California Teachers Association union dues increase and Proposition 75

20 August 2008: Many of these links have broken since I first posted this in October 2005. I’ve updated those for which I could find new links. The original link appears under the strikeouts.

For those of you looking for more information about the California Teachers Association corrected link union dues, here are some links you might find helpful:

The original press release corrected link from the CTA announcing that it will dock an additional $60 from every teacher in California for the next three years in order to raise $50 million “…to protect minimum funding to our public schools and to ensure the concerns of teachers, students and parents are heard…”

An L.A. Times story dated Sept. 23, 2005 reporting on the lawsuit filed in response to this dues increase: “Lawsuit Targets Teachers Union: A group of teachers seeks the return of a $60 increase in annual dues to fund the CTA’s fight against the governor’s special election agenda.”

The National Right to Work Foundation’s coverage corrected link of the union dues issue, including a sworn declaration by CTA controller Carlos Moreno revealing that the union is heavily in debt corrected link and in the process of negotiating a $40 million letter of credit to pay for even more political initiatives. (I transcribed the PDF document and included it at the bottom of this post. If I missed any typos please let me know.)

The result of the lawsuit according to the plaintiffs corrected link.

The result of the lawsuit according to the CTA corrected link.

An editorial against Proposition 75 by Eric Farwell, member of the Chula Vista Police Officers’ Association. He says, “Proposition 75’s restrictions would make it harder for teachers and other education workers to fight the governor’s agenda to slash education funding… Proposition 75 is not designed to help us; Proposition 75 was designed by the governor’s wealthy, corporate donors to shut us up.”

An editorial in favor of Proposition 75 by Sandra Crandall, 2004-05 teacher of the year in Fountain Valley and chair of the Yes on 75 State Coalition. She says, “For the 2005-06 school year, roughly $922 will be seized from my paycheck and the other 300 teachers in my district for unified union dues, including the $60 increase CTA is using to fight the ballot propositions… Those monies fund political causes, candidates and issues I rarely support.”

Official Title and Summary of Proposition 75 (in PDF format) from the California Secretary of State’s website. I’ve read it several times, but cannot find the part about silencing workers. I did find the part, though, about Prop 75 giving public employees the right to decide whether or not their union dues are used for political contributions.

A QuickTime/Windows Media video showing CTA members trying to drown out the press conference of teachers asking the CTA to stop using their union dues to fund political campaigns without their permission.

A Mercury News article corrected link about the CTA trying to silence teachers who disagree with CTA actions.

An article from the Daily Breeze (can’t find updated link) showing that not all CTA political campaign money goes to fight ballot propositions; some of it goes into the war chests of local school board candidates. In this case, the CTA funded $1500 — via the Palos Verdes Faculty Association — to be given to a Palos Verdes school board candidate (who turned it down). Unless the CTA offers $1500 to all school board candidates, such contributions are presumably meant only for candidates sympathetic to the CTA’s agenda, rather than, say, to the goals of parents or teachers.

And finally, my transcription of the declaration of Carlos Moreno, controller of the California Teachers Association. (PDF version of this document is here.)

DECLARATION OF CARLOS MORENO

Date: October 5, 2005
Time: 2:00 pm
Place: Courtroom 8, 4th Floor

The Hon. James Ware

Liegmann, et. al. v. California Teachers Ass’n, et al., N.D. Cal. Case No. CV05-3828 JW

I, Carlos Moreno, hereby declare:

  1. The facts stated herein are personally known to me and if called to testify, I could testify competently thereto.
  2. I am currently employed by the California Teachers Association (“CTA”) as Controller. It is my responsibility to manage the business and financial operations of CTA. My official start date was August 8, 2005, but I was actively involved in CTA’s financial operations from the time the position was offered to me on June 21, 2005. Prior to obtaining my position at CTA, I was employed for twenty years by Education Minnesota, the National Education Association state affiliate in Minnesota, first as a staff accountant and since 1991 as Controller. I am a Certified Public Accountant.
  3. In my position as Controller I am familiar with the current and historical financial situation of CTA. I am informed and believe that on June 5, 2005, CTA’s approximately 800 person representative body, “State Council”, voted nearly unanimously to increase CTA member dues by $60 a year for three years to maintain fiscal solvency while CTA fought against several initiatives scheduled for the November 2005 California ballot (“the initiative campaign”). I know from my review of CTA’s financial records that CTA spent considerable sums of money on the initiative campaign before June 21, 2005. Since my personal involvement with CTA starting on June 21, 2005, CTA has continued to spend considerable sums of money on the initiative campaign. Spending this money has necessitated CTA obtaining a $14 million loan. We are currently paying interest on that loan. CTA has spent the money on the initiative campaign in reliance on its expectation of receiving a certain income stream from the three year temporary $60 annual dues increase to repay current and future debts incurred as a result of actual campaign spending while being able to continue its normal operations serving members. The increase in dues will begin to be paid, in monthly installments, by almost all members through payroll deductions from their end-of-September, 2005 paychecks.
  4. CTA has already spent on the initiative campaign the equivalent of what the temporary dues increase would bring in over three years.
  5. CTA is in the process of negotiating a necessary $40 million line of credit. The proposed terms for the new line of credit call for the income stream from the $60 dues increase, together with CTA’s other ongoing income, to pay back the principal and interest. If the temporary restraining order is granted, it will greatly harm or destroy CTA’s ability to get this line of credit. If CTA is unable to get this line of credit, there is a significant risk that an outstanding $20 million line will be called. Millions of CTA’s members dues dollars are possibly at stake. Therefore the temporary restraining order would cause great financial harm to CTA and affect CTA’s ability to continue to deliver its current level of services to members over the long term.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Dated 9/30/05
Carlos Moreno

Tags: , , , ,

One Reply to “California Teachers Association union dues increase and Proposition 75”

Leave a Reply