Share This Article
Article Summary
The recent Sycamore school board election highlights what the author views as a broader national problem: teachers’ unions influencing school board races and governance. Following a public misconduct scandal involving a union leader, union-endorsed board members declined termination and maintained majority control. This opinion piece argues that taxpayers — not unions — should control public education decisions.
A story deserving of public discussion relates to the recent November election for the Sycamore school board.
Sycamore encompasses the affluent Cincinnati suburbs of Blue Ash, Montgomery, Symmes, and Sycamore Township.
In this race, as in many other school board elections across the United States, the teachers’ union put their thumb on the scale and managed to win two board seats to maintain majority control.
Incredibly, this outcome occurred immediately following a scandal that would normally sink any candidate implicated in the affair. Sycamore is not an isolated incident. According to the author, it is symptomatic of what occurs in public school districts across the country.
The Scrase Incident
On September 18, 2024, Danielle Scrase, a Sycamore science teacher, appeared at a public school board meeting allegedly intoxicated, exposed herself multiple times on camera, bullied a female co-worker via text, and publicly made a racial remark during a ceremony honoring Black students, referring to Sycamore High School Principal Taylor Porter as “an incompetent black man,” according to reporting cited by the author from the Cincinnati Enquirer.
Sycamore Education Association President Danielle Scrase was suspended after commenting about a principal and displaying ‘erratic’ behavior publicly. https://t.co/84UhVbPndL
— Enquirer (@Enquirer) March 4, 2025
Most employers would deem any one of these acts grounds for termination. Committing all of them would make termination a certainty.
Nevertheless, the Sycamore school board did not have the votes to terminate Scrase. Teachers’ union-endorsed board members voted against termination. They reduced a 45-day unpaid suspension to 15 days and removed references to the incident from her personnel file.
To put this into perspective, an adult who exposed herself during a public work meeting on school premises and interacts with children daily was allowed to remain employed, and records of the incident were effectively erased. In the author’s view, child endangerment appeared to be of little concern to certain board members.
How Did This Happen?
Scrase was not just a teacher. She had served as president of the Sycamore Education Association (SEA), the local teachers’ union.
The SEA’s PAC, Citizens for Sycamore, endorsed, campaigned for, and donated to a majority of the Sycamore school board, including Board President Sara Bitter. Instead of facing consequences at the ballot box, union-backed candidates were rewarded with victory in November.
Teachers’ unions are among the most powerful interest groups in education, spending nearly $1.5 billion annually on lobbying and campaigns. Research cited by the author suggests that approximately 70% of elected public school board members nationally are endorsed by local teachers’ unions.
In addition to funding, unions mobilize members, conduct early voting efforts, deploy direct mail, digital ads, phone banks, and canvassing operations. In this election cycle, union-backed candidates were also supported by organized labor and local party structures.
National Teachers’ Unions and Political Alignment
The two largest teachers’ unions in the United States are the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers.
The author notes that the presidents of both unions have had roles within the Democratic National Committee, arguing that this reflects a broader political alignment between national unions and party leadership.
In his view, public school classrooms increasingly emphasize political agendas over the traditional “Three R’s,” pointing to national reading and math proficiency results as evidence of declining academic outcomes.
Low-Turnout School Board Elections
School board elections typically see turnout between five and ten percent. In such an environment, organized groups have disproportionate influence.
Union-backed candidates often campaign under messaging such as “teacher endorsed” rather than “teacher union endorsed.” According to survey data cited by the author, many voters do not distinguish between teachers and teachers’ unions.
The result, in his view, is union-endorsed school board hegemony.
Collective Bargaining and Conflicts of Interest
The Sycamore school board negotiates collective bargaining agreements on behalf of taxpayers. However, when the same union that negotiates contracts also funds and installs board members, the author argues that the district is effectively bargaining with itself.
He compares the situation to the UAW appointing the CEO and board of GM, Ford, and Chrysler and then negotiating contracts with its own delegation.
In Sycamore, over 70% of residents do not have children in the district. Yet those residents are responsible for property tax levies that fund district spending.
According to figures cited from Sycamore Citizens for Ethics, district expenses increased by over $8 million in a single fiscal year — an 8.7% increase year over year. The author argues that sustainable growth would be closer to 3%.
Some expenditures cited include legal fees and capital projects such as playground construction.
The author contends that such spending increases will likely require additional operating levies, raising Hamilton County property taxes. He questions whether levy campaigns framed as “for the kids” truly reflect broader district priorities.
The Sycamore school board controversy, in the author’s view, is not unique. It reflects what he sees as a national pattern in public school governance.
He makes clear that his criticism is not directed at teachers themselves — members of his own family worked in public education. Rather, he argues that when school board members are “bought and paid for” by teachers’ unions, they do not serve the broader community.
The options, he suggests, are limited: organize to defeat union-backed candidates, or explore alternatives such as tuition-free public charter schools.
FAQs
Can teachers’ unions endorse school board candidates?
Yes. Teachers’ unions routinely endorse and financially support candidates in local school board elections.
How do school levies affect property taxes?
Operating levies increase local property taxes to fund school district expenses.
Do teachers’ unions spend money on school board elections?
Yes. Teachers’ unions at the local, state, and national levels routinely endorse and financially support candidates in school board elections. Support can include direct campaign contributions, independent expenditures, mailers, digital advertising, canvassing operations, and mobilizing union members to vote. Because school board elections often have low turnout, organized groups can have significant influence.
Are teachers’ unions politically active beyond local school districts?
Yes. National teachers’ unions such as the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers engage in federal and state political advocacy. They spend on lobbying, endorse candidates, and participate in party platform discussions. Public campaign finance disclosures show that both organizations are active political donors and policy advocates at multiple levels of government.
This article is an opinion submission and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of The Cincinnati Exchange. The Cincinnati Exchange publishes a range of perspectives on local issues in the interest of public discussion. Factual claims referenced in this piece are attributed to publicly available reporting and community sources where noted.
