The Examiner U-46 News Feed
Race Hustling on the U-46 School Board part V
Last week, we promised to expose the far reaching political corruption that squares the circle connecting union money and School Board Trustee Traci O’Neal and U-46 CEO Tony Sanders—a circle colored in with nasty racial politics and inside dealing.
Unqualified to serve as superintendent of the largest Illinois school district outside of Chicago, Tony Sanders could not perform all of the functions of the job he inherited from his predecessor Jose Torres—though he certainly performed the function of stirring up racial divisions with equal competence. (If you haven’t seen the Sanders video yet, please visit our website at www.examinerpublications.com.) Being a good soldier in the race war, however, Sanders got a little help from his friends in Springfield, and those friends have quite a bit in common with Sanders and his boss, Traci O’Neal Ellis.
Four members of the Illinois General Assembly stepped up to sponsor the “Keep Tony Sanders Employed and Highly Compensated Law.” Well, that isn’t the official name. In fact, the law doesn’t even mention Sanders by name. Instead, the law is comically drafted to exclude every single person in the State of Illinois except Tony Sanders. The new law applies to:
Any school district that has boundaries that lie in three counties, one county of which has a population exceeding 1,000,000 inhabitants, that has an enrollment of more than 35,000 students, and that has on staff properly licensed assistant superintendents or directors in the areas of instruction, finance, special education, assessments, and career and technology education, the school board may instead, by a vote of a majority of its full membership, appoint a chief executive officer to serve as its superintendent.
Our legislators could have saved taxpayers ink and paper if the new law simply read: “If your name rhymes with Sony Tanders, you need not be qualified as a superintendent to run U-46.”
So, who were these legislators?
In the State House, Fred Crespo and Anne Moeller sponsored the Sanders law. Crespo, elected to serve all the residents of the 44th District, spends much of his time and energy serving as co-chairman of the Illinois Legislative Latino Caucus. Yes, he and Sanders are race-hustling buddies from way back. On May 18, 2015, for example, they joined together for a graduation ceremony for parents who completed two years in U-46’s Hispanic Parent Leadership Institute and the African-American Parent Leadership Institute. If you didn’t know that your tax dollars were being allocated to run race-exclusive programs, now you do know. As we mentioned last week, though, Sanders believes that our school children are being short-changed because prison guards make $42,000 per year performing a very dangerous job, not because his administration is redirecting precious educational dollars from classrooms (that should be lifting up all students) into programs designed to pander to various racial identities.
Representative Moeller also likes racial politics. According to her Facebook page, illegal immigrants in Illinois “live and work in this state, and they are central to our state’s culture and character.” Compassion for people fleeing poverty is one thing; celebrating a national policy crises is quite another. When she’s not busy pandering to Hispanic voters, Moeller works hard as a co-chairwoman of the Illinois General Assembly Legislative Research Unit, a group of legislators who take time away from running Illinois into bankruptcy so that they can generate useless reports such as “African American Men and Women of Science.” A better use of her time would be to amend and repeal Illinois laws that especially hurt the African American community, laws that kill jobs and increase inflation. Perhaps more interesting than her racial politics, though, is Moeller’s appetite for union money, an appetite that makes Traci O’Neal Ellis look like a small-time grifter. Just last week, alone, Moeller filed campaign disclosures revealing multiple union donations totaling $111,100. We ask the same question of her that we ask of Ellis: Who are you working for?
On the Senate side, Andy Manar and Michael Noland sponsored the Tony Sanders law. Manar uses his platform to rename downstate roads after deceased African Americans…and to rake in thousands in union donations, as well. What he does for living, struggling African Americans, other than to divide them destructively from the rest of the populace, is not so clear. Noland, of course, is the husband of U-46 Trustee Veronica Noland, and public records show that in addition to doing the bidding of his wife’s voting bloc on the school board—which typically includes Ellis—he moves some of his union money into her campaign coffers to mingle with her union money.
We grow dizzy navigating the endless tributaries of union money—particularly teachers’ union money—flowing into the pockets of these politicians. They are bought and paid for, and what they offer unions in return are the tax dollars we send to U-46 and Springfield every year. Ellis, Sanders, and the teachers’ union are sitting on the same side of the table negotiating against us. Our money goes to higher salaries and pensions, which send more vigorish to the unions, who line the pockets of politicians, who vote to raise our taxes to fund even higher salaries and pensions, and round and round it goes. And adding insult to that injury, these same self-dealers engage in the most pernicious racial politics while they fleece us in order to create racially segregated constituencies who turn out as voting blocs—hurting everyone of every color.
Circling back to their racial politics, we return to Tony Sanders’s speech and his specious claim that “structural racism” accounts for his cherry-picked distinctions between U-46, Barrington and St. Charles. Sanders insinuates that but for the racist system, U-46’s black and brown students would have the same advantages as students in Barrington and St. Charles. So, let us take a look at some statistics that we are uncomfortable bringing forward, and would not bring forward but for the fact that Ellis, Sanders, and their allied race hustlers have forced our hand. According to the most recent and available Illinois School Report Cards, black students in Barrington and St. Charles averaged together have an 83.85 percent five-year graduation rate. So, how poorly must the black U-46 students fare when, according to Sanders, they are targeted for racial oppression? Well, their five-year graduation rate is 84.3 percent, higher than that of their correspondents in the two less diverse districts.
Of course, Sanders and Ellis might cite that statistic as additional proof of structural racism: that is, Barrington and St. Charles are keeping their black students down. Except that there is a problem with that theory, too. White students in the two other districts have a combined 95.65 percent five-year graduation rate, but U-46 whites graduate at a lower rate—94.1 percent. So, the structural racism that Sanders uses to excuse the many failings of U-46 is not only a lie, it is a total inversion of the truth. White students in U-46 are faring relatively worse, while black students in U-46 are faring relatively better than their counterparts in Barrington and St. Charles.
The only structural racism we can find, therefore, is in our U-46 leadership. Ellis is the chief proponent of that racism, and Sanders—along with other trustees and district employees—have been bullied by Ellis and her ilk into remaining quiet or, worse, abetting their racial hatred. Firmly in the latter category, Sanders has taken sides (see photo below)—sides against other school board members and sides against educational equality for students of every background. All of which is highly improper and disturbing coming from the CEO of our school district.
Yet, these are the strange but predictable fruits of Ellis’s racial politics, which are appalling and offensive in their own right. When we look even deeper into Ellis’s background next week, however, we will make our final demonstrations that her audacity is shocking, that her character is profoundly flawed, and that she is manifestly unfit for public office.