|
In May of 2006, as a prelude to a school bond referendum, District 281 hired Springsted, Inc., a public relations firm and paid them $36,620 to provide consulting, marketing, public relations and market analysis services to the District. The referendum they helped construct was defeated and one can, in hindsight, say that the District threw the money down a rat hole – money, a radical might argue, that could have been used to feed a starving child! They’re doing it again. Springsted has convinced the District that the rat hole needs to be replenished. They have hired Springsted again to do market analysis for a pondered referendum vote during the general elections this fall. As a member of CARE-281 I can tell you that nothing close to $36,620 was spent by the opposition to defeat the last referendum. And, here’s the critical difference: The money spent by CARE-281 was private and VOLUNTARY. The funds used by the District to pay Springsted is, and was, public money. It comes from the District budget. I have studied their analyses and can see that they are toying with different ways to word their proposals so that they evoke the most public sympathy. Springsted has conducted extensive surveys and have concluded that the District 281 tree is ripe for referenda. (In reviewing their surveys it occurs to me that the way they worded their questions could have ONLY evoked sympathetic responses for the District – which is a kind way of saying that firms like Springsted know how to milk money from clueless educrats). Now, this is not to say that the District shouldn’t hire a PR firm. However, the dishonesty of using public money to petition voters for more public money ought to discourage anyone who sees the growth of the public sector as counter-intuitive to our larger American destiny. Let the public be forwarned. The full-court press is coming. They’ll be in your face again this fall. They will pull out all the stops, again, to wear the public down with the illusion that what they’re doing is ‘for the children.’ They won’t mention the words ‘school choice’ in any of their ads. They will not dwell on declining enrollment or empty schools or importing students from other districts in order to feed their huge bureaucratic beast. They will not mention the words ‘voucher’ or ‘tax credits.’ They will, instead talk of ‘investments’ and ‘sacrifices’ or improving the ‘quality of life’ or ‘increasing property values.’ I think they’re making a critical, crucial tactical error, however, in having the referendum voted on in a presidential election. The reason Districts always sponsor their referenda votes in off-years is so the general public can be minimized in their process. That way they can mobilize their strong union influence to make certain they pack the polls with those who have a vested interest in growing the education empire. Well, like they said last week: Let the games begin!
|
