Montclair Moms are voting for Real Progress Montclair, according to a full-page ad in today’s Montclair Times. Over 100 women signed the ad proclaiming their support for the RPM slate in the May election, and in particular for Karen Turner’s bid for Mayor. From the ad:
We are mothers. We are members of Montclair’s PTAs, PTOs, PAMKA and School Action Teams. We are volunteers in the classroom, on our schools’ stages and at the gyms and fields where our young athletes play. We strongly support the MFEE. We are women working both inside and outside the home, who have dedicated ourselves year-after-year to supporting students of all abilities and backgrounds in every public and private school in Montclair. Because the candidates of the Real Progress Montclair slate have articulated a clear understanding of the issues our town faces, presented a clear set of fiscal and management goals, and because of their long-term support and commitment to our public schools, we, the undersigned Montclair Moms, wholeheartedly support the Real Progress Montclair slate in our municipal election on May 8th.
The ad notes that while the township’s municipal budget and debt burden have increased, the schools have been forced to make cuts to keep taxes down. The women say that “smart decision making” and “prudent financial management” are essential to keep Montclair’s schools from bearing the brunt of the cost trimming.
A press release RPM issued explaining the ad singled out Turner’s “exceptional appeal to committed volunteer moms,” and said that the signers are banding together to “help Karen Turner become the second woman mayor in Montclair’s 118-year history.” The release also pointed out that the majority of RPM’s campaign volunteers are women.
In the press release, Glenfield School PTA president Sue Schuchinski Weintraub is quoted as saying, “Karen has done her research and reached out to women in town, like myself, whom she knows devote themselves to the Montclair public schools. She has asked me and many others what we care about, what we are concerned about, what makes our schools great and what needs attention. We did not have to chase her to be heard, to be listened to. She engaged us in conversation. She is the epitome of what one wants from a local government representative. She wants to represent her constituents, not simply tell them what’s good for them.”
Turner has taken some heat during the campaign about the fact that she sends her own children to private school, though she has maintained that she will strongly advocate for the public school system.
Weintraub told Baristanet that there were so many women who wanted to sign the ad that a full page was necessary. The cost of $2,033 was largely paid for by contributions by the women who signed.
“The ad notes that while the township’s municipal budget and debt burden have increased, the schools have been forced to make cuts to keep taxes down. The women say that “smart decision making” and “prudent financial management” are essential to keep Montclair’s schools from bearing the brunt of the cost trimming”
Long term residents of Montclair know that over the past 20 years it has been the school budget, not the municipal budget, that has contributed overwhelmingly to the steady increase of property taxes. It’s about time that the school budget has been brought under control. While it is important to look for savings every place, real impacts on our property taxes will come from further reductions in the school budget, which has seen non-classroom related expenses skyrocket since I’ve moved here in the mid 80’s.
From this should I assume the BOE budget is a sacred cow for Turner?
If 25% of taxes go to the county and are thus not in our control, and If the 60% of teh taxes the schools consume is off the table. What do you think can be achieved with the remaining 15%? NOT MUCH is the answer.
Now a ticket needs 100 seniors to take out an add an neutralize the moms.
Oh, Boy this is really heating up.
Now I don’t know what to do, I thought she’d really be much more concerned about overall finances, including school budgets. So let’s see – we have the pro-BOE and pro-pre K slate, it seems Turner is heading the pro-school slate, and the we did a crummy job of keeping taxes from skyrocketing slate. This does not bode well.
As the post from ROC implies, a reality check is needed here. The facts of the matter are: 1 – the Township was and is far ahead of the schools in cutbacks and downsizing. According to the TM Office, the Township is now at 350 FT staff, which would be down from 450 ten years ago, or a reduction in staff of nearly 30%. The schools have not done anything remotely close to this. In 2005, the Township even achieved a zero tax increase, well before the schools recently did. 2 − property taxes for the schools and for school debt dwarf those for the Township by more than double. 3 − the “elephant in the room” that pushed the community’s debt level so high is school debt, not Township debt. For example, if the Township completely eliminated for the next ten years all new capital spending at its recently typical $4 million annual rate, and watched streets, sewers, treescape, parks and public property, etc. deteriorate for ten years to even further crisis proportions, it wouldn’t even cover the debt that was approved for one new school (a debt level many in the community tried to warn against and rethink after the community was denied state funds for the school). In short, the truth is that there cannot be any meaningful discussion of controlling taxes if the schools and county are off the table. The goal should not be to pit the schools and municipality against one another, but rather to “strengthen” them both as much as possible to be effective and cost efficient operations serving the needs of the community, not to mention lobbying in Trenton for changes needed at the State level. I hope this helps the discussion.
Individuals in town are always free to endorse whatever they choose. I find it odd that any of the women who signed this petition would feel free to use the names of 501c3 organizations to endorse political candidates. Bad call.
http://www.pta.org/hosting_a_canidates_forum.asp
Regular members and board members can support or oppose candidates as private citizens, but they must not associate their political activity with PTA.
I’m sorry, but I thought the school board was appointed by the Council. Doesn’t that tend to align the BoE and the town council, not push them apart?
The white elephant that is an extra school cannot be helped by spending more on shade trees. And the last several years the BoE has improved while the municipal budget has not. The next government can’t be held responsible for the last 20 years, but needs to provide direction for the next 20.
All of it needs fiscal responsibility, including the County government but that’s a different election.
Fiscal responsibility and long term health of the public schools can go hand in hand, and certainly can include intelligent review of the BoE budget as well as the municipal budget. I doubt Ms. Turner would suggest that she would give BoE a blank check, but would instead try to work to get a better budget process and fiscal responsibility across the board.
Mostly, I am in favor of anyone taking over who is not afraid to make changes, and sets a goal of tax decreases. If you keep raising taxes , people leave and the tax base erodes. It’s not complicated.
The inconvenient truth is simple and it is as follows: for property taxes, there is no realistic chance of “tax decreases” unless taxes for the schools, which are by far the largest component of property tax bills, are decreased. Politicians at all levels can put whatever spin they want on things, but that is the truth of it. That’s basically the point I was trying to make for accuracy and to help the discussion along. I certainly agree that good fiscal management is warranted everywhere.
I don’t see any official endorsement by any parent organizations. I see a bunch of moms active in the schools who want to make a statement. Isn’t that what free speech is all about?
Please don’t tell me we are going to see a bunch of drama over this now. It sounds like a bunch of political hogwash.
sohobound – there has been lots of buzz about this ad coming out. I heard about it a week ago. I am 100% convinced that Harvey Susswein did too and that is why he came out with his ridiculouos list of questions in the beginning of the week. Of coarse, there will be a lot of political drama over this ad. It’s a big deal for RPM. There was no official endorsement and those that are posing such questions are doing so on behalf of the other slates. Fasten your seat belts the election is getting close.
PS. sohobound – to further my comment above Joe Hartnett has come out of retirement to comment? I mean isn’t that proof enough – he was TM under Remsen and we need him to explain to us the towns finances? It was under his employment with the Remsen crew that we are deeper in debt. Thanks Mr. Hartnett but seeing you post on this piece really makees me wonder who reached out to you for help, Harvey Susswein ,Tim Barr, Don Zeif, Ed Remsen, Jerry Kapner or nmaybe all of them.
Now, having seen it. There’s nothing wrong with the ad. They just identify themselves (some of themselves) as “members of the PTA”
There is nothing wrong with that.
Not interested in the personal attacks, but FWIW candidates and representatives from all the slates in Montclair, as well as from several other communities, have reached out to me for information and governmental advice and I have been honored that they asked and to meet with them, just as I have been happy to give seminars on public management and financial management for the Montclair Times, the Adult School, Montclair State University, and other organizations. I’ve worked with numerous elected officials in my career, including 18 from Montclair, not just the ones you mentioned. Whenever I’m asked, I am more than happy to give the best non-partisan advice I can to people of good will who are interested in serving the community and who put themselves out there to public scrutiny. I consider these activities part of being a good citizen.
Well said, Joe.
Also, Joe has been a regular commenter here on Baristanet for quite some time.
I second Carl’s accolade. Since he’s been posting here, Mr. Hartnett has been a very helpful source of information.
Mr. Hartnett – maybe your reasoning would be more believable if it was attached to a different post – but frankly, I don’t see any relevance to your post under the heading “Montclair Moms” support Karen Turner. You were trying to insinuate that Ms. Turner and her slate were trying to “pit” the schools & municiplaity against each other. But I do thank you for saying -” Whenever I’m asked, I am more than happy to give the best non-partisan advice I can to people of good will who are interested in serving the community and who put themselves out there to public scrutiny. I consider these activities part of being a good citizen.” Seems to me that you were in fact “asked” to respond to this post by someone, doubtful it was Karen Turner.
Thx. Much appreciated.
“According to the TM Office, the Township is now at 350 FT staff, which would be down from 450 ten years ago, or a reduction in staff of nearly 30%. ”
Just this past year there’s been – or so it has been reported – staff reduction. Yet spending increased. I’m having some difficulty with this since we seem to be experiencing the worst of possible worlds: the problems associated with staff reductions combined with the problems associated with cost increases.
How can staff cuts not cut costs?
…Andrew
“How can staff cuts not cut costs?”
Increased debt costs and increased benefits cost. Health Insurance has gone up 50% since 2008.
It’s called a “Death Spiral” we will continue to reduce services to pay debt and benefits.
Andrew — That’s a great question, with the answer obviously being mainly other drivers of costs, including State mandates. As an illustration to focus on cost drivers (this from an old report), from 2003 through 2008, if you removed the increases for Police and Fire, State mandated pension premiums, health and other insurance, utilities, debt service, and mandated deferred charges (like the cost of the mandated tax revaluation), the taxes for municipal government would actually have been $2,924,326 or 10% less in 2008 than they were in 2003. More recently, I’m sure there are new factors as well.
No discussion here of changing how schools are funded from property tax to income tax, and letting dollars follow students. The school budget problem is not going to be fixed by cutting, unless everyone simply wants to eviscerate the schools.
It’s a pickle, Kit. NJ has so many problems.
Sadly, Montclair has made some additional mistakes that are huge. Building a brand new $35mm school is just one, after having sold one for next to nothing a decade ago.
Then there’s the 8% “oh we have problems increase”, followed by “gee, everyone is angry how do we tighten the reins”, followed by “we found a big lump of extra money!” And there’s more.
Wow…a story about an ad – here and on Montclair Patch. Talk about bang for your buck. Three for one.
I found the add to be a bit offensive on many levels. Karen Turner and the rest of her slate should think twice before they allow the women who placed this ad as one more way for the White Junior League Women to run your show. Indicating that you will be beholden to a few on this list ensures I won’t vote for this slate. Think of the ladies in both the book and movie “The Help” and then think of the diverse population our town prides itself in having. Whoever is elected must also consider other aspects of running a township, not just who can have a potential seat on the BOE. I see more about how important these women think they are than I do regarding solving problems from the candidates. I find it offensive to all of the women who do not align with this and offensive to all who feel our town is a whole town and not a bunch of ladies who lunch. Karen Turner should consider that she and her slate lost many votes according to what I have heard from background buzz. Poorly executed and badly recieved by most of the population who are not signers. Pathetic that these women felt a need to use the names of not for profit organizations who do not endorse candidates and who purposefully state that they are members of these organizations then place their name and endorse candidates. At least we know who you have in your pocket and who you will be beholden to. Thanks. But no thanks.
There were 450 full time town employees ten years ago and now there are 350 full time employees? Well, things are running just fine now with 100 fewer employees. Sounds like whoever was running the town ten years ago was having a party at tax payers’ expense. So who is to say reducing headcount should stop at 350? Maybe things will run just fine with 300 town employees. Too bad Montclair has one of the highest percentages in the state of municipal employees making over $1ook. And those “cadillac” health benefits our municipal employees have that no private insurance company will underwrite because they can’t possibly provide that level of benefits at a profit. The party is still going on down at 205 Claremont.
blablabla – very racist and stereotypical comments. apparently you can’t endorse anyone due to what someone very wise person once called “the content of their character.” apparently any Montclair mom who endorses the RPM slate has nothing to do all day but sit in their mansion and direct their minority servants. I am sure there are no women who work hard and live in regular homes who also endorse RPM. you should be ashamed of yourself for your bigoted views.
The ad was a craven ploy to distract voters from the cold, hard fact that Turner has no stake in the public school system in Montclair. With no skin in the game, Turner could appoint BOE members who will eviserate our public schools by slashing programs, laying off teachers, closing schools.
What would it matter to her? She sends her kids to private school!
“there is no realistic chance of “tax decreases” unless taxes for the schools, which are by far the largest component of property tax bills, are decreased”
I see what Mr. Hartnett means in that this is the largest component of our taxes. But the BOE’s recent budgets have been flat in terms of revenue. That made tax decreases a possibility for Montclair. But the town hasn’t even been able to get to “revenue flat” yet, which is why we’re still seeing increases.
That the schools represent the largest portion of our taxes is correct, but the town side is the part remaining out of control.
…Andrew
hi
i’m new to area and baristanet.
how do you upload a profile pic on wordpress?
“if you removed the increases for Police and Fire, State mandated pension premiums, health and other insurance, utilities, debt service, and mandated deferred charges (like the cost of the mandated tax revaluation), the taxes for municipal government would actually have been $2,924,326 or 10% less in 2008 than they were in 2003.”
If we use ROC’s “death spiral” analogy for this, then I know the answer at least from the aviation perspective (sometimes being a pilot pays off {8^). When you’re behind the power curve in some way, you need to trade off altitude to get back ahead of the curve where you’ve more control.
Amusingly (because it is still aviation-related), the flying club I help manage was in a situation like this, and we had to adopt a plan which let our assets drop rather uncomfortably for a time, though with the knowledge that the plan followed this with an increase back to proper levels. And that plan did work.
In the non-analogy Montclair world, though, how can we do that? We don’t control costs such as those listed above (except perhaps for “increases for Police and Fire” which wasn’t further defined above). Or does outsourcing free us from at least some of these?
…Andrew
With control of only 25% of the budget, Andrew we only control the Aileron on the left side…
“The ad was a craven ploy to distract voters from the cold, hard fact that Turner has no stake in the public school system in Montclair.”
In fact, I think the ad was a rather clever demonstration that plenty of parents do believe that Ms. Turner can be trusted with the ownership of the BOE she’d have as mayor. That’s not quite the same as convincing others of this, but it does show that some are finding her answers on this matter to be satisfactory.
Of course, as a parent active in the schools I’m going to feel slighted if there’s isn’t a “Dads” follow-up *laugh*.
…Andrew
I’m not sure 100 people signing on to anything whatsoever constitutes “plenty of people”.
“With control of only 25% of the budget, Andrew we only control the Aileron on the left side…”
If all other controls are locked into a neutral position, this would be enough. The BOE’s recent revenue-flat budgets would be the equivalent of locked control, I think (though this analogy is stretched pretty far already, so I won’t mention directional control by opening and closing doors *grin*).
Actually, I think part of the problem is that we *don’t* have control over that left aileron…and it is not in a neutral position. What we need is to get that under control.
[I do love aviation analogies!]
…Andrew
[I do love aviation analogies!]
Sometimes they’re apt. I read this yesterday, I doubt you will like it, though.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2012/04/11/spain-is-headed-for-a-major-economic-crash/
Wow …the White Junior League Women ?? The Help ????
Would you like a dash of class warfare to go along with your coffee ?
cspn55 – I found the ad to be elitist and offensive. Frankly, it didn’t promote what most in town are wondering. What does this slate, in detail plan to do? I am tired of hearing people say “do good things for the town while cutting costs.” Seriously? HOW? What do you cut? Are you going to outsource the township’s municipal services? The ad served to offend any woman who doesn’t trust this slate. It was a PR disaster. I don’t endorse the tone and I don’t endorse those who abuse their position to promote any cause. The content of someone’s character might be called to task when you see people who use organizations as self serving vehicles. Just my opinion. You are certainly not obligated to agree.
“The ad was a craven ploy to distract voters from the cold, hard fact that Turner has no stake in the public school system in Montclair. With no skin in the game, Turner could appoint BOE members who will eviserate our public schools by slashing programs, laying off teachers, closing schools. What would it matter to her? She sends her kids to private school!”
Any elected mayor who has grown children or no children could also appoint an “evil” BOE that is set on destroying our school system! However, any sane mayor knows that the quality of the schools is both immensely important to a majority of people in town and is also a huge determining factor on our property values and the attractiveness of bringing people to Montclair. This is a reactionary, baseless and frankly a dumb post by relax people.
Challenge Turner or anyone running on what they say they will do or have done in the past – don’t challenge her because she sends her kids to a private school which may have been for any number of reasons and not be a reflection of the public schools in Montclair.
johnqp – Karen Turner is a member of the Junior League. Most of the signers are white and have/had positions on what they feel to be the prominent mother’s list of “who is really who” in town. If you want to be like the prominent Moms you must certainly agree with them. That wreaks of class warfare and it was offensive. I think most of the signers are affluent, the others want to appear to be affluent. The presentation offended me, the tone was wretched and it further created doubt that Karen Turner understood the needs of the Magnet system and could make choices that were not benefiting those who manipulate and power grab in the public school system. I am a person of color and I am greatly offended by the notion that I would not be equally hard working or as well informed as these women if I don’t agree with them. Karen Turner doesn’t have children in the public school system and with this endorsement it further distances me from her slate. Everyone agrees that the BOE has problems. I think allowing even more cronieism to the equation is not a solution. My opinion. You are entitled to your opinion.
Are most people in town wondering how they can force people in larger homes to pay for everything? and how is this offensive Blablabla? Go through the list of names and see where everyone lives and what their color/creed and class is and you still will have no ammo to make that determination. These are actual people who signed their real names to support Turner and cared enough to pony up $2,000 to take out an ad whci is about $20/person.
Go campaign for whoever you support and stop deridding these people with your racist and stereotypical nonsense. You know I know one of the mom’s who signed and is African-American. Does that make her the female equivalent of an “uncle tom” to you? She also is a very accomplished professional who works and also finds time to be very active in her kids school (which is the same as my kids school). Is that offensive to you?
Blablabla – holy cow, talk about having an inferiority complex. Did the cool kids not let you play hopscotch with them at some point? Go volunteer and do something productive instead of smearing with racist overtones and generalizations well intentioned people who actually give their time and money to trying to make Montclair a better place.
This is so incredibly sad. What happened to “I’m not voting for Karen Turner because of these reasons but I am voting for this person for these reasons?” This is really the direction these posts should be going. I am so saddened by the personal attacks to Karen Turner and the woman that chose to endorse Karen. Maybe, I was niave but I really did think that we were all better than this.
“…Most of the signers are white….”
Wow …speechless. You have a horrible chip on your shoulder.
Oh my – black folk may not disagee because you let one black mom appear in print? This makes sense to who? I forgot my place Thank you for making your case more clear to anyone who does not agree. As for the many moms who live in Montclair who may not have been on the A-List of networked Montclair Moms – 100 white moms and a black lady group – seriously? I have to step away from the computer because I am not the racist here.
blablabla,
you brought race and wealth into the conversation. you pointed out that this is “100 white moms and a black lady group –”.
only you saw through that lens….
your envy and hate is very evident. please do not blame others for the divisive and bigoted comments you made.
Very sad. You need to see a Doctor about that chip.
It is pretty sad reading these posts and similar ones on the other town blogs. If there are people from out of town who are reading this stuff and are considering Montclair because they perceive it to be a diverse harmonious town they would surely be disappointed. I think many of us are disappointed as well.
Can’t we all just get along.
blablabla – support who you want, speak out for them if you want. Your place is right next to anyone else who has a vote, no better, no worse. But as others have said you bring race into this with every post and a massive inferiority complex to these women for some reason that clouds your thoughts. And your racism (or maybe it’s just jealousy, nah it’s racism) shows your lack of intelligence when you say, without provocation, somthing like this:
“I am greatly offended by the notion that I would not be equally hard working or as well informed as these women if I don’t agree with them”
Where would you ever get such a “notion”? I didn’t see in the ad that if you don’t vote for Turner you are automatically considered beneath these women. Did you? Do those women really think if you vote for Jackson or Susswein that you are lazy and uninformed? You think they see their opinion as the only view in town worthy of consideration? Does this mean that if i don’t agree with someone who has a Jackson or Susswein sign on their lawn that those people must look at me as inferior to them if I were to vote to Turner?
No, your “notion” is you projecting here and this is how you view others, not how they view you. Clearly your racism makes you paranoid or maybe your paranoia makes you racist (can’t really tell).
I hope that one day you learn not to view people in such a broad-based, stereotypical and ignorant manner and that you can avoid projecting your own issues on others.
The Montclair High School Civics and Government Institute will be hosting a community-wide mayoral debate.
The debate will take place April 26 from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the school’s LGI room.
The focus of the debate will be on education in Montclair.
It will be moderated by two high school seniors, Chris Murphy and Gabriella Peterson.
Residents can submit questions for the candidates via email at cgidebate@gmail.com or Twitter @CGIdebate.
cspn55,
Your moral indignation is tiresome. Obviously you are a Turner supporter. Perhaps you are part of her campaign. Regardless, there are many, many people who are troubled by Turner, her positions and yes, frankly, her choice not to support the public schools.
relax people – the fear-based voter! I can be objective about Turner’s positions without basing my opinion solely on where she sends her kids to school. What impresses me about her is the work with the concerned citizens group over the last few years. What impresses me about Susswein is the commttment to the pre-k which i support and other local educational issues. I don’t know anything about Jackson except that he was a former mayor and somebody at some point contributed to the mess we are in, so I am not enamored but plan to learn more about him.
I have not made up my mind on who I will vote for and am in no way related to any slate. I don’t personally know any of them except that Chris Swenson ran the T-ball progam my son was in and has an offbeat sense of humor. Unlike you I plan on listening to the debates, reading as much as possible and making up my mind in the voting booth.
You and Blabalbla can base your vote on some preconceived notion you have and be against someone rather than for someone else based on that preconveived notion. While that attitude stinks for the greater good of the town and probably indicative of why we are so badly managed, it is your right.
I read the press release/ad – like many people, I found it offensive. I didn’t like the fact that this slate usded the wording Montclair Moms, I didn’t like that they took liberties with the names of many organizations. Not just the PTA. The Scool Action Team is also a national 501c3 and the others are as far as I am aware not for profit organizations too. When you are a member of any 501c3 you are not supposed to use your name publicly and identify yourself as a member when you are advocating for a candidate. That is the FEDERAL law, not a local preference. So if you use your name and you endorse a candidate great. When you use your name and identify yourself as a member of a 501c3 and endorse a candidate – BAD. Pretty cut and dry. I found the presumption and the irresponsibility of 115 women using membership in organizations which do not endorse candidates to endorse candidates to be tasteless. That is my opinion. Frankly, I was still waiting to see where the candidates stood on all of the issues. Since the article I am responding to is not for other candidates and is about this ad, posted on a full page in the Montclair Times, declaring that a certain 115 women ad names here ____ who are members of many 501c3 organizations add names of 4 or 5 non profits here ______ endorse these candidates ________ . We are the most informed and hardest working for all children in Montclair and not one of us ever works the system to get our child into a specific school or to get a specific teacher and none of us ever enjoys any extra perks all of you lousey mothers who have to work too much don’t notice. The tone and the PR were bad. After I read the ad I didn’t even care about what anyone from that slate had to say. Was that the goal? What audience were you trying to attract? It had no real content and didn’t really endorse any real issue. Mostly it was big and had the names of 115 moms who have an extra 5 to 20 hours a week to burn. I am not a bad mother because I can’t devote my life to the politics of any of these particular organizations. The sad reality is that many women avoid these groups and these women because of the attitude they have recieved. Some women have tried to volunteer and were not made welcome because they were not a part of a well established clique. I am not the only person who found the ad on many levels to fall flat on its face. I am just one of the few to point it out. I am still deciding who I will vote for but frankly, on its face the ad was written in such a way that it offends many people. So you accomplished getting attention but so far the only people I see defending or supporting this appear to be a part of this group. I don’t see many who have read this and felt influenced to vote for this slate, to the contrary.
Ohhhhh, it’s a stay-at-home mom vs. working-mom thing….
Quietly back slowly out of the room, without making any direct eye contact, and without making any sharp movements.
Since we are discusing the pont of this ad. Who commenting here read the ad and felt influenced to vote for the slate? Who was influenced to change their mind based on this ad? Anyone?
blablabla…take a deep breath. It’s okay. If a bunch of moms want to take out an ad, it’s okay. I’m not a mom and I’m not offended.
(now I’m not going to take my own advice)
“When you are a member of any 501c3 you are not supposed to use your name publicly and identify yourself as a member when you are advocating for a candidate. That is the FEDERAL law, not a local preference. ”
That’s 100% absolutely totally incorrect
https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&rgn=div8&view=text&node=26:7.0.1.1.1.0.1.3&idno=26
Where does it say that?
cspn55,
I’ve spoken with Turner at length and found her to be smart and motivated. But I find her last minute attempts to show that she supports the public schools as pathetic.
You can flail about all you like, but it doesn’t change the fact that Turner is the candidate least likely to keep our schools strong. And that disqualifies her to many, many voters who understand how important our schools are.
Least likely to keep our schools strong? Please explain? The other slates are so pro teacher union and so pro spending money on pre-K they scare me.
I think that in “lunching” all day and bouncing ideas/thoughts off one another the “Montclair Moms” are able to develop a better handle on the pressing issues and what policies might best address those issues. In the same manner, they likely have the best feel for what slate adds the most value. I would not be so critical of this endorsement, maybe instead one should appreciate it and support Turner as well.
“You can flail about all you like, but it doesn’t change the fact that Turner is the candidate least likely to keep our schools strong. And that disqualifies her to many, many voters who understand how important our schools are.”
Other than the private school (read: straw man) argument, what else are you basing your conclusions on ?
They lost me at PTA and I can’t be the only Montclair mom who feels that way. And go blablabla! I agree with most everything you’ve said about how they operate, and I’m sure we aren’t at the same school. Says this white mother.
ROC why don’t you take a gander at the IRS site. 501c3 organizations can advocate for issues that follow the premise of their goals but they must not use the organization’s name or likeness to endorse a candidtate. I will assume you have never actually studied law, policy or had much respect for the purpose of being tax exempt. I promise you, it is the Federal Law and any organization who has members who freely abuse this law often find themselves stripped of their tax exempt status. This is required to be acknowledged in your application for 501c3 status. Whoever the mastermind behind this PR stunt and whoever wrote the copy should be fired. It was an arrogant gesture that could have been tasteful and meaningful. But wasn’t. Moreover – it was a cheap attempt to gain some sort of credibility that was a tad sleazy and at the end of the day illegal. Someone really smart would have never jeopordized the accountability of the candidates in this fashion.
As an elementary school father, I’m not impressed with the Montclair public schools so far, and I know the local private schools have issues. But I am impressed with all the public school volunteers. I do what I can. So many do so much more. It feels like 50 percent of the parents contribute to my kid getting a better education. The PTA and all the other volunteers should be applauded. I can’t imagine what the schools would be like without them.
blablabla–
i’ve read a lot of your anger on patch and now on baristanet. despite having a job you clearly have loads of time to blow off steam on internet sites maybe you should put it all that extra time to better use and start working for the greater good.
btw there is more than just one smart-minded african-american woman on that list. i think your righteous indignation is misplaced. perhaps its not race you’re angry about but perceived elitism? i think you have more to add to the equation than anger and hatred.
“501c3 organizations can advocate for issues that follow the premise of their goals but they must not use the organization’s name or likeness to endorse a candidtate. ”
I actually looked at that today in regards to this conversation. You’re right. But this ad wasn’t placed by the PTA organization, was it? I don’t think when you become a member of a501c3 organization you give up your right to participate in politics. Neither do you give up the right to mention any organization, of which you are a member.
The tax regulations pertaining to 501c3’s do not bind or control the actions of individuals, they only bind the actions of the 501c3’s.