A Seven Year Legacy: The Despotic Carpetbagger Paradigm Case Against Proposition 75

Californians have a nasty habit of voting against their best interests, and one could argue the initiative process perpetuates this peculiar behavior. The well-intentioned voter looking to cut a little bureaucracy and save a tax dollar or two, persuaded by an organized and grotesquely-funded “Yes on whatever” lobby, casts an affirming vote for a ballot measure that cost millions to get on the ballot and millions more in the ensuing legal challenge that ultimately proves the initiative unconstitutional. Call it “The 187 Phenomenon.”

Prop 75 claims to protect the wages of unionized public service employees by requiring their unions to obtain member permission before a portion of dues are spent on political action. The argument goes that union activism prevents educational reform. When pressed for specifics, however, those who buy this argument only cite general and controversial reform ideas like vouchers and charter schools. Throw out the example of Andrew Hill, a school characterized repeatedly by the Mercury News as filled with union activists but who also happen to seek to convert the school into a charter, following the lead of three other unionized high schools in Southern California, whose reform effort is hampered by ESUHSD school board—the very people Arnold seeks to empower—and the argument falls flat.

Like any organization, a union can be obtusely bureaucratic, especially the further up the organizational chain one goes. They function best at the local level, a hypothesis confirmed when viewed under the historical lens of the Despotic Carpetbagger Paradigm.

Let’s travel to San Diego for this example. The trustees of the San Diego Unified School District decided to shake up the status quo by bringing in a reform-minded, politically-connected educational outsider, a carpetbagger to the profession. Alan Bersin, a federal prosecutor who’d been serving in San Diego for a few years, adopted what professional educators disparagingly call a “drill and kill” curriculum that emphasized standardized test performance above all other measurable student outcomes. As soon as the plan was unveiled, Carpetbagger Bersin decided the best way to build consensus for his plan was to bark out a few despotic comments to his subordinates like “You’re either with me or I will be ruthless in pursuing you!”

Bersin’s “you get more bees by smashing the hive” managerial style led to a lawsuit favoring 16 wrongfully dismissed school site administrators, a La Jolla High School community charter revolt, an employee exodus to neighboring counties and districts, and a 93% vote of no confidence. Bersin weathered the criticism for seven years largely by maintaining a slim school board majority with the abundant financial assistance of a conservative, pro-business PAC. (read the whole story here: http://www.unrulyrus.com/200501_news.html )

In spite of the inordinate backing of the business lobby and the editorial board of the San Diego Tribune, Bersin’s morale destroying despotism eventually caused his board supporters to lose reelection. Bersin’s ouster was voter mandated, and it was the local union in San Diego that repeatedly drove the message home with voters. Parents took their time and weighed both sides of the issue—and they sided with the union. Once the new board was in place, CTA stepped in and ran an ad campaign calling for Bersin’s contract to be bought out. Two months later, they did.

If not for the grassroots effort of the San Diego Educator’s Association, kindergarteners might still be attending a district that made teachers feel like crayons were contraband (). Bersin’s most ardent supporters got their silver lining: the teacher-vilifying nemesis of the public employee unions appointed Bersin as his State Secretary of Education. He replaced Arnold’s other go to guy, the one who liked to ridicule 6 year olds. ()
As we noted last month, teachers in Cupertino have formed a PAC to rid their district of board support for Superintendent William Bragg, despotic carpetbagger and first recipient of The Unruly Advocate’s Kiko Award. That’s what unions can do when they take a stand against totalitarianism. What happens though when a union loses its financial power to take a political stand?

The historical precedent was set by—you guessed it, avid unruly reader—Esperanza Zendejas. Just prior to Zendejas’ arrival in Indianapolis, then-Mayor Stephen Goldsmith navigated an education reform package strictly for Indianapolis’ public schools, part of which limited the scope of the union’s bargaining to wages and benefits. State officials took the proposed measure a step further and implemented a “paycheck protection” act of their own, called SEA 5. SEA 5 allowed union members and fee payers to opt out of paying dues. Zendejas came into the job right at the start of negotiations and, after using delay tactics and feigning ignorance, she sent out a letter that caused an uproar. That mailing led to the filing of an unfair labor practice only five months after being named superintendent. After two years of suffering under the iron hand of this state-empowered despot, Zendejas’ contract was bought out.

By then the damage was beyond done. Her successor, Duncan “Pat” Pritchett, spent seven years repairing her mess. () What, exactly, did he repair? He reestablished good relations with the employee unions in order to cauterize the wound causing the exodus. He reached out to local universities so that education departments would feel comfortable placing interns and student teachers in Indianapolis schools again. He stopped needlessly transferring principals and administrators to build a culture of stability. And he worked to reinstate the rights of employees unions so that teachers could have a voice in education policy matters.

In a state where the cost of living rapidly outpaces the average teacher salary, it’s not hard to imagine a dip if not a full blown exodus of teachers into neighboring states, not only for the chance to find an affordable home, but to also know they will continue to have a voice in education policy matters. That voice is critical given the proliferation of despotic carpetbaggers. That’s why we urge you to vote NO on proposition 75.