Dangerous charity: Private funds for public schools

Two weeks ago, D.C. Chief Financial Officer Natwar M. Gandhi testified before the D.C. Council that, because of its conditional nature, supplemental funding from private foundations could not be relied upon to support the proposed $140 million contract negotiated between the Washington Teachers' Union and Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee. The D.C. Council insisted that Gandhi and Rhee work together to identify public dollars to back up a long-sought labor agreement that would also support school reform initiatives such as teacher bonuses for performance. Now, after a long and often contentious process, CFO Gandhi has stated that the contract is fiscally sound.

The Washington Teachers' Union members who will soon vote on the contract, and indeed everyone who lives in the city, would do well to pause and consider some of the worrying implications of this deal. I have two primary concerns:

-- The impact on elections: First, the $64.5 million in foundation money in the D.C. public schools' budget won't just impact our schools; conditions placed by the foundations will inject themselves into this year's electoral process, which could focus on education issues more than any other recent election. The four donors have reserved the right to withdraw the money if the leadership of the schools -- read: Chancellor Rhee, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's controversial partner in reforming the D.C. system -- were to leave.

Do we want these outside foundations to have a vote in our election? The qualified nature of their support creates the perception that voting against Fenty could cost the city revenue that could help our city's children. How many votes is this worth? This is a question you can be sure that both Fenty and his main challenger, Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray, are asking.

-- The impact on school policy: Second, by accepting such conditional money, we also are inviting the unacceptable dilemma of having to choose between the educational approaches that we determine are in the best interests of our children and the divergent priorities of private foundations. The Walton Family Foundation, one of the donors, has made major investments in nonunionized charter schools and promoted privatization of public education; Rhee, too, has made clear that she is comfortable with growing charter competition in the city. It's not hard to imagine why this money would be conditioned on maintaining a D.C. public schools leadership that may be more than just sympathetic to the foundation's cause.

The Washington Teachers' Union agreement is routinely described as "groundbreaking," and Fenty and Rhee have unprecedented powers to make changes in our schools. But the D.C. Council also has a role to play. The council can still step forward and set firm conditions for the acceptance of any private funds with the potential to create these serious conflicts of interest.

By exercising its responsible oversight and placing its own conditions on the acceptance and application of this private financial support, the council can protect the interests of both our schools and our democratic process.