School Scandal in San Fransisco

As schools face budget cuts and the financial crisis, a San Francisco school district scandal has many up in arms. According to the New York Times, despite a $113 million deficit, several San Francisco Unified School District administrators who work for the Student Support Services (SSS) Department, a U.S. Department of Education program, were discovered taking district money from community organizations for personal uses. The purpose of SSS is to offer after school programs, substance abuse assistance, and other educational resources to students through the aid of community organizations.

The head of SSS in San Francisco, Ms. Bascom, is under heavy investigation as she controlled how money was given to community organizations that were to offer programs to the schools. Shockingly, the community organizations were giving money directly to administrators. One official, Ms. Lovelace, took money from an organization as a bonus and faked authorization on contracts. She also accepted $40,000 from Edgewood Center for Children and Families; Edgewood also gave money to another official, who is accused of approving unlawful payments to another administrator in order to pocket the Edgewood money. Checks, invoices, and contracts were tampered with also.

Many are wondering how with such hard times facing schools, could public officials in essence be stealing from the district? The President of the United Educators of San Francisco, Dennis Kelly, said that the administrators of SSS at SF United have become an “empire with a moat around it without oversight or control by the central administration.” The administrators who are supposed to be regulating how much money to give to community organizations are in fact receiving personal gifts from them. In this example, the governmental agency, the SF district, that works for SSS, a Department of Education program, is captured by the community organizations. It can be assumed that officials are being paid off by interest groups, like Edgewood, to get more aid and form contracts with schools. Officials no longer act in the interest of the common good and pursue private interests in the form of checks. Interest groups are affecting how the agency runs – not a democracy at its best. In this case, intermediary institutions – interest groups – show the flaws of a pluralist democracy. Because of Madison’s separation of powers, passing legislation that restricts interest groups is difficult. Although the interest groups allow for those intensely interested in education to participate, how far is too far?