Cecily E. Collier-Montgomery, director of the District’s Office of Campaign Finance, and her general counsel, Kathy Williams, have begun a full-scale investigation into D.C. Public Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee’s solicitation of private foundation grants to finance a pay-for-performance plan. That should make D.C. residents question the competence of these OCF officials.
Robert Vinson Brannum, a former DCPS teacher and president of the D.C. Federation of Civic Associations, filed a complaint June 2 accusing Rhee of violating conflict-of-interest laws, specifically those that prohibit public officials from using their offices for financial gain including the promise of future employment. He asserted Rhee sought to guarantee her job by accepting donations to which foundations attached the caveat that they could withdraw support if there were a change in the reform agenda or a change in school leadership.
On June 4, Collier-Montgomery sent a letter to Rhee indicating there “may be reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred.”
Collier-Montgomery and Williams are the same duo that determined Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray didn’t violate city laws when he used his official letterhead to solicit $20,000 from Comcast for activities at the Democratic National Convention. The OCF ruled that the $10,000 Comcast ultimately provided was not a political contribution — although it went to the D.C. Democratic State Committee — and Gray was acting in his official capacity because he was promoting statehood.
Now, the OCF team suggests Rhee may have broken the law by raising money to increase the salaries of teachers who pledge to work harder to ensure children perform better.
Have mercy!
If the OCF had undertaken a simple review — rather than jumping immediately into a costly, full investigation — they would have discovered that it is standard practice for nonprofits to attach conditions to their donations to ensure funds are spent as intended and for maximum results. Further, Rhee is hardly the first to secure private, restricted grants for DCPS. Moreover, the nonprofits, in this case, have already compromised on their restrictions — allowing some of the money to support the retroactive pay increases for teachers. It is therefore reasonable to believe that other restrictions could be modified, if necessary — a point discernible though a review.
It should be pointed out that any nonprofit dealing with DCPS has good reason to insist on restrictions. The Washington Examiner‘s Bill Myers previously reported a 2005 audit found the school system misspent a federal grant aimed at the children of migrant workers. Actually, DCPS appears to have lied about there even being migrant children in the system.
In 2006, citing general financial mismanagement, the U.S. Department of Education designated the DCPS “high risk.” That same year, the Examiner reported then-Superintendent Clifford B. Janey used grants designated for low-income students to pay for fancy lunches and dinners with high rollers in the city.
Why didn’t those cases prompt Brannum to file a complaint or the prompt the OCF to begin a full investigation?
It’s all politics, all the time.
Brannum blogs about Ward 5 on the Web site hosted by Examiner.com. [While owned by the same parent company, that Web site has no direct connection with The Washington Examiner newspaper.] He and others supporting Gray’s mayoral campaign seem to have morphed into independent political action committees. (Are they acting without the candidate’s knowledge?) They will do whatever is necessary to derail Mayor Adrian M. Fenty’s reelection, including discrediting his education reform platform and sullying Rhee’s reputation.
Sadly, they also appear willing to sacrifice the futures of more than 40,000 children.
That’s pretty low, even by D.C.’s political standards.
Jonetta Rose Barras’s column appears on Monday and Wednesday. She can be contacted at [email protected]
