down the highway in your Cadillac Supreme Escalade 4 FWD with the Bose Super 8 Surround Sound DVD/CD/VCR/STD Combo Package blasting out your favorite tune. Then some idiot in front of you will slam on brakes because he couldn’t read the road signs and in no time you are laying on your back in the middle of the road with a piece of rebar replacing your belly button. No need to worry. Local EMS is on the way and it is staffed with two of your former students. They were members of the class 2008 that graduated 182 students but only 2 of them could read on the 6th grade level. No doubt they will be extra careful with you just like you were to the kids on the short bus.
Oh, if you are thinking of moving to another area or another state upon retirement forget it. The sons of bitches there are doing the same thing you are doing here.
Karma can be a Bitch.
By Ad. Hom August 4, 2011 at 4:21 pm
Love the ad hominem approach to the author.
Facts of the case clearly not the issue, right?
Same Neil Mellen who started a charity that sends poor brown kids in the Pacific to Christian schools?
Bless his heart indeed!
By Smack_talker August 4, 2011 at 4:56 pm
Good gracious, you South Carolina public school supporters are pathetic. Do you think that there is a particular reason why our students are some of the most ignorant in the country? Could it possibly have ANYTHING to do with the way our public schools are run?
To pay a district superintendent $218,000 is obscene! To pay a public school teacher $60,000+ a year is obscene, especially given the the fact that they ONLY WORK 9 MONTHS FOR THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY!! These people are some of the most overpaid, underworked individuals in existence.
And to continue to hear the same old mantra, that “we do not fund education is this state” is ridiculous.
Keep it up sheeple. The public education system is working SO WELL in South Carolina.
By Bob Dalton August 4, 2011 at 9:06 pm
It’s not about education, and it never has been. It’s about money, and it always will be.
By Lewis August 4, 2011 at 9:13 pm
USC, that’s just pathetic. Go to AC Flora and walk through the classes other than the IB and AAP classes and tell me there are teachers ANYWHERE IN AMERICA worse that these hold-overs. The language arts teachers can’t correct the papers because they have no idea how to write a complete sentence. But Vince Ford has decreed that he has to approve any changes…..
By BIN News Editorial Staff August 4, 2011 at 9:38 pm
Mellen is a paid voucher wh@re, and he can’t be trusted to tell the truth about the issues facing public education any further than our Funding Editor can kick sic(k) willie’s bloated arse.
And sic(k) willie pimps this cr@p for Howie the Voucher Clown.
Because no one reads Mellen’s cr@p at the S.C. for Irresponsible Voucher Scams. It’s a dead site.
By Billy Bob August 4, 2011 at 10:41 pm
Yo asshole!! While I think the pay for school district supers is just plain stupid, if you think I will subsidize your kids private school education, you are dumber than a rock. I WILL find you!!
By Bob The Builder August 5, 2011 at 6:32 am
Bo Dalton is right. It is all about money and who controls it. Education is not in either side’s thoughts.
$200K for ANY public sector job is obscene.
The public schools actually do need more money. I think we found some.
By baker August 5, 2011 at 1:51 pm
We’ve got the customary harangues against “educrats” and public schools from some here.
But no one has established why it’s wrong for public officials — whether they’re school superintendents, police chiefs, fire chiefs, or city managers — for keep their employees informed about legislation that could affect their jobs and livelihoods, or why it’s wrong for superintendents, etc. to voice their opinions about political proposals that have to do with their areas of expertise and professional responsibility.
In other words, as usual, SCRG is really reaching.
By baker August 5, 2011 at 1:51 pm
I meant to say “….to keep their employees informed….” Sorry about that.
By Kobayashi Maru August 6, 2011 at 10:53 am
Baker,
You’re right on target. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Page v. Lexington County School District One (that’s right: Randy Page) upheld a school board’s right to be an advocate for public schools in the legislative arena, stating, “It is therefore appropriate for the school district to defend public education in the face of pending legislation that it views as potentially threatening of public education.”
Further, it is completely legal under the state ethics act for public officials to express opinions and share information about legislative matters, even if they use public computers and other equipment. It’s a local policy matter.
Guess SCRG just can’t get seem to get that through their (exceptionally) thick heads!
Pingback: Spartanburg SC: Axis Of (Educrat) Evil | South Carolina News Press | South Carolina Breaking News Headlines | SC