|
|||||||
hot topics |
|||||||
Speaking of Leading “For the Legislature to do nothing is not an option.…We have a structural problem in the funding of education in Michigan. We have a structural problem in the funding of all programs in Michigan. The fact is, until the Legislature has the courage to step up and do something about it, we are going to flounder.”
Read impressions from MASA Executive Director William Mayes, who attended the event… Read more speech excerpts… Read the AASA blog entry by AASA President Mark Bielang, Superintendent of Paw Paw Public Schools…
A primer on the campaign finance and tax laws for PTOs and other school supporters who want to engage in the political processBy Andrew C. Richner and Duane L. Tarnacki, Clark Hill PLC With another election season upon us, many parent-teacher organizations and other public school organizations (collectively, “PTOs”) may be asked to take part in political activities such as supporting or opposing candidates for public office or ballot proposals and in other political activities. We thought it appropriate to provide a primer on the campaign finance and tax laws relevant to PTOs as they, and their public school district partners, consider the degree to which they should engage in the political process. Most PTOs are unincorporated associations with self-appointed boards. While sometimes PTOs have made the effort to apply for and qualify as tax-exempt organizations under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) or other provisions of the Code, often the tax status of PTOs is unclear. Also varying from school district to school district is the degree to which financial arrangements and governance of PTOs are intertwined with the schools. These factors can affect whether PTOs can engage in political activity. We describe the various tax status scenarios below. Section 501(c)(3) OrganizationsTax-exempt organizations under IRC Section 501(c)(3) are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective office. This prohibition would extend to candidate endorsements. Therefore, any PTO that is tax-exempt under 501(c)(3) may not endorse candidates for school board. A Section 501(c)(3) organization can contribute funds to a non-501(c)(3) organization, but only to support 501(c)(3) activities of the latter organization. The 501(c)(3) organization must avoid funding, participating in, or having attributed to it, any non-501(c)(3) appropriate activities. If a PTO that is tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) is going to engage in political activities, it should implement measures to comply with these requirements. Such measures would include segregating 501(c)(3) funds from other funds and including a disclaimer on written materials relating to the Section 501(c)(3) organizations. Section 501(c)(4) OrganizationsTax-exempt organizations under IRC Section 501(c)(4) may endorse candidates and/or ballot proposals. Such an organization may make political contributions, but only if its primary purpose is civic or social welfare in nature and it only incidentally gets involved in political campaigns. Note that contributions by individuals to a Section 501(c)(4) organization are not deductible as charitable contributions. Public BodiesPublic bodies (e.g., governmental instrumantiolites like school districts) are prohibited by the Michigan Campaign Finance Act from spending public funds or other resources for campaign activities, including for the election or defeat of candidates or ballot proposals. If a PTO “is primarily funded by or through state or local authority, which body exercises governmental or proprietary authority or performs a governmental or proprietary function,” the PTO may be considered a public body. Thus, a PTO must make it consistently clear that it is independent of the school district. Any school district accounts designated for a PTO should be kept separately from accounts holding school district funds. The PTO should have exclusive control over its funds. The PTO should not use the school district federal taxpayer identification number or state tax-exempt number for purchases or other purposes. A public body may endorse a ballot proposal as long as such endorsement does not entail the expenditure of public funds. Whether this power also extends to the endorsement of candidates is less certain. Section 527 Political OrganizationsIf a PTO’s primary activity is to make expenditures associated with a candidate for public office or a ballot proposal, it could be considered a political organization under Section 527 of the IRC and subject to applicable reporting requirements if it wishes to claim tax-exempt status under that section. A PTO can make contributions to candidate or ballot campaigns, or make independent expenditures in support of candidates or ballot proposals, so long as it obeys campaign finance laws. If a PTO uses its funds to urge the election or defeat of a candidate or ballot proposal, the PTO must register as a committee (which would be a Section 527 organization) and file reports with the Michigan Secretary of State under the Michigan Campaign Finance Act. If the expenditures are coordinated with a candidate committee, then those expenditures would be treated as contributions to the candidate committee and subject to contribution limits. Taxable EntitiesIf a PTO is not a Section 501(c)(4) civic or social welfare organization, Section 527 organization or a governmental entity, it would likely be a taxable entity and must file a corporate tax return and pay income tax on net revenues. Like a tax-exempt entity (with the exception of Section 501(c)(3) organizations), a taxable organization may endorse candidates or ballot proposals. It may also make contributions to candidate or ballot proposal committees, or make independent expenditures urging the election of candidates or ballot proposals, but would be subject to the registration and reporting requirements as a political committee as described above. A corporate entity, whether for-profit or not, is prohibited from making direct contributions to candidate committees under both federal and state law, but could make independent expenditures supporting candidates, subject to campaign law registration and reporting requirement, under the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. FEC.
Michigan Government Television (MGTV) announces a statewide initiative to promote student voter-education through Michigan’s public and private schools. MGTV has received a $42,000.00 grant from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC). The funds will underwrite MGTV’s partnership with Leland Schools to recruit students in rural and urban areas statewide to participate in the National Student Parent Mock Election (NSPME), the largest mock election in the country. In addition, students will also be invited to participate in many pre-election activities including live MGTV interview programs with top-of-the-Michigan-ticket candidates. Michigan School Districts are invited to participate in any of the offered programs, including:
Schools should contact MGTV if they want to participate by calling 517-373-4250 or e-mail mgtv@mgtv.org. Leland Schools has been responsible for coordinating the involvement of Michigan’s schools in the NSPME since 2005 and plans a regional student rally involving up to 10 local schools with political candidates just prior to the NSPME election on October 28. “This grant money will allow us to involve so many more students and make their election experience so much more meaningful,” said Leland School Superintendent Mike Hartigan. MGTV will also work with existing civic-education-related groups like The Michigan Center for Civic Education to involve the greatest number of students in pre-election programs and voting in the NSPME. “What a great way for Michigan’s students to come together and learn about the importance of voting and civic participation,” said MGTV Executive Director, Bill Trevarthen.
By Charles Haynes, First Amendment CenterNot so very long ago, “separation of church and state” was as American as motherhood and apple pie. Despite perennial debates over the degree of separation, public support for the principle itself has been strong for much of our history. But in today’s culture-war climate, the very mention of “separation of church and state” is enough to trigger a bitter argument over the relationship of government and religion in the United States. Consider the current fight over the social studies curriculum in Texas. For months now the Democratic minority on the State Board of Education has been sparring with the Republican majority (mostly social conservatives) over what to teach students about the establishment clause of the First Amendment. The board recently voted down a Democratic proposal calling for students to examine the reasons the Founding Fathers “protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others” — arguably the mildest possible definition of the “no establishment” mandated by the First Amendment. A conservative member of the board wants instead for students to “contrast the Founders’ intent relative to the wording of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause, with the popular term ‘Separation of church and state.’” The tug-of-war in Texas over what students should learn about the First Amendment is the latest chapter in a decades-long crusade by some Christian conservatives to denigrate “separation of church and state” as an invention of the courts that ignores the intent of the Founders to create a Christian nation. The phrase, they argue, doesn’t appear anywhere in the Constitution. While it’s true that the words “separation of church and state” are not in the First Amendment, the principle of separation is at the very heart of the establishment clause. By barring Congress from enacting any law that would have anything to do with an establishment of religion, the Founders clearly intended to keep the federal government, at least, out of the religion business. If that isn’t “separation,” what is? That doesn’t mean, of course, that the Founders agreed on the application of separation — any more than Americans agree about what separation should look like today. Some voted for the establishment clause to keep the federal government from interfering with state establishments (where, as in Massachusetts and Connecticut, state funds supported favored religious sects). Others, including James Madison, the primary drafter of the Bill of Rights, supported full disestablishment on all levels of government, arguing that entanglement of church and state had been a leading source of persecution and coercion throughout history. Madison settled for half a loaf in 1789, when Congress passed the First Amendment, although the church-state separation he argued for was accomplished in all states by 1833. His vision for religious freedom under the federal Constitution wasn’t fully realized until the 20th century when the Supreme Court applied the establishment clause to all levels of government through the 14th Amendment. Ironically, many of the evangelical Christian opponents of separation in Texas today belong to religious groups that were once among the strongest defenders of a high and impregnable wall of separation between church and state. Protestant dissenters in Virginia, for example, were the ground forces in the successful political battle to pass Thomas Jefferson’s Statute for Religious Freedom in 1786 — the first time in history a legislature voted to separate church from state. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, many Protestants waved the banner of church-state separation in their crusade to contain the influence of the Roman Catholic Church in America. As late as 1960, presidential candidate John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, felt compelled to travel to Houston to convince a roomful of Protestant ministers that he was fully committed to the “separation of church and state.” The story of Kennedy’s religious test is a reminder that the principle of church-state separation has a checkered history — a history that gives the establishment clause a bad name in some quarters. Attacks on Catholics in the name of “separation of church and state” were unfair and unjust. And contemporary attempts to exclude religion from public life in the name of “separation” are also unfair and unjust. But abuses of the principle, past and present, should not obscure the vital importance of church-state separation for religious freedom. What students in Texas (and everywhere else) need to learn is that by separating church from state, the First Amendment protects the independence and integrity of both religion and government — thereby guaranteeing liberty of conscience for us all. Charles C. Haynes was a MASA Keynote speaker in 2008 and is director of the Religious Freedom Education Project at the Newseum, in Washington, D.C. Contact him at chaynes@freedomforum.org.
At the same time that Michigan voters will be asked whether or not to call a constitutional convention, voters will be asked to elect a new chief executive for state government. In addition to Governor Granholm, three other statewide-elected executive branch officials (lieutenant governor, secretary of state, and attorney general) will be required to exit their respective offices due to the term limitation provisions provided for in Article V, Section 30. This complete turnover in the executive branch of state government will usher in new officials that will be responsible for executing state laws and delivering services to Michigan residents. "A constitutional convention, if called, would likely examine the broad issues dealing with the powers of the governor and other officials as they pertain to the structure and organization of the executive branch of government," stated Craig Thiel CRC's Director of State Affairs. For 47 years, Michigan state government has operated under a constitutional framework that centralizes executive power in a single office and provides for a strong governor. With the exception of two amendments to Article V, the original constitutional provisions governing the operations of the executive branch remain basically intact. Despite this consistency over the years, a number of issues might be considered by a potential constitutional convention charged with looking at Article V dealing with: executive reorganization powers, single versus plural executive, filling legislative vacancies, office vacancies of executive officials, the governor's role in the state budget process, and the governor's appointment powers. While it is likely that a con-con would examine these and other issues related to Article V of the 1963 Constitution, Craig Thiel added, "Nothing in Article V has prevented the executive branch from governing effectively since its enactment nearly 50 years ago and no issues have risen to the level of crisis that would suggest immediate modification is necessary." In looking at each article of the Michigan Constitution, CRC takes no position on the question of calling a constitutional convention. It is hoped that examination of the matters identified in this paper will promote discussion of vital constitutional issues and assist citizens in deliberations on the question of calling a constitutional convention. Article V -- Executive Branch can be accessed at www.crcmich.org/PUBLICAT/2010s/2010/rpt36008.html. The series of constitutional issues papers is being released on roughly a bi-weekly schedule and can be accessed at www.crcmich.org/election.
These guidelines were developed with input from the House and Senate Fiscal Agencies, the State Budget Office, and representatives from the Michigan School Business Officials. In order to assure compliance with the statutory requirements, all data elements defined in the Guidelines must be available on the district’s Main Home Page in the form and manner described in the Guidelines. The data must be posted within 30 days after the local, intermediate or PSA board has adopted its annual operating budget for the 2010-11 school fiscal year. Early implementation of these Guidelines is encouraged.
The program is designed to save Michigan’s K-12 schools energy and money, enhance educational opportunities for students, and create green collar jobs modernizing our schools. What Schools Get Program Details: Once accepted to the Energy Efficiency Program, schools will receive an investment-grade energy audit conducted by a licensed Michigan engineer - a $10,000 value. The professional engineering and architectural firms partnered with Energy Works offer independent third-party advice to schools about their buildings. They do not sell equipment or have a contracting business. More than a simple walk-thru audit, these audits provide a detailed engineering analysis of your school that will identify specific cost-effective improvements that could save your school thousands of dollars each year! With the audit report completed, the Energy Works Team will assist in making an Energy Action Plan for your school that identifies your priorities and develops a time line for achieving savings. Once the Energy Action Plan is complete, a $5,000 cash matching grant is available towards the first $10,000 in energy efficiency improvements! In addition, participating schools will receive a new energy-focused Curriculum Support Guide and teacher Professional Development. These new lesson plans will cover energy basics, energy efficiency, and renewable energy in a hands-on, inquiry based format. Enhancing the new lessons, participating schools will receive a free Laboratory Kit including interactive equipment for the students, such as: a light meter, a watt meter, a solar panel kit, and a wind turbine model. To learn more, visit: www.EnergyWorksMichigan.org.
Launches New Interactive Mapping App on Connect Michigan WebsiteThe Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) announced in May the completion of the first round of broadband maps aimed at promoting technology development and increasing high-speed Internet throughout the state. The maps, which are now accessible online at www.connectmi.org, are a product of the Connect Michigan broadband initiative, a public-private partnership between the MPSC and Connected Nation, a national nonprofit focused on technology expansion in underserved areas. “Today marks an important day in Michigan: a complete, interactive broadband map is now available for customers, Internet service providers, and policymakers,” said Orjiakor Isiogu, chairman of the Michigan Public Service Commission. “This is an important first step as the state seeks to target resources to those areas of the state without high-speed Internet service.” Connect Michigan has been able to gather and verify state-specific data on the availability, speed, location, and type of broadband services as well as the adoption and availability of broadband at community anchor institutions across the state. The meeting of this milestone is a result of a several-month long process of aggressive outreach to providers and community anchor institutions across the state, and extensive verification and validation of the data collected from these entities. These initial maps include data from 86 state providers, and key findings include:
A public demonstration of the program’s new interactive mapping feature, BroadbandStat, was held via webinar to encourage citizen feedback and to demonstrate the broadband expansion scenario building that can be achieved using the tool. Connected Nation’s GIS team will continuously refine the maps as more data is gathered, relying upon citizen feedback as part of the validation process. Residents, businesses, and any interested party with knowledge of the state broadband landscape are asked to go to Connect Michigan’s website to provide input that will be used to verify and ensure the highest level of accuracy for the broadband maps. On www.Connectmi.org, those who do not currently have broadband access can add their name and address to a secure database of households that would like to subscribe if given the opportunity. The collected information supports the creation of the broadband inventory map that will assist in expanding broadband delivery to residents across the state. “We are excited to offer this interactive app to the citizens of Michigan. With this new website, citizens can play an active role in the validation of the data and more importantly, use it as a resource to search provider options and draw attention to the areas that remain unserved,” explains Brian Mefford, CEO of Connect Michigan’s parent organization, Connected Nation. “The goal of our nonprofit organization is to expand broadband access to areas where it doesn’t exist and improve the quality of service in areas that are already served. Michigan’s newly completed map is the first major step in this process.” As the designated entity for broadband mapping and planning in the state of Michigan, Connect Michigan is a public-private partnership uniting local governments, businesses, and citizens in the goal of increasing broadband service in the state’s unserved and underserved areas. In December 2009, Connect Michigan was awarded $1.8 million in Recovery Act funding in an effort to increase the availability and use of high-speed Internet service in the state. The funding enables the state to collect data to develop and maintain a detailed map of existing broadband service over two years and conduct planning efforts for a period of five years. These efforts are in compliance with the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for the State Broadband Data and Development grant program (SBDD).
|
|||||||
MASA news: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
AASA news: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
in case you missed it: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
MDE news: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
leader resource: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
leader resource: |
|||||||
|
|||||||
professional development: |
|||||||
Registration now open for members and exhibitors. Visit gomasa.org today. |
|||||||
| Michigan Association
of School Administrators 1001 Centennial Way, Ste 300 Lansing, MI 48917 www.gomasa.org | Contact us |
|||||||