Setting the Record Straight: Responding to False Claims About Public Education Advocacy in New Jersey
A small but vocal organization, the Sunlight Policy Center of New Jersey (SPCNJ), has sought to present itself as a source of investigative reporting on education and state policy issues. The Center describes itself as a “non-partisan, non-profit research center” devoted to “informing citizens of the facts behind New Jersey’s dysfunctional status quo.” In practice, however, its content blurs the line between evidence and opinion. Each new post follows a familiar pattern of alarmist headlines, sweeping generalizations, and repeated claims about the dangers of teachers’ unions and “progressive activists.”
The Center’s posts often use loaded language and moral judgment to frame opponents in the harshest possible terms. Unions and public education advocates are portrayed as corrupt or dangerous, and individuals such as Michael Gottesman, the founder of New Jersey Public Education Coalition, are called “zealots,” “liars,” or “bullies.” This style of writing is meant to provoke anger rather than understanding. By framing disagreement as a moral failure, the author avoids discussing real issues such as education policy, school funding, or union governance.
Another feature of the Center’s writing is oversimplification. Complex topics such as population migration or tax policy are reduced to political talking points that fit one narrative: that progressive leadership always leads to decline. This approach ignores real factors such as housing costs, job markets, and demographic changes. The result is commentary that sounds certain but lacks the careful analysis and context of real research.
Perhaps the most telling issue with the Center’s work is its lack of independent sources. True research depends on verifiable information and credible documentation. Yet the Center’s posts often cite only their own previous work or like-minded political outlets. This creates the illusion of evidence without offering proof. Instead of investigation, readers get repetition that builds the appearance of authority without substance.
The Sunlight Policy Center was founded by Mike Lilley, who has described the organization as a watchdog based on research he conducted for the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). AEI is a Washington, D.C. think tank known for promoting free-market, anti-union, and small-government policies. It has played a major role in shaping conservative economic and education policy since the 1980s, supporting privatization, deregulation, and school voucher programs. Although both AEI and SPCNJ describe themselves as “non-partisan,” their priorities and rhetoric reflect a clear political perspective that treats public education and teachers’ unions not as partners in civic life but as obstacles to reform.
These ideological roots help explain why SPCNJ’s publications often read as political manifestos rather than objective research. Across multiple posts, the Center’s so-called “reports” rely on emotionally charged language, self-citation, and partisan framing rather than facts. Claims are linked back to the author’s earlier posts, creating a feedback loop that appears authoritative but lacks external verification. For example, the October 13, 2025 post “A New Low for Mendacious Michael Gottesman: Going after High School Freshmen and College Kids while Giving the NJEA a Pass” links to multiple prior Sunlight Policy Center pieces as proof of its own claims. Further, any claims made in those linked pieces direct readers to yet more prior pieces authored by the Center. The result is writing that may look like an investigation but doesn’t hold up to basic standards of credible reporting.
This more recent blog post that the Center published is yet another exaggeration about Michael Gottesman, a prominent public education advocate and founder of the New Jersey Public Education Coalition (NJPEC). Gottesman has been a frequent target of the Center’s attacks. In this latest piece, framed as an exposé, the author accuses him of bullying, dishonesty, and reckless behavior. These accusations are delivered with theatrical outrage but supported only by the author’s own opinions and previous writings. Like much of SPCNJ’s content, this attack uses emotional language to present speculation as fact, prioritizing ideology over accuracy.
Because the accusations are serious, involving claims of “bullying,” “doxxing,” and “reckless behavior,” they deserve a careful review. The following is a factual summary that corrects the record and allows readers to see the truth for themselves.
Factual Review of the Accusations
1. Speaking Out Against Antisemitism Is Not Bullying
The claim that Michael Gottesman “bullied” students after an antisemitic incident is false. When students in Freehold discussed in a chat about dressing as Holocaust victims for Halloween, it was an act that demanded attention and accountability. Confronting antisemitism is not “picking on kids”; it is responsible leadership.
Michael responded to the incident with a social media post and email to various media (see image below) that criticized the district’s administrators for failing to release a public statement about what had happened. His post included only the publicly available contact information for the district superintendent and the school principal. It did not mention any students by name, grade, or school year, nor did it call on anyone to contact or target them. The Sunlight Policy Center links to a news article covering Michael’s post, and that article makes it clear there was no “bullying of freshmen students.” There is only a call for accountability from school leadership. (Note: since the time of posting, the superintendent did release a public statement, and Michael’s post reflects this with an edit of such.)
Addressing hate requires adults to speak out, to help students understand why their actions matter, and to make the incident a learning experience. Ignoring or minimizing such behavior sends the wrong message and allows prejudice to grow. Gottesman’s actions reflected concern for his community and a commitment to education, not harassment. This is clearly an exaggerated claim made by the SPC with no evidence to support it.
2. NJPEC Condemns Hate in All Forms
The Sunlight Policy Center falsely claims that NJPEC remained “silent” about antisemitism within the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA).
“But Gottesman was silent about the NJEA’s “violent, anti-Semitic” editor. But what is so revealing is that just last week, Rep. Josh Gottheimer wrote an official letter to NJEA President Beatty demanding the firing of the editor of NJEA Review due to her “violent, anti-Semitic” social media posts. Democratic gubernatorial nominee Mikie Sherrill seconded Gottheimer’s demand with strong, unequivocal words. Here we have the editor of a magazine for (something less than) 200,000 NJEA educators, whose actual words were truly vile, but Gottesman was silent. We’re guessing money talks and the NJEA’s funding for NJPEC curbed Gottesman’s enthusiasm. It’s so much easier to bully high school freshmen who wear stupid Halloween costumes.”
The truth is the opposite. NJPEC directly contacted the NJEA President and Vice President to raise concerns about the appointment of an editor who had shared antisemitic and inflammatory content online.
Later, NJPEC also contacted NJEA leadership to protest the inclusion of the Zinn Education Project’s “Teaching Palestine” presentation at the NJEA Convention, arguing that it was politically biased and divisive.
These actions show that NJPEC applies the same moral standard to everyone. It opposes antisemitism and extremism, no matter where it appears, whether from the right or the left.
3. Turning Point USA Is a Political Organization, Not a Student Club
The Center’s accusation that Gottesman and NJPEC “attacked high school and college students” associated with Turning Point USA (TPUSA) is misleading. TPUSA is not a student-led club but a national political organization with strong ties to wealthy donors and partisan activists.
Groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) have documented TPUSA’s history of promoting misinformation, targeting educators, and spreading extremist content. When NJPEC raises concerns about TPUSA’s efforts to organize in New Jersey schools, it is not “targeting students.” It is protecting them from political manipulation and ensuring that schools remain safe and inclusive learning environments.
4. The Sunlight Policy Center Lacks Transparency
SPCNJ repeatedly calls for transparency from others but refuses to meet the same standard. When the Center falsely claimed that NJPEC was funded by the NJEA, Gottesman challenged its founder, Mike Lilley, to release SPCNJ’s financial statements publicly. NJPEC agreed to release its own if SPCNJ did the same. SPCNJ declined to do so. Its refusal to disclose its funding sources raises serious questions about its credibility as a “watchdog” organization.
Mike Lilley’s professional history also makes SPCNJ’s agenda clear. He has worked with or been affiliated with several major conservative organizations, including the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Manhattan Institute, the State Policy Network, and The Club for Growth. These groups share a common goal of reducing the role of public institutions and weakening unions, particularly teachers’ unions. SPCNJ’s publications follow this same ideological line.
5. Accountability Is Not Reckless
Calling out antisemitism, exposing extremist influence, or objecting to politically biased educational programs is not reckless. It is the responsible course of action for anyone who cares about the well-being of students and the integrity of public education.
What is reckless is using inflammatory rhetoric to discredit those who stand up against hate. The Center’s attempt to label these efforts “incendiary” reverses reality. Advocacy for inclusion and safety is not the problem. Misrepresenting it for political gain is.
6. Personal Attacks Are Not Evidence
The use of personal insults such as “Mendacious Michael” or “progressive zealot” reflects the weakness of the Center’s argument. Serious journalism relies on documentation and facts, not name-calling. When an organization substitutes ridicule for reasoning, it reveals that it has no evidence to support its claims.
Conclusion
The pattern is clear. When the facts do not support its narrative, the Sunlight Policy Center turns to distortion, exaggeration, and personal attack. Its accusations against Michael Gottesman and the New Jersey Public Education Coalition are not grounded in evidence but in political hostility toward public education advocates and unions.
In contrast, NJPEC’s record is consistent and transparent. It has spoken out against antisemitism and political extremism in every form, regardless of political affiliation. It has stood up for teachers, students, and communities across New Jersey.
Efforts to twist those actions into “bullying” or “reckless behavior” are not journalism; they are propaganda. NJPEC continues to stand for truth, inclusion, and accountability in education because protecting students, educators, and democracy in our schools is more important than appeasing partisans who seek to divide them.