Last month, we reported on an improper invite from Keith Ellison’s campaign using Patsy Green’s school board title and mentioning the 281 referendum. We asked the school board if Robbinsdale Schools officially endorsed Ellison, Franken and Obama. Only one response was given by Barb Van Heel:
Robbinsdale Area Schools does not endorse any candidate for office.
However, individual board members do not give up their constitutional rights as citizens to endorse candidates of their choosing, just as other elected officials are allowed to endorse candidates.
Thank you for your question.
Barb Van Heel
School Board Vice-Chair
We acquired the RAS bylaws, highlighting numbers 10-12 of board member duties and ethics:
We feel Patsy Green used her position (by listing her School Board title) in a partisan way and did not abide by these conduct rules. An Ellison campaign staffer said Green proofed the post card before it went to print. She took advantage of her position to promote a partisan campaign – violating #10, 11 and 12 of the code of ethics.
Contact the school board and ask how they handle ethic violations by school board members.
Tags: Keith Ellison, Patsy Green
281 Exposed 
November 15, 2008 at 5:34 am |
Excellent work, 281 Exposed. Most of us simply don’t have the time to follow up on these things, and frankly, a lot of people just don’t get the depth of corruption going on.
You took the time to look up and publish the vows made by board members. This information should be made available to the local paper, Sun Post. Let’s see if they dare to shine a light on one of their favorite sponsors.
November 15, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
It’s easy enough to make some technical arguments. You notice that the bylaws are nothing more than a draft dated after Ellison invitation. The invitation itself, was from the Ellison campaign, not the boardmember. Neither the invitation nor the event was partisan. But there are larger issues here.
Please correct me if I am wrong but this blog is about Robbinsdale schools, not partisan elections. That being the case, how could anyone concerned with Robbinsdale schools have a problem with a board member meeting with a Congressman? Isn’t that what they are supposed to do? Some of us might object to specific policies of the school district, but don’t we all agree, that for example, the federal government should keep it’s promises with respect to special education? Something that a Congressman is in a position to do something about?
This whole thing is a non-issue. I am pretty confident in saying that the language of the invite didn’t change a single vote in the Congressional election. It seems to me that the time and energy of those concerned about what’s happening in Robbinsdale schools should pay attention to things that matter, rather than things that do not.
November 16, 2008 at 2:08 am |
Different things matter to different people.
November 16, 2008 at 3:31 pm |
“Different things matter to different people.”
I am sure they do, but here I am looking at things from the perspective of district 281, which I assume is the perspective of this blog. I still don’t know what it is the board member did wrong, or how anything the board member harmed the school district. Meeting with US representatives is what they are supposed to do. Arguably, had the board member refused to meet with the representative, she would have violated several other provisions of the proposed draft published above.
“We feel Patsy Green used her position (by listing her School Board title) in a partisan way and did not abide by these conduct rules.”
I think you are entitled to feel any way you want, but the fact is, this invitation was issued by Keith Ellison, not Patsy Green. It was Ellison, not Green who stated the fact in the invitation that Green is a member of the school board.
November 17, 2008 at 4:29 am |
theobald7,
To help you understand the issues;
1). The Bylaws listed as “draft” are amendment to the original Bylaws, the amended Bylaws were passed and are final. The section regarding “Ethics” was in the original Bylaws before the latest changes to certain parts of the Bylaws as amended. Therefore, the “Ethics” section was in place since Pasty Green has been a Board member.
2). It was partisan as part of Keith Ellison’s RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN. Read the invitation “Re-Elect Keith Ellison for U.S. Congress”.
3). Pasty Green proofed the invitation before being sent out. Pasty Green gave her ok on the wording.
4). The reason it is included on this Blog is because the VIOLATION is of a RAS Board Bylaw.
I hope this detailed analysis help you understand the facts and why this Blog is covering the issues.
November 17, 2008 at 9:07 pm |
Feel free to quote the applicable bylaws, not the drafts.
“It was partisan as part of Keith Ellison’s RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN.”
Keith Ellison is not a member of the school board and not subject to it’s rules. He hold a partisan office.
“Pasty Green proofed the invitation before being sent out. Pasty Green gave her ok on the wording.”
But she didn’t issue the invitation. It was not a statement from her, and no reader of the invitation could reasonably construe it as such.
“The reason it is included on this Blog is because the VIOLATION is of a RAS Board Bylaw.”
How can Keith Ellison and/or his campaign violate a board bylaw to which he or they was not subject?
November 17, 2008 at 11:25 pm |
Comment removed by moderator.
November 18, 2008 at 5:18 pm |
Removing my comment ??? That’s too bad, I thought it was pertinent to Theo’s comments.
November 18, 2008 at 5:28 pm |
Sometimes those who object to school officials’ efforts hide behind cloaks of anonymity, setting up anonymous email accounts and voicing their views only if they don’t have to identify themselves. (As tensions grew in Osseo, board members received this email message: “Please keep pour [sic] children in their own neighborhood.”)
This is from MinnPost. Sound familiar 281 exposed?
November 18, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
281 Careless: No, that doesn’t sound familiar.
You and Give2Attain are given fair warning to discuss the issues and stop with the childish accusations (as you’re not seeming able to do so lately). All posts here have trackbacks or links to the source for verification.
You’re welcome to start/continue with your own blogs or comment elsewhere (like MinnPost) if you so choose.
November 18, 2008 at 9:42 pm |
Which childish accusation? I stated a fact regarding idea generation and gave some advice regarding how to improve the credibility of the site.
I am sorry if you took offense, none was intended.
November 20, 2008 at 1:41 am |
Exposed, Since the string is quieting down. I was wondering what your readers think the qualifications and compensation should be for the next Superintendent? Just wondering….
March 20, 2009 at 1:39 pm |
[…] Ethics seem to be an issue with this administration, right Patsy Green? […]
March 11, 2010 at 8:19 pm |
[…] related posts: Did Patsy Green violate school board code of ethics? Patsy Green: arrogant and partisan […]