A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

Sixteen Years of Masson’s Blog

by 10 Comments

My first post was 16 years ago. I can’t say this blog is still going strong, but it’s still going. When I started, I kind of had in mind a resource that Hoosiers could use to comment on topics of the day and maybe provide some links to legal resources, commentary on legislation, and discussion of legal opinions. With respect to the legislature, in part, I wanted to show that there was more going on with the General Assembly than just the stuff that hit the headlines. I was also inspired by the national blogs that were starting to go strong back then but whereas that space already seemed crowded, the state level seemed wide open. On top of that, my experience at Legislative Services (only 5 years prior at that point) could be helpful.

Early on, I had the notion that maybe I’d recruit some friends with other areas of expertise: business, science, medicine, etc. That never panned out. I was a little surprised by what seemed to draw traffic and what didn’t. People were *really* passionate about Daylight Saving Time. I could put up a quick hit on DST and get a lot of traffic. Meanwhile, a deep dive into a complicated piece of legislation would be less popular. It gave me some sympathy for what news organizations must struggle with.

Social media — mainly Facebook and Twitter came along — and made it easier for me to scratch my writing itch by just posting something quick there. So, I wrote less here. Which was probably just as well because that’s where people re-located in any case. It wasn’t just me – the entire blogosphere shrank. But, I keep plugging along – usually going through a burst of productivity when the General Assembly introduces its bills. I’m happy to still have this place to write and still interact with some old friends.

At the moment, I feel like social media isn’t giving me what it used to. The algorithms seem to feed me angry political stuff which gets old after awhile. I don’t have a good sense of whether my friends are still posting about their kids or what they had for lunch or cat pictures or whatever. I don’t see that stuff, but it could be that the algorithm buries it. So, maybe I’ll be writing more here. Maybe not. We’ll see. That’s been one of the joys of having a blog – I can do it when I feel like, and not do it when I don’t feel like it. For those of you who are still dropping by, thank you!

Executive Order 20-48: Color Coded County Assessments

by 3 Comments

Gov. Holcomb has issued Executive Order 20-48 which rescinds the “Stage 5” COVID mitigation order and replaces it with the “Color Coded County Assessment” order. This relies on the State’s color code system where it averages two numbers for each county. The first number is the weekly number of new cases per 100,000 residents in a county. Blue is less than 10 cases per 100,000 residents. Yellow is between 10 and 99. Orange is between 100 and 199. And red is 200 and above. Blue gets you zero, yellow – 1, orange – 2, and red – 3.

The second number is the seven day positivity rate for a county. Positivity rate is number of positive cases divided by number of tests. This is important because a low positivity rate gives you more confidence that you’re identifying most or all of the cases in your community. Blue (0) is less than 5%. Yellow (1) is between 5% and 10%. Orange (2) is between 10% and 15%. And red (3) is above 15%.

You average these two numbers to get your county score/color. Blue for 0 and 0.5, yellow for 1 and 1.5, orange for 2 and 2.5, and red for 3. The executive order requires the Indiana State Department of Health (ISDH) to monitor these metrics as well as hospitalizations, available critical care beds & ventilators, and testing & contact tracing ability. The order also makes some recommendations to citizens: follow CDC guidelines, self-quarantine when sick or having been in contact with someone symptomatic, and be vigilant if you’re in a higher risk category or in contact with such people. Many of the old stage 5 requirements remain in place: Social distancing and masks are part of the order. Masks are not required in private businesses where maintaining distances of 6 feet is feasible.  Some exemptions are specifically authorized – among other things, where a medical condition that prevents wearing a face mask. (This is the one the anti-maskers are most likely to abuse by lying.) Masks aren’t required when seated at an establishment to eat or drink. Masks are required at schools for students grade 3 and above as well as all staff members. However, if 6 feet of space can be maintained, masks aren’t required. And, if 3 feet of space can be maintained and students are all facing the same direction, masks aren’t required during in-person instruction time.

The color coded approach will limit the size of social gatherings and events based on the county’s color. Larger social gatherings are permitted but the organizer has to submit a safety plan and have it approved by the local health department. In blue counties, social gatherings can have up to 250 people, yellow counties up to 100, orange counties up to 50, and red counties up to 25. In yellow counties, local officials and health officials are expected to meet regularly to talk about potential actions to decrease the spread of COVID. In orange counties, there is the same expectation. In addition, IHSAA sporting events are limited to 25% capacity. In red counties, local officials are also expected to talk and, in addition, to consider limiting hours of operation for bars and restaurants. There’s a lot of encouragement for red counties: the Governor encourages events to be cancelled, encourages businesses to limit employee congregation in public areas, and encourages restaurants and retail businesses to promote curbside pickup. Senior care center activities must be suspended or cancelled.

(I probably mock the “encouragement” more than I should. Yes, there’s a part of me that wants The Law to take forceful action to compel people to act in a way that won’t spread this deadly disease. But the reality is that the rule of law depends heavily on voluntary compliance. If you have to use force in a high percentage of cases to obtain compliance, your government is in trouble. If our leaders were speaking with one voice on the appropriate actions citizens should take, I think we’d be in better shape than if we have mixed messages even if some of those messages come with legal compulsion.)

The order does come with some enforcement provisions for business. Verbal order to business owner followed by written cease and desist order to business followed by the local department of health issuing an order to close the business. There don’t seem to be explicit enforcement provisions for situations not involving businesses but I presume, for example, the courts could issue injunctions in non-business situations. Also, disaster emergency law under which the Governor is issuing these orders has some general penalty provisions which might come into play even though they aren’t specifically articulated in the order.

 

Indiana State Department of Health Agency Report to the General Assembly

by 1 Comment

I’ll be candid, I haven’t read this entire document, but it seemed worth sharing: 2020 ISDH Emergency Response Report (pdf). I found the link in the minutes to the October 14, 2020, interim committee on public health. I guess I would have expected that entire meeting to be devoted to COVID and making recommendations to the General Assembly on legislation to address the pandemic which is currently spiraling out of control. (But, the legislature isn’t exactly nimble – the agenda and the notice of the committee meeting were probably prepared a month before based on planning which happened before that. In August, the pandemic felt kind of stable.)

Anyway, what I found probably most interesting in the ISDH document (at p. 18) was a chart of suspended, waived, or modified rules and statutes. For example, a prohibition on automated dialing was suspended for the purpose of allowing the Fairbanks Study to call people to determine the extent of COVID spread. There are several pages of these modified rules, allowing more remote services, modifying timelines,  and relaxing rules to account for the fact that more resources are being thrown at COVID. The document also has a chart (p. 13) listing reduced or suspended health services (e.g. audiology assessment services were reduced or changed to virtual, routine food safety inspections were suspended, some immunization services were suspended, etc.).

As far as future recommendations, the report suggested to the General Assembly:

Related to ongoing response operations and other pre-COVID public health initiatives, IDOH recommends that Indiana consider a long-term solution for expanding some telehealth services on an ongoing basis. The temporary expansion during the COVID-19 pandemic has proven to be invaluable in supporting healthcare delivery during the public health emergency when our healthcare system was facing challenges keeping patients and providers connected, especially for patients with chronic medical conditions or circumstances where a patient did not feel safe with a traditional face-to-face visit or in-home services. Delivery of services through telehealth expands access to care, streamlines efficiency and increases convenience for both patients and provider and is expected to be an improvement in service delivery going forward.

Which is fine, as far as it goes. What I wonder is whether the committee on public health or some other arm of the General Assembly is studying masking, social distancing, and other tools for limiting the spread and damage caused by the pandemic and — probably the important part — how best to obtain public buy-in and compliance with such requirements or recommendations.

 

General Assembly Declines To Do Bare Minimum To Slow COVID Spread

by 5 Comments

I’m open to correct that the Indiana General Assembly is acting more responsibly than this brief AP story suggests, but it looks like they’re unwilling to do the bare minimum to slow the spread of COVID. Specifically, they’re unwilling to commit to a rule requiring that members of the General Assembly wear masks at the State House when they reconvene for organization day on Tuesday.  Just as a reminder: this is what our new COVID cases are doing.

This is probably an indicator that we won’t be getting a lot of scientifically sound public health legislation this session.

Edited to add: I occasionally browse the bioRxiv COVID pre-print server for biology. Just after I wrote this post, I came across this study entitled “Association of social distancing and masking with risk of COVID-19.” From the abstract:

We examined the association of community-level social distancing measures and individual masking with risk of predicted COVID-19 in a large prospective U.S. cohort study of 198,077 participants. Individuals living in communities with the greatest social distancing had a 31% lower risk of predicted COVID-19 compared with those living in communities with poor social distancing. Self-reported masking was associated with a 63% reduced risk of predicted COVID-19 even among individuals living in a community with poor social distancing.

This politically-motivated, performative anti-masking is hurting people.

Holcomb Revising State COVID Plan

by 4 Comments

As COVID spirals out of control in Indiana and with re-election secured, Governor Holcomb is apparently revamping the COVID restriction system for Indiana. Instead of the five stage re-opening plan announced earlier this year, there will be a county-by-county set of restrictions based on whether the counties have a red, orange, yellow, or blue coding on the State’s dashboard. The color coding is based on the county’s number of weekly cases per capita and its positivity rate.  According to news reports, social events in orange counties will be 50 or fewer (unless there is a health department approved plan) and extracurricular school events will be limited to 25%.  Red counties will be limited to social events with 25 or fewer (unless there is a health department approved plan), senior care activities are suspended, and school events are limited to participants and parents. I haven’t seen the actual order from the Governor yet, so this is me paraphrasing the newspaper summary — omitting the “ought to” provisions and descriptions of things that are already permitted. (For example, “Local officials can consider limiting hours at bars, nightclubs and restaurants” — they can already do that.)

The mask mandate will remain in place. I don’t see it in the material I’ve linked above, but I thought I read something about the State making money available to communities that enforce the mask mandate. I’ll be interested to see what that’s about.

The number of new cases per day were holding relatively steady until about the beginning of October when things went screaming upward. Our death rates are up, our new cases are up, the hospitals are starting to feel the strain. It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Gov. Holcomb would have felt more freedom to act sooner if the election had been earlier. The right wing of his party is howling that having to wear a mask is tyranny and the Democrats weren’t likely to give him much credit regardless of what he did. I would have liked to see more political courage from him. But the hell of it is that it shouldn’t require that much courage.  Rather than fighting him on this, Hoosiers should welcome guidance on how to get past a pandemic that’s cost 4,500 lives in our state alone.  Instead, a shocking number of Hoosiers can’t manage to keep a mask over their nose.

There’s encouraging news about a vaccine, but it’s far from a sure thing and it’s going to take awhile to roll out even if things go perfectly — which they won’t, because our federal government is an incompetent shit show at the moment. So, this winter is going to be tough.

Social Media as Fun House Mirror

by 3 Comments

None of us has the god-like perspective it would take to be truly objective. All of our experiences are mediated by the time & place in which we find ourselves, our past experiences, the gaps in our knowledge, and any number of other biasing factors. Media we consume add their biases — and it’s not necessarily a left or right thing. Even journalists striving to be objective are limited by space – and so have to pick & choose which facts or what context to mention and what to leave out. Newspapers and broadcasts are going to include deviations from the norm (man-bites-dog rather than dog-bites-man) and stories that increase subscriptions or get viewers to watch through the commercials.

But, it seems to me (and this is hardly original) that social media algorithms are taking this to the next level. I hesitate to make too much of this because I think there is a tendency to fear-monger new trends and technologies. (“Comic books are ruining our youth!”)  The algorithms are designed to increase engagement between the user and the social media platform. Emotional experiences are more likely to keep the user’s attention and negative emotions are easier to provoke than positive ones. So, you end up with a lot of people spending a lot of time viewing the world through the lens of a platform designed to keep you coming back by making you anxious or angry.

I hesitate to make this analogy because I don’t have any expertise in mental health, but I wonder if this is in some ways analogous to what an individual goes through with depression. Their brain filters out the positive and emphasizes the negative, creating a feeling of hopelessness. Only in this case, it’s not brain chemistry doing the filtering but a business that wants you paying attention long enough to show you ads.

For what it’s worth, I’ve spent the last few days without checking Twitter or Facebook where I’m typically a heavy user. I’m not ready to judge that as good or bad, but it’s different. This will auto-post to Twitter. I don’t think I have anything similar set up on Facebook.

Election Day 2020

by 11 Comments

I haven’t posted much other than School Board stuff in a long time, and I suppose this will touch on that as well. But I’m not exactly “focused” this election day morning. So I thought I’d just write a little bit and see what comes up. The big ticket item today is obviously Biden v. Trump. The available indicators look good for Biden, but the folks who recognize Trump for the absolute shit-show of a President that he has been for the last four years are jumpy. We’ve been hurt before.

A thought that caught my attention was a Biden campaign ad that focused on America as an “idea.” There are probably a lot of variations on exactly what that idea might be, but at the end of the day, it allows inclusion of people who buy into that idea. I’ve spent a lot of time over the years writing about how so much hinges on “us” versus “them,” who falls into those categories, and how one goes about moving between those categories. If Biden is correct that America is an idea, then the only thing that’s really required is (to paraphrase the Captain from Cool Hand Luke) that a person get their mind right. Trump’s vision of America has more to do with what the Nazis called blood and soil. It’s a place and a people. Those people are American by virtue of their ancestory and where they were born, not their belief in an idea. In fact, if they are from the right place or have the right parents, their ideas can be completely antithetical to what the Founders had in mind when they wrote the Declaration and the Constitution, and still be deemed more American than those who have kept faith with our Founding. Every election seems more consequential than the last – like we keep playing a game of double or nothing. I’m not sure if the stakes have always been as high as what I perceive, but this time it seems real enough. I think 1996 was the last time I wasn’t wound up very tightly during a Presidential election.

I haven’t been paying much attention to the House of Representatives races. On the national level, it looks like the Democrats have the House in the bag. On the state level, it’s been awhile since Indiana’s Congressional districts seemed competitive. I suppose that’s part of a red-shift in state politics and partly gerrymandering that followed the 2010 census. Indiana’s 1st (Lake County) and 7th (Marion County) districts will be Democratic. The 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 8th, and 9th will be Republican. And the 5th looks to be the only one that’s up in the air. It’s a fight for the seat being given up by Susan Brooks. Republican Victoria Spartz and Democrat Christina Hale seem to be pretty close. If I had to guess, Hale will pull it out. The suburban vote has been breaking against Trump lately and I think that will pull Hale across the finish line. But I’m horrible at these predictions.  Indiana doesn’t have any Senate races. Nationally, it looks like the Democrats have a decent chance of taking control.  The incumbent Democratic Senators most at risk look to be Doug Jones (Alabama) and to a lesser extent, Gary Peters (Michigan.) The Republicans seem to be at risk of losing seats in Arizona, Colorado, Georgia (x2), Iowa, Maine, Montana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Arkansas, Kansas, and Texas.

On the State level, I assume the General Assembly is still firmly under Republican control. The House Democrats can hope to deprive the Republicans of a supermajority, but I expect that’s about it. (Although, it looks like Todd Huston — the current Speaker — is in an exciting race that could shake up the House leadership.) The Democratic Caucus in the Indiana Senate will, I predict, continue to be a relatively lonely place. I haven’t heard too much about our local races – I assume the various incumbents will keep their seats. The Governor’s race could have been interesting if Woody Myers had gotten off to a smoother start. The roll out was fairly rocky and, at the time, Gov. Holcomb looked more or less untouchable. However, his support on the right wing of his party began to deteriorate due to his relatively sane COVID response — the masks-are-tyranny crowd are defecting to Rainwater. I tend to believe that defection is mostly illusory — if the Myers campaign had looked more threatening, the Rainwater Republicans would return to the Holcomb fold.

For me, the big state-wide race is Weinzapfel v. Rokita for Attorney General. I’ve never much cared for Rokita in any of his positions. He doesn’t seem to be well-liked among other Republicans, let alone Democrats. But he took advantage of Hill’s groping scandal and Holcomb’s somewhat tenuous control of the State party to win the Republican nomination. Meanwhile, Weinzapfel is a serious candidate who would likely do a good job as Attorney General. However, the fact remains that this is a pretty red state, so it’s going to be an uphill climb for any Democrat — even in a generally favorable year for Democrats. I’m crossing my fingers on this one.

And then there is my school board race. Fifteen people running for four spots. I’m hopeful, and I’m a competitive person, so I’d really like to win. Losing will sting for a bit. But, in the bigger picture, my life won’t change much one way or the other. I’d like to think enough of myself that I think the school will be worse off if I don’t pull this out. But the reality is that the schools will probably be fine whatever happens. Either way — and I know this is a cliche — but the good wishes of folks in the community have really meant a lot to me. The enthusiasm of friends has been gratifying and a little surprising (in a good way!) My wife is simply a juggernaut. Give her a solid project, and she’ll organize the hell out of it. My campaign would be a shambles but for her. The kids seem to be getting a kick out of their friends mentioning seeing my ad on YouTube.

Crossing my fingers and hoping for good things all across the board.

Behind the Scenes of a Political Campaign

by 2 Comments

Usually, you have to find a disgruntled campaign staffer for a behind the scenes look at a political campaign. But, here at Masson-for-School-Board, we run a lean operation. Unless Amy is looking to sell a book, it’s going to have to be me telling the tale. I doubt this will change the vote count very much. With early voting having been under way for the better part of a month, I expect almost anyone interested in reading this has already voted. Maybe something for posterity or of interest to my regular blog readers.

First, the context: I’m a non-incumbent looking to get on the board of a school ranked top in the state which has a teaching staff ranked fourth best in the nation. The current board and administration have largely been in place for ten years or more. The finances and strength of the school are better now than when they took over. For a challenger in a typical political race, the normal approach would be to attack the record of the incumbent. That’s an uphill battle when things are going reasonably well. But, with four slots to fill, the context is a little different; particularly with one of the incumbents not campaigning. It’s fortunate that I don’t have to pursue the standard two-person approach.  Dissatisfaction with the school is not really what I’m about. I’m a huge supporter of our schools, and think I have a skill set that might be valuable in that position. I want to get elected, but if I don’t, the schools will be fine.

The Plan

With that as the background, I made the decision to focus on my experience as an attorney with a background in local government law, my history of volunteering in support of the school, a desire to improve the school by advancing the strategic plan I participated in developing, and my generally friendly demeanor. However, in a crowded down-ballot race, simply having good qualities probably isn’t enough to get elected. In an ideal world, every citizen goes into the voting booth having carefully weighed the pros and cons of each candidate on the ballot before casting his or her vote. In our world, however, there will be a sizable number of voters who go into the voting booth with Trump v. Biden on their mind and will be absolutely befuddled by any school board race, let alone one that presents them with fifteen candidates. Name recognition will be important.

In my mind, the big endorsement available for this race was from the teacher’s association — the WLEA. So, I definitely wanted to pursue that. One of the items on the WLEA interview questionnaire asked whether the candidate would accept PAC money if the candidate received the teacher’s association endorsement. Even though it became a source of consternation later (more on that below), I assume most of the candidates who interviewed for the endorsement stated (as did I) that they would accept such assistance. For my part, in addition to genuinely wanting the support of the teachers, I also wanted assistance in getting some name recognition. The unfortunate political reality is that name recognition probably earns more votes than policy positions or other substantive qualities. I felt, correctly as it turned out, I had a good shot at getting the WLEA endorsement: I had worked shoulder-to-shoulder with a number of WLEA members on such things as the 2017 referendum and strategic plan workshops. And I’ve been a full-throated supporter of their efforts to improve teacher pay, limit diversion of state funds to charters and vouchers, and move away from wasteful high-stakes testing.

The final, and maybe biggest, arrow in my quiver is being married to an inveterate organizer who is also extraordinarily tech savvy. I don’t know if I’ll win or lose, but my wife is a born campaign manager. We put together what feels like a pretty good social media campaign for this kind of race. We’ll see if that translates to votes.

The PAC

One of the big wildcards from this race came from the political action committee I mentioned earlier. If you haven’t heard anything else about this race, you’ve probably heard about the RDP PAC. In a 15 person campaign with no defining issues that seem to encompass all of the candidates, it seems to be the only handle our local news outlets have been able to get in terms of a narrative for the race. They’ve run a couple of stories on it. Sometime between the close of the candidate filing window but before the WLEA endorsements were made, RDP PAC determined to provide money to promote whoever the teacher’s association ended up endorsing. The PAC sent out a ham-fisted fundraising letter that conjured the specter of the 90s when West Lafayette stumbled through a disgruntled school board and the troubled tenure (not to mention litigious termination) of Stella Battagianis. The letter warned ominously that selection of unnamed candidates might  return us to those days. Basically, “send some money in support of whoever the WLEA endorses, and we can keep the good times going. (Don’t send money and the bad old days might return.)” On its own, that letter probably would have been inconsequential. The distribution couldn’t have been very wide. It probably went to some people, but I don’t know anyone who received it in the wild. A PAC campaign finance disclosure revealed about a dozen contributors, and it’s hard to believe many of the names on the list would’ve needed that letter to contribute.

But the letter was not to die in obscurity. Instead, it got a signal boost by a post in a local Facebook group whereupon a sort of Streisand Effect took hold. The act of decrying the letter served to amplify it. And this group made a bit of a meal of the thing. As I mentioned above, given the strength of our schools, I thought it would be challenging to win the race by being very critical of them. I think this PAC letter (as amplified by local news and social media) made that approach more challenging.  Remember that the letter itself was non-committal as to who the scary candidates might be. With so many people running, it could be any of them or none of them in particular. But it created a risk that some of the non-incumbent candidates might self-identify themselves as being analogs of their mid-90s counterparts if they protested the letter too much and/or were perceived as being too critical of the apparently successful West Lafayette schools.

Whether the PAC money itself will prove to be of any use remains to be seen. But, as I write this, its efforts don’t appear to be terribly influential. As of the October filing date, it had spent about $8,000. (The Journal & Courier inflated that number by more than 200%, mistaking the “cash on hand” line item for expenditures.) That money was spent on signs for other candidates (I already had mine from four years ago), some sign-toppers indicating the WLEA endorsement, a four-person sign that doesn’t seem to have wide distribution, and a text to voters urging support of the four WLEA-endorsed candidates. Whether or how it will spend the remainder of the money it raised, I have no idea. Maybe it will blanket the airwaves with ads. Maybe it will give every voter in the district root beer and pie. Maybe it will do nothing. In the final analysis, I might end up taking more of a hit from the WLEA endorsement and its PAC association than I benefit. But, you make your decisions and you take your lumps. We’ll see what happens.

Other Strategies

Other candidates have pursued their own strategies. Many of those approaches, I can’t match, don’t agree with the substance, question the strategic value, or some combination thereof. For example, one candidate has been a juggernaut at sign distribution. If signs win elections, congratulations to her in advance, because I just couldn’t keep pace.

Transparency

Another approach was to focus on “transparency.” A lot of candidates were critical of the school’s COVID re-opening plan. (And, coming as that did during the candidate filing window, I suspect that was the trigger for a lot of our candidates jumping in.) For my part, I thought the school could have done a better job of communicating its thinking and outlining the variables it had to deal with when making its decisions. But, as I write this, the school’s COVID plan has been far more successful than I had anticipated. I think for some candidates, the success of the substance of the COVID plan caused a shift in focus to the more procedural notion of transparency.

From a purely strategic perspective, I think process matters like transparency mostly don’t appeal to constituents unless they are already upset about substantive matters. For example, years ago,  I remember being critical of members of Congress when they stopped  conducting “town halls.” But, truth be told, I never had much interest in those town halls when I approved of what Congress was doing. When that changed, my real concern wasn’t the town hall. I mostly wanted to see members of Congress get yelled at for the substantive things I disagreed with. As a practical matter, “transparency” is an ambiguous term that’s tough for me to embrace before it’s been defined pretty thoroughly. I have a great deal of expertise with Indiana’s public records and open door laws. I’ve won probably dozens of favorable opinions from Indiana’s Public Access Counselor over the last twenty years. I support full compliance with these requirements. But the kind of free-wheeling public meetings that a few of the candidates seem to contemplate (unless I misunderstand the limitations they would impose on the proceedings) just seem too unworkable for me to promote in support of my own campaign. Over the years, I estimate that I’ve attended more than a thousand governmental meetings in one capacity or another. Those meetings need structure to be productive.

By way of analogy, consider a social media group with no moderator. The conversation comes to be dominated by the same handful of people who like to re-visit the same issues. The passionate few tend to drive out or silence the average member, and there’s a tendency toward wheel-spinning. Government-by-YouTube-comment-section is not a recipe for success. To get its job done, a governmental body has to impose structure on its meetings that will be regarded by some percentage of the population as censorship or lack of transparency. There are similarly issues with public records. The law requires some to be public, requires some to be confidential, and gives the governmental body discretion on others. I usually advise clients to err on the side of disclosure. But there is a cost in terms of money and/or labor to sort these documents. If not many people are looking at them, then there’s a real question about the cost/benefit equation to making records available before anyone has asked for them. So, as a practical matter, I’m cautious about embracing “transparency” as a policy without knowing exactly what we’re talking about. And, as a strategic matter, I’m just not convinced it’s a burning issue for a lot of voters.

Teacher Retention

A couple of candidates have tried to make the case that there’s a problem with our teacher retention. This is a tough argument to make for a variety of reasons. First of all, there’s that risk of inadvertently self-identifying with the otherwise unidentified “scary” candidates in the PAC letter. Beyond that, it’s hard to make the case that a teaching staff ranked fourth in the country is all that unhappy. Our teachers are paid better than average and our teacher retention is better than the state average. And, unless you’re very careful about who you name or what statistics you use, you quickly run into the fact that, for example, some of the teachers were very happy at West Side but had to leave for personal reasons, some were just retiring because they’d finished a long and successful career, and there were some that we probably didn’t want to retain for various reasons. Without navigating those shoals very carefully, even meritorious concerns about teacher satisfaction will be overshadowed. As a strategic matter, it gave one of the incumbents an opportunity to elevate his profile by providing facts and figures on the subject.

Teachers everywhere face a challenging situation. I believe the health of our schools depend on us seeking ways to relieve the stressors on teachers, to treat them as professionals, and to give them the space they need to exercise that professionalism. But, inasmuch as the lot of a West Side teacher is probably better than the lot of a teacher in most other parts of the state, it’s tough to score points against the current school administration as part of a school board campaign.

School Finance

School finance is another area where a few candidates have tried to rise above the field. This is a challenging path. Local government finance is, quite frankly, a thicket with snares beset by other snares. For example, schools and other units of local government use a governmental building corporation when they want to issue bonds for construction. One or two candidates got out over their skis when they took notice of the school’s governmental building corporation and called it a “shell company.” I get it. If you haven’t seen it before, it looks fishy. Why the hell would you need a separate corporation to take out bonds and then lease you the new building? But there are historical reasons why basically every unit of local government in Indiana that wants to build something uses these corporations and have done so for probably eighty years. That being the case, coming out strong with a phrase like “shell company” with insinuations that something untoward was involved is bound to backfire.

There were questions about whether past referendum money was spent on debt financing. But that was based on a state document that turned out to have an error. There was the notion that reducing the money coming out of our debt service fund could somehow open up money for operations. But that’s not allowed under state law: money from the debt service tax rate can only be used for capital expenses and the ability to increase the operations tax levy is limited by the State. There was the notion that reducing the money coming out of our debt service fund could at least reduce taxes for West Lafayette taxpayers. But given how our tax cap and circuit breaker system works, reducing debt service taxes would probably serve mostly to give more money to the City of West Lafayette and Tippecanoe County government.  On the upside for me, all of that gave me the opportunity to stretch my legs a little with a blog post about the intricacies of local government finance. Other than my puppy video, that finance post got way more traffic than anything else I’ve done in this campaign.Which shocked me. Because local government finance is, as it turns out, not exciting.

Now the school finance argument has shifted to speculation about whether future payments for construction might possibly require use of referendum funds. But, as the man said, there’s many a slip ‘twixt a cup and a lip. A lot of variables will be at play between now and then, and the folks who have navigated school finances reasonably well for a decade will probably find a way to deal with the next challenge. The potential for disagreeable actions in the future isn’t nearly as compelling as the transgressions originally alleged. And, after all, this construction debt served a purpose: there was a need to build and renovate.

It’s tricky navigation as a campaign strategy to begin with, and the evolving nature of the allegations might make it easy for a voter to tune out.

Knocking on doors and word-of-mouth

I’m not sure if any candidate is knocking on doors, but it’s something I had wanted to do when I originally envisioned running for school board again. Back in 2016, I didn’t knock on any doors, and I lost by four votes. In 2017, campaigning for the referendum, I knocked on a lot of doors. I found out I was good at it, and I liked it. What I didn’t envision was that the 2020 campaign would be in the midst of a global pandemic. Even if I was comfortable going door-to-door (which I’m not), I think the voters who answer the door would be put off by that sort of risky behavior in pursuit of votes. It might well lose me more votes than I gained. Ultimately I decided to take a pass on that campaign strategy.

The biggest wild-card is word of mouth. I can see the stuff that’s taking place online. But, the Internet is not necessarily the same as real life. I saw this play out in the Democratic Presidential primaries. On the Internet, Sanders supporters were legion: they were active, and they were everywhere. In real life, they were rather thinner on the ground. I have no idea how word-of-mouth is going in the West Lafayette school district. Even if I thought I had the pulse of what was being said within the school community, the fact remains that there are a lot of voters with no kids in the school at all. Unfortunately, I don’t have Nate Silver giving me the daily update of polling data in the district. So, my vision of how the race is going may be badly skewed.

Ultimately, I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is a local race with friends and neighbors involved. When this is over, we still need to work with and among each other. We’ll run into each other at the grocery store, in the schools, and on the sidewalks. I know it’s been harder on some folks than others — maybe harder on candidates’ families and friends than on the candidates themselves. It’s easier to take incoming fire yourself than to watch it happening to a loved one. I feel like I’ve had an easier time than most. Maybe years of trading barbs with opposing counsel in litigation has made me numb. Mostly I feel like this has been a positive experience, and all of the support has been humbling. I suppose it’s an inevitable part of campaigning, but it’s still a little weird listening to other people say nice things about you and having them put your sign in their yard.

In any event, that’s some background on how I’ve seen the race. I wanted to write this down before knowing the results colored my impressions. There’s a fantastic chance I’ll be wildly off-base with respect to what I think are winning and losing approaches. With a fifteen person field in a down-ballot race, it’s tough to call any strategy a winner. And, lest anyone forget, I’m the only person who has managed to lose a West Lafayette School Board race in at least 15 years. The only thing I can say for sure is that in the very near future, I will have a lot of company. For now, I’ll cross my fingers and hope for the best.

Red Devil Pride!

by 2 Comments

This post isn’t really about how I’d be a better school board member than anyone else. In fact, if anything, this reflects great accomplishments under the current school board. (Not that I’m necessarily looking to oust an incumbent — one of the incumbents is on the ballot but has since decided that he’d rather not serve another term.) It’s about what a strong school system we have and why I want to continue helping it to stay strong.

This week, there were two pretty remarkable stories showing the strength of our system. The first was an October 13, 2020, New York Times story about Cumberland Elementary.The story is about a firefly project Mrs. Samudio, a second grade teacher, worked on from 2015 through 2017 in conjunction with people from Purdue and the Bezos founded Blue Origin rocket company. One of her students asked her whether a firefly would light up in space. She posed the question to a professor she knew at Purdue who suggested that they didn’t have to guess, instead, they could do an experiment:

Following Dr. Collicott’s suggestion, Ms. Samudio’s children at Cumberland got to work, collaborating with Purdue students in Dr. Collicott’s classes.

“For the next two years, I had aeronautical engineers in my second-grade classroom teaching mini-lessons on basic principles of flight and propulsion as well as the basic principles of ‘firefly’ chemistry,” Ms. Samudio said.

On December 12, 2017, an apparatus that replicated the chemistry of how fireflies generate light went up in space. Dr. Collicot attended the launch, and two days later reported that, in fact, fireflies can glow in space.

The second was a NICHES school ranking for 2020 that put West Lafayette Community School Corporation as top in the state & twelfth in the nation, and its teachers as top in the state and number four in the nation. Now, you can pick at this ranking in a bunch of different ways: school rankings are largely proxies for socioeconomic status, West Lafayette benefits from a lot of educated parents, even highly ranked schools might be leaving kids behind. There is validity to all of that, but the fact remains that West Lafayette schools are accomplishing a lot notwithstanding the fact that they start with a lot of advantages. There plenty of school districts in the country with more money than us who are, nevertheless, below us in the rankings.

Even while we search for our problem areas and seek to make them better, we should not forget to take pride in the school system we’re building and give credit where it is due. Sometimes, I think folks are hesitant with praise – even where it’s appropriate – because they think that might breed complacency. But the flip side is that despair has a tendency to slip in if we don’t praise the praiseworthy. (“Nothing’s ever good enough. Why try?”)

We’re part of a very special school system in which we can take pride, and we should never take that for granted. If elected to the school board, I intend to remain cognizant of that fact, taking care to maintain what we have even as we seek to make improvements where we fall short. As the saying goes, “examine all things; hold fast to what is good.”

West Lafayette School Board: Quick Campaign Finance Report

by 5 Comments

Just a note in case anyone wants to know about the big money being spent on my School Board race. The campaign finance rules for school board state that you don’t have to file a report unless you receive more than $500 or spend more than $500. I’ve done neither. But, if someone wants to know the extent of my finances:

On the expenditure side, I’ve spent just under $165 on Facebook and Instagram ads.

My share of some signs showing all four of the WLEA endorsed candidates constitutes a “gift-in-kind” of $332.

My wife added the school board section onto my website which I believes falls under the category of “personal services of a volunteer who is not being compensated” and, therefore, not a contribution.

And, I used yard signs I had in my basement from 2016.

I’m a high roller.