Submitted by Bill Gleason on August 16, 2012 - 7:59am.
You have completely misinterpreted the Strib editorial referred to in the summary above. I suggest that you read it.
The point is that school boards and superintendents who have to ask
for and justify requests for referenda must report their activity and
expenses if it falls outside of legitimate information provision.
"...nail in the coffin for the teacher's union.
No longer will they be able to advance confusing, specious papspew to
further pad their nests. Appeals for more funding must pass a litmus
test of honesty and accuracy."
The Supreme Court decision does no such thing.
This decision has absolutely nothing to do with political advocacy
efforts by Education Minnesota in support of referenda requests.
See, for example:
"Your local may be eligible for a grant from the Education Minnesota
Political Action Committee (PAC) to help you pass a levy or bond
referendum or support candidates in a school board election."
Local Election Assistance Program for 2011-12
link: http://bit.ly/RXWVhp
The point is that school boards and superintendents who have to ask for and justify requests for referenda must report their activity and expenses if it falls outside of legitimate information provision.
No longer will they be able to advance confusing, specious papspew to further pad their nests. Appeals for more funding must pass a litmus test of honesty and accuracy."
See, for example:
"Your local may be eligible for a grant from the Education Minnesota Political Action Committee (PAC) to help you pass a levy or bond referendum or support candidates in a school board election."
Local Election Assistance Program for 2011-12
link: http://bit.ly/RXWVhp