[Ohiogift] More about state board member conflicts of interest

[anngift at aol.com]

Next week, the people in the articles/editorials will be voting on the gifted operating standards. It is good for gifted advocates to know who is making decisions with regard to the their children. Mr. Jones and Dr. Smith are appointed members. Mr. Williams is elected. Some people may not be able to access the Dispatch editorial, so I've pasted to text in the body of this email. 

- Ann

http://www.ohio.com/news/state-school-board-member-from-akron-represents-nonunion-contractors-who-opened-charter-school-1.448804

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2013/11/29/state-school-board-deserves-scrutiny.html



Government under the radar never is a good idea, but some government agencies simply aren't wellknown to the public. That's the case with Ohio's State Board of Education, which approves detailedrules and academic-content standards for public and private schools.
Few Ohioans can name the state board member representing their communities, much less know theirmember’s views on education issues.


As recent stories by the Akron Beacon Journal showed, the state board is subject to lots of political influence andnot very much public scrutiny.
It's up to Ohioans to decide to watch their state school board more closely, but lawmakers couldimprove transparency, by writing the board into Ohio's lobbying law.


The school board has 19 members, 11 of whom are elected from geographical districts and eight ofwhom are appointed by the governor. The members tend to be politically active and have interests ineducation-related fields.


That's not inherently bad; it makes sense that people interested in education are interested inserving on the state school board. But state ethics rules should spell out clearly what to do whenconflicts arise. While state law explicitly bars members of the legislature from lobbying while inoffice, lobbying law says nothing about members of the state school board.


That leaves open to question the activities of current members who lobby for educationalinterests.
Bryan Williams, a school-board member elected from the Akron area, is a lobbyist for theAssociated Builders and Contractors of Ohio. Among his projects this year was lobbying on behalf ofHouse Bill 168, which would create a revamped post-secondary education option program.
The existing program allows high-school students to take college courses with their local schooldistricts paying the tuition. The bill would expand that to include apprenticeship programs fortrades, through which students could work for contractors, with their wages paid by schooldistricts.
Even if Williams abstains on any state-board votes affecting his lobbying clients, the lobbyingitself allows his independence as a board member to be questioned.


Another state board member, C. Todd Jones, lobbies on behalf of the Association of IndependentColleges & Universities of Ohio. The group of private colleges includes Ohio ChristianUniversity, whose president, Mark S. Smith, also sits on the state school board.


Ohio Christian University has succeeded in collecting about $22 million from public schools —tuition for high-school students earning credit through the post-secondary education optionsprogram — even though state law limits the program to nonsectarian courses and OCU states that allits courses are Bible-based.


The state school board attracts public attention only occasionally, such as an attempt by someboard members nearly a decade ago to put supernatural explanations for creation on par withevolution in the state’s science curriculum.
But lobbying by individual board members should be of equal concern.
The best recipe for a more publicly accountable state school board includes a more-watchfulpublic and clear laws regarding members’ outside activities.
						 				
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/ohiogift/attachments/20131201/5efc7ed4/attachment.html>