ALBANY — Nearly four in 10 school board members are current or former teachers, according to a survey by the state School Boards Association, reflecting the rising influence of the state’s largest teachers union in electing its members to public office.

The Pipeline Project of the New York State United Teachers union has helped elect more than 400 of its members to the more than 700 school boards since 2015, according to the union, which has nearly 700,000 members.

Supporters say union members can provide school boards with direct insight from classrooms on curriculum, education policy, student needs and funding priorities. The project is also helping members win seats in the State Legislature and in Congress, according to the union.

But the Pipeline Project has also drawn criticism that the already politically powerful teachers union now has a conflicting interest in school boards, which determine spending, including teacher compensation, and set instruction policy in a state with some of the highest property taxes in the nation.

State law doesn’t allow teachers and other employees of a school district to serve on that district’s school board as a guard against conflicts of interest, but teachers can serve on their local school boards if they work in other school districts.

Ken Girardin, director of research at the Empire Center for Public Policy think tank, concluded in his 2023 study that current teachers who work in other districts still pose a conflict by potentially promoting policies to benefit teachers as a group over fiscal prudence. He also said retired teachers and family members of teachers also pose potential conflicts on school boards.

He said the Pipeline Project provides "a stranglehold on the school districts" that gives the union an outsize role on school boards on labor contracts and other policy and spending that drives property taxes, overshadowing education issues.

The union, however, said Pipeline and the expertise and funding it provides works for the whole community, and will continue to put more members in elected roles.

"We are always encouraging members to be engaged and run for public office," said NYSUT spokeswoman Emily Allen. "Our member candidates have found overwhelming support in campaigns and in the majority of races, they receive funding through their local union via VOTE-COPE rebates."

VOTE-COPE is NYSUT's political action arm and stands for Voice of Teachers in Education-Committee on Political Education. It is funded by voluntary contributions by members. VOTE-COPE rebates can cover up to 40% of a donation by a local teachers union. Last year the fund totaled more than $11 million.

In a video produced for members, Melinda Person, president of the union, said, "In 2015, we created a program to train and encourage union members to run for office. When you look at the polling, who do people want? They want regular people, with regular lives. They want working people. They want teachers."

In the video, legislators in what NYSUT called its growing "caucus" in the State Legislature who benefited from Pipeline and the union's endorsement, said their greatest accomplishments in office include annual record increases in state school aid and revising the job evaluations for teachers in part to eliminate student test scores as a required assessment tool.

"While we have elected over 300 people to office, we want more," Person said. "We want more teachers, more [school-related professionals], more higher ed professionals."

The state does not keep track of how many NYSUT members hold school board seats. But the New York State School Boards Association annual survey of school boards found about 11% of members are teachers, up from 9% in 2021. When retired teachers and former teachers are added in, the number grew to 37.7% of school board members, said David Albert, spokesman for the state School Boards Association.

On Long Island, NYSUT has reported a similar trend. In 2021, five school board candidates were NYSUT members; in 2022 there were 15; in 2023 there were 16; and last year there were 17, according to the union’s statements after each election to what are typically three-year terms.

"We want you to run for office because our voice needs to be heard in Albany and in Washington and the only way it’s going to happen is if people step up and run," Person said in the video recruiting candidates.

NYSUT has for decades been influential with the State Legislature and governors. NYSUT is one of the biggest campaign contributors, lobbyist and provider of volunteers who can staff phone banks and knock on doors to persuade voters to choose their endorsed candidates.

In the last two legislative elections, for example, NYSUT directly contributed more than $2 million in campaign contributions to candidates, political action committees and parties. That included a $250,000 check in October to the state Democratic Committee’s "housekeeping account," according to state Board of Elections records. Parties highly value donations to housekeeping accounts because there are few restrictions on how it’s spent.

The overall influence of the union in the May school board elections, in which turnout averages about 10% of voters, is clear. An analysis by the school boards association found 88% of candidates endorsed by NYSUT won their school board election last year. The analysis also showed about 99% of school budgets are approved by voters each year.

"The question for voters is whether candidates from NYSUT and other government unions serve as responsible stewards of local government while bringing home the bacon for their members," said good government advocate John Kaehny of Reinvent Albany. "Could anyone?"

Reinvent Albany favors expanding the system used in the state’s five biggest cities, which puts a mayor in charge of schools and is responsible to voters in general elections with far bigger turnouts.

"Mayoral control has been far, far better in New York City than the old school board system in which board members were elected in ultralow turnout elections," Kaehny told Newsday in a written response. "It makes no sense to us that local governments do not run schools, which are by far the biggest ticket item for local taxpayers."

Compared with the way all other elections are run and monitored in the state, school board regulations on campaign contributions and campaign spending is a throwback to the 1980s, according to records obtained from the state Education Department under the state Freedom of Information Law.

State education law requires school board candidates to submit campaign finance disclosure forms to the state Education Department and the school district clerk, but only if contributions or spending exceeds $500. Those paper records are destroyed after three years.

There is no central database online and there is no routine review by the state for accuracy or failures to file under education law, said David Elliot, spokesman for the education department.

Instead, five qualified voters or a campaign opponent must petition the state Supreme Court to order a candidate to file or to correct their file, according to state education law.

By contrast, other local and state elections are monitored by county and state boards of election. The boards require more frequent filing of campaign finance records online for public view and enforce laws governing fundraising and spending.

Campaign finance filings of school board candidates who do file their reports show that even a school board race can easily cross the $500 threshold. For example, records show lawn signs that are common expenses in school board races often cost $700 or more.

A Newsday review found filings from candidates running for school boards in just 72 of the state’s more than 700 school districts in 2024. That represents about 1% of 2,000 candidates in school board elections last year, according to the records.

The records showed numerous instances that could trigger reviews in other elections by state and county boards of elections, which closely monitor all other political races through online filings.

The school board candidates’ records showed:

The filings are not on a searchable database, even within the state Education Department. That means voters can’t evaluate contributions and spending by a candidate online.
Some candidates didn’t identify their contributors or didn’t affirm that they self-funded their campaign.
Addresses of contributors are redacted.
Missing filings for the three required filing dates — in April, May and June. Most filings were submitted just days before the May election.
Two candidates each submitted copies of the same $704.48 bill as an expense for "buffet and pizza, beer, wine and soda" on the same date at the same restaurant for a fundraiser. The bill carried handwritten statements said the spending was both "paid in full" and an "in-kind" contribution for service, which doesn’t require payment.

Girardin said transparency in school board elections is long overdue. He said the State Legislature should require all the files posted online in every school district.

"It’s something to think about for the future," said Albert of the school boards group.

But he defended the current system: "This data is available from the district clerk and the state Education Department. So there is a record and it can be accessed. It’s public information, so there is that enforcement mechanism."

Newsday’s request to the state Education Department for these public records of campaign spending and fundraising over three years took five months for the state to copy and black out addresses.

Albert said school boards face so many issues of policy and budgeting that they are so busy that teachers on the board — even if they wanted to — can’t dominate a school board to focus on compensation or labor issues.

"We’ve never heard that," Albert said. "They are going to quickly realize there is so much more to the role than one particular thing.

"We’ve seen a pretty good balance," Albert said. "Union negotiations are just one thing."

Top Videos

Stay logged in.