Howard Blume of the Los Angeles Times obtained a copy of Eli Broad’s plan to build charter schools for half the students in Los Angeles.
The plan projects that it will cost $490 million and take eight years to build 260 new charter schools. Here is the 44-page document.
This would, of course, decimate the remaining public schools by draining them of students and resources.
And the city would run a dual school-system, both supported by public funds. But only the charters would be free to reject students they don’t want, and they would have ample resources from their friends in philanthropy and hedge funds.
Who elected Eli Broad, a man who has said publicly that he knows nothing about education, to redesign the public schools that belong to the people, not to him?
Will anyone stand up to this billionaire who thinks he can buy anything and anyone?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It’s all about the he-con-o-you, Stupid.
Peter Greene wrote a great response to this over at his CURMUDGUCATION blog:
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2015/09/la-plan-to-crush-public-education.html?showComment=1442965354228#c7378453597820918113
——————
Tuesday, September 22, 2015
L.A. Plan To Crush Public Education
The LA Time published further confirmation of the story they broke in August– Eli Broad and friends would like to replace public education in Los Angeles, taking over half of the district’s “business.”
The confirmation comes by way of an extraordinary document– the Great Public Schools Now Initiative. It’s nothing short of amazing– a plan to do away with democratically controlled, publicly accountable education in LA.
Granted, LA schools have never been short of people willing to just go ahead and impose their will on the school district. It was just last week the Times ran the news that a group of “concerned citizens” had gotten a meeting with LAUSD school board president Steven Zimmer to tell him what they think he should do about filling the superintendent spot.
How cool is that?!
I think I will call the mayor of my town and tell him I want to meet to discuss my recommendations for how to make a budget. In fact, speaking of budgets, maybe I’ll just summon my state’s governor and some key legislators to a meeting where I’ll tell them what they should do about the budget impasse. Because, you know, representative democracy is for suckers and little people– People Who Matter just pick up the phone and tell elected officials what’s what.
But the Great Public Schools Now Initiative puts the “aud” in “audacious” and the “balls” in “holy schneikes but you have a big brass pair on you!” It’s forty-four pages of How To Completely Circumvent the Public School System For Fun and Profit.
The Times coverage hits some special highlights, so I am going to skate across this pond of barely frozen pig poo as quickly as possible. But just in case you think some of what you’re seeing about this plan involves scrutinous depalabration (my new term for close reading– patent pending), here are the goals of the plan in the plain executive summary English:
This effort will be structured over an eight-year period from 2016 to 2023 with the following objectives: (1) to create 260 new high-quality charter schools, (2) to generate 130,000 high-quality charter seats, and (3) to reach 50 percent charter market share.
That is, not incidentally, almost doubling the current charter capacity in LA. But the creators of this plan say that “the opportunity is ripe for a significant expansion” of charter baloney in LA.
Big Ripe LA Dreams
GPSN thinks that LA is redolent with potential, positively fecund with charter possibilities, because reasons. [Insert Chamber of Commerce boilerplate here.]
But the dream is not just to tap into the huge market of students trapped in failing blah blah blah waiting for their chance for high-quality seats (and, man, I would love to see one of these seats, sit in one of these seats, visit the High Quality Seat Factory and see how these seats are made) blah blah blah.
No, the dream is to “create a national proof point for other states and cities seeking to dramatically improve K-12 education.” GPSN wants LA to be the new New Orleans, the exemplar for charter champions everywhere, as they head out to double down, buckle up, and cash in. Gosh, let’s see what kind of program they have in mind, because I’m sure it won’t turn out to be a hollow, costly, unscaleable, irreproduceable, unsustainable plan at all.
But first…
Background: LA Schools Suck
Urban minority students trapped in zip codes blah blah blah no change in last years blah blah blah. Poor minority students have potential for success, and that potential goes untapped because of schools and not at all because of systemic racism and poverty. Nuh-uh. Just bad schools. Which, incidentally we keep throwing money at, but they don’t get any better. Also, achievement gap.
Charter Schools Fix Everything While Riding Unicorns Across Rainbows
LA is filled with parent demand for charters, plus the suckiness of LAUSD. Oddly enough, the Deasy-loving tablet-pushing reformsters behind GPSN are not going to pause to consider their own role in the LAUSD suckness. But it doesn’t matter because they have the biggest charter sector in the world, and it’s awesome.
Charters “have maintained impressive growth” and now show a “total market share” of almost twenty-five percent. This is because of “the success of charters to push past environmental and political factors and achieve sustainable growth over time.” So success = more of them, It’s almost as if we’re discussing an investment business, and not a school. And indeed, we go on to discuss charter unit growth and enrollment trends.
We will also discuss student achievement, relying on API (Academic Performance Index) scores, and we don’t have time right now to discuss how much baloney is stuffed into this mostly-standardized-test-scores measure. But GPSN wants you to know that the charters do better at the API stuff, mostly, pretty much. The state also has a special sauce for setting predictions of outcomes, and while I’m not super-familiar, it sounds like one more variation on “We’re going to compare your students to other imaginary students over here that are more or less the same even if they are imaginary.”
At any rate, charters are awesome. This report does not address the possibility that charters are creaming and skimming, nor does it discuss the value in regular, intense test prep. Charter are awesome. Awesome! And CREDO, a group that exists primarily to promote charters, says so, too, so it must be true. So many days of learning (whatever the hell that is) are added.
Waitlists
If you believe that waitlists actually provide meaningful data, we have some charts for you. Everyone else can just move on. Unless you want to look at the map that highlights some great market opportunities.
Things We’ll Need Our Friendly Elected Officials To Do
The California Charter School Association has helpfully dragged the LAUSD into court so that judges can ‘splain to them that they have to give us whatever we want. Kewl, because we’re going to need space for all those super seats.
We made some headway on the last school board elections. We just need to get more people involved in the elected school board who will roll over and let us stomp them in the head.
The public support is growing. As proof, they offer a picture of a rally. You know, the kind where charter operators get all their parents to come, or else. The data point GPSN likes? There are now more charter parents than unionized teachers.
Any Obstacles?
GPSN spots a few.
Real estate and builders are needed to get enough snazzy charters built and filled. But the state’s tax-exempt bond market is opening up to charter operators, so that’s a plus.
Human capital. Yes, that’s what they call it. They are going to need many, many teachers, even as the teacher pipeline in California is choking and sputtering (teacher ed program enrollment down 53%). The charters will have to compete with LAUSD for both quantity and quality. Charters look to “high quality providers,” by which they mean TFA and Relay Academy, so it’s possible they have some different definition of “high-quality”– anyway, TFA is tanking and Relay hasn’t arrived in LA yet, so charters are stuck trying to hire actual teachers with actual training. Of course, some charter outfits like Aspire are creating their own fake teaching credentials, but those don’t serve the larger cause.
Also, finding principals will be a real bear.
GPSN wants to double the charter market in eight years, but by gum, they just won’t sacrifice quality to do it. So funding. And closing down crappy charters that don’t belong to the Right People.
Let’s Talk Money
Speaking of sustainability.
Remember when a charter’s selling point was that it could do more with less. That was apparently not in LA, where, if I’m reading these charts correctly, GPSN will need almost a half a billion-with-a-b dollars of outside money over the next eight years to pull this off (excluding any potential overruns, which I’m sure won’t be an issue when building a few hundred new schools). In fact, late in this report, it starts to become clear that this is, in part, an investors prospectus.
That half-a-billion includes funds for building schools, “scaling” schools, getting teachers (this includes pumping up TFA and Relay), recruiting principals, organizing and advocacfy, and fund management (because you don’t just stick $500 million in a desk drawer somewhere).
I am now really curious about what outside investors are spending on LA charters right now, but clearly, LA will be one more place where the effect charter schools will be to raise the total cost of the complete school system a whole hell of a lot. I’ll say it again– only charter school operators believe you can live in two homes for the cost of one.
They have many hopes, including parent groups, CCSA, and Emma Bloomberg’s new Big Data group, Murmuration– plus the United Way and other community groups who will, apparently, contribute to replacing a public school system with private profiteering.
Okay, “replace” is too strong a word. Fifty percent of LA students will be allowed to stay in the public schools, or whatever is left of them after the charters have sucked them dry. But don’t worry– I’m sure that the charters will call first dibs on the most challenging, difficult, expensive students in the system, taking on the challenges of students with special needs, English language learners, and the most vulnerable students, leaving the public school with the strongest, most capable, most resilient students in the city.
Bottom Line
I am absolutely bowled over at the magnitude of this power grab. Imagine if Broad and his friends said, “We’re not happy with the LAPD, so we’re going to hire and train our own police force, answerable to nobody but us, to cover some parts of the city. Also, the taxpayers have to foot the bill.” Or if they decided to get their own army? Or their own mayor?
Who does this? Who says, “We can’t get enough control over the elected officials in this branch of government, so we will just shove them out of the way and replace them with our own guys, who won’t bug us by answering to Those People.”
This is not just about educational quality (or lack thereof), or just about how to turn education into a cash cow for a few high rollers– this is about a hamhanded effort to circumvent democracy in a major American city. There’s nothing in this plan about listening to the parents or community- only about what is going to be done to them by men with power and money. This just sucks a lot.
I wrote the first comment to this piece:
————————-
Peter,
Thanks for writing this. It makes a piece I was going to write superfluous.
One aspect that you misssed: the recently-departed John Deasy fought any salary increase for teachers tooth and nail—as he did an class size decrease—and now you know why. The report laments the monkey wrench that the current school board through into their plans when they awarded teachers an across the board 10% raise. Mind you, that’s no one-time bonus, but a permanent 10% increase to the hourly / annual salary schedule.
Here’s the report on that: (bottom half of p. 29 at
http://documents.latimes.com/great-public-schools-now-initiative/
——————————————-
GPSN document:
“Across California, enrollment in teacher preparation programs fell by 53 percent between 2008 and 2013. As a result, charter schools are increased competition with LAUSD for a smaller pool of program graduates. Moreover charter operators are concerned that the new LAUSD contract, which includes a two-year quality-blind 10% increase over two years, will not only make recruitment more challenging, but may also increase attrition as existing (charter school) teacher leave for (unionized LAUSD) district jobs.”
—————————————————————
Damn that LAUSD School Board! If only they’d kept their teachers at sh#%^y wages, we’d be able to lure more of their teachers, and recent graduates over to work at our schools… and we wouldn’t be losing our own teachers who defect to work in LAUSD.
This comment ignores other factors. It’s not just the money that’s luring charter teachers to leave and work in LAUSD. The charter school teachers are not stupid, and they talk to LAUSD teachers, and among themselves. They talk to LAUSD teachers about the advantages of teaching in an environment set in part by the terms of a union contract. They hear about the respect that they’re afforded administration. They hear about being treated as a professional, while teaching among other professionals with decades of experience and expertise.
I can tell you about all my own personal conversations with the refugee teachers—those who left charters to teach in LAUSD. “It was Hell working there.”
“It was an pseudo-educational sweatshop.” “God, I can’t tell you how happy I am to be here. It’s so much better than at that charter.” … and on and on…
I can only compare it to folks who breathe freely after leaving North Korea, or back in the day, who left the old Soviet Union.
Regarding salary, you notice how the report doesn’t even consider the possibility of increasing the salaries of charter school teachers so that they will be on a par with, or closer to that of LAUSD teachers. Poor teacher pay is not a bug, but a feature of the charter school business model.
They blather away about applying market-based principles to education, but the one that they will never apply is “supply-and-demand” to teacher’s wages, with the accompanying result of increasing those wages.
With management however, that’s a different story. Campbell Brown defends Eva Moskowitz’ $600,000+ salary on the grounds that they need to compete with other industries to attract and retain such high quality leaders.
With teachers… not so much.
Also, Steve Zimmer came out strongly against this Broad plan:
L.A. SCHOOL REPORT: “Steve Zimmer, president of the LA Unified school board, said today that plans by Eli Broad and other philanthropists to expand the number of charter schools in the district represents “a strategy to bring down LAUSD that leaves 250,000 kids vulnerable to damage.
” … ”
“But Zimmer characterized the plan as a destructive one that would ignore the needs of thousands of other children ‘living in isolation, segregation and extreme poverty.’
“ ‘This is not an all-kids plan or an all-kids strategy,’ (ZIMMER) told LA School Report.
” ‘It’s very explicitly a some-kids strategy, a strategy that some kids will have a better education at a publicly-funded school that assumes that other kids will be injured by that opportunity. It’s not appropriate in terms of what the conversation should be in Los Angeles. The conversation should be better public education options and quality public schools for all kids, not some kids.’
“(ZIMMER) added, “To submit a business plan that focuses on market share is tantamount to commodifying our children.”
I think it’s great the reporter revealed the planning document, but he needs to connect the planning to politicians because Eli Broad isn’t accountable to anyone.
Eli Broad can’t buy a school system without a lot of help from politicians and someone who is in government is helping him with this. Those people should have to defend it publicly.
Right on the mark, Chiara…we know some of the local and state pols who support Broad all the way.
Foremost among these is former LA mayor, Anthony Villaraigosa, and his many associates who were, or are, in our State House. Villaraigosa is running to be Governor of California and is a staunch supporter of Broad, and his hired guns, John Deasy, and Ben Austin.
I encourage you to read about former and current Ca. legislators Calderon, Nunez, Perez, Sanchez, Ref Rodriguez, Monica Garcia….etc…. and how they feed into all this. Most have publicly supported, and some are owners of charters, and Broad. In addition, the current mayor’s wife worked for former LA billionaire mayor, Richard Riordan, to implement his charter schools.
Also read up on at least two law firms that Eli and his billionaire associates use, O’Melveny and Myers, and, Manatt, Phillips. Lots of fascinating reading for such a good researcher.
Alarmingly, there are some on the City Council of LA, and on the County Bd. of Supervisors, who are also invested charter supporters.
But I wonder if this Blume article today has anything to do with the leaked (Wiki) emails between Jamie Alter Lynton of LASR, and her Sony exec husband some months ago? If anyone has more info about their list of donors specified in their back and forth emails, please post it here. When I first read the list, I recognized some names and wrote about them on this site. I think Julie Tran and Karen Wolfe did as well.
Carrie Walton Penner is everywhere, sitting on endless boards of charters, and seems to attend all of these meetings, as shown in online evidence. Broad and Milken, and the Wassermans and the Kecks, and the Lyntons all live in close proximity in the wealthiest enclave in WLA.
The various meetings of these uber wealthy charter supporters have taken place in So. California in the high priced hotels and restaurants, and some in Santa Monica and around town, at the homes of these unelected Rheeformers. The Kochs hold meetings often in their Palm Springs estate.
But all collude to shape American education to suit their grandiose purposes, both corporate goals to shape a subservient docile work force, and political goals to shape voters who can be influenced to support their oligarchic perspectives.
IMO….This is a long range plan that has been stepped up since the American public has been waking up, only in the last year or so, to the dangers of this Wall Street takeover of universal free public education.
addendum..kudos…I want to thank our well informed colleague, Educator, for her reports. She always has historical and accurate info.
To give him the benefit of the doubt — what he doesn’t realize (I hope) is that he is supporting a plan to let 50% of the neediest, most challenging and most learning disabled children rot in underfunded schools because they are “undeserving” of spots in good charter schools. And he is supporting a plan to allow the people running those charter schools for the cheapest and easiest to educate children to take the profit from that to enrich themselves instead of having that money go to the schools that educate the most expensive kids. What a terrible, terrible thing.
I find it shocking that anyone supports this. If Eli Broad really believed in charter schools that can get rid of any difficult kids as a cure all, he would want them overseen by the public instead of private boards who care about results more than they care about the children who are treated terribly because they just don’t “fit” and can be made miserable — even at age 5 or 6 — until their parents have little option but to find a public school that doesn’t treat their children like dogs who either are trained or sent to the pound. Someday, I hope the people supporting this realize what a truly terrible thing they are doing. Thinking that the children who have the least options should have no choices except a charter school looking for kids who will give them results they can brag about, or an underfunded public school where all the kids charters don’t want are sent, is sickening. Shame on all the people who are making excuses for the lack of oversight and allowing such practices to continue in the name of “good results”.
Good to see that even Eli has the sense not to buy 490 million dollars of charter school iPads….
Does Broad want to completely run Los Angeles? He also wants to take over the paper.i’m glad I’m exiting LAUSD service area, I don’t want my tax dollars funding charter schools, I’m opting out.
Bilbo Billionaire invades public education at LAUSDhttp://www.changethelausd.com/education
Every state creates their own laws that govern charters. California is considered very charter friendly, meaning that the laws are very lax in terms of approving and overseeing them. To be clear, all Broad is doing is providing the seed money and resources that will allow present and future CMOs to increase market share.
So, at this point, as long as Broad attracts enough funding, there is really nothing that can be done to stop him unless the laws are changed. Even if the LAUSD board attempts to thwart his attempts, the law allows for a charter operator to go directly to the Los Angeles County Board of Education. If they are denied at this level, the next step is the state where they first get screened by the Advisory Commission on Charter Schools. By the way, this commission is headed by Granada Hills Charter High School CEO, Brian Bauer.
Unless the charter petition is deficient, LAUSD has no choice but to approve it. Again, even if deficient, the county and state will be the next stop.
Thank you, Educator. I hope that the new group to change this Ca. charter law adopted in 1994, will take off. I know some on the people commenting on this site are in the lead in forming this group, I would suggest that they comment here often so as to build their group with allies.
I really wish these “philanthropists” would use their millions to put libraries, playgrounds, staffing, and wrap-around services in existing public schools. Parents, students, and teachers want neighborhood public schools but they want them to be updated, cultivated, and cared for and they want their voices heard in the process.
Most of them are not truly philanthropists. They are philanthro-capitalists. If you dig deeper, you generally find they are looking for a return on investment.
The Broad document relies on an argument for charters based on data, most of this dating back to before 2011 and churned out by the pro-charter Stanford -based CREDO Center for Research on Educational Outcomes, with scores on math and ELA the only thing that matters.
The 2015 report includes some data from 2011, that shows performance on these measures of charters in 41 urban centers. The comparison groups are fictions…virtual public schools and virtual public school students, as are extrapolations of “days of learning gained” from the standard deviations in test scores–extrapolations made by economists who are skilled in making inferential leaps through hot air.
In any case, the CREDO research cited in the Broad proposal is not credible. It is, by CREDO’s own admission, framed to avoid peer review. Andrea Gabor and Andrew Maul are among those who have challenged the glow reports from CREDO.
Broad is looking to Walton and other foundations for big support of the startup. They are planning on teachers from TFA, Relay, and larger charter franchises with in-house systems. They estimate the cost for teacher training at $20,000 with principals from Relay at $25,000. They plan on $5000. per student for facilities with some of that going to parochial schools for leased space. There is a 22% benifits package for three staff who will help manage the money, not a word about benefits to teachers. Not a word about the five year national data on charter closings, one third of those started.
Is there any mention of what happens to the public schools when they start the second system?
Or are they ignoring the disfavored “government schools”, as usual?
Chiara…the long range goal of Broad and his backers is to shut down all public ed, and to eliminate all unions. It goes far beyond only education issues, and is a push by ALEC members for complete domination of how our country is run.
As to this Wall Street takeover, it is a brilliant plan for these charter purveyors to use public taxpayer money to invest in non-public schools which enrich only the investors, with no investment by them.
What a scam!
I have 2 daughters. My oldest graduated 2nd in her class, perfect SAT score. The cream of her class for sure, but she had stiff competition. She is now a 3rd yr dean’s scholar at an elite university. My youngest is a HS soph, also a top student. The school has a solid faculty, certified and expert in their field. This is LAUSD.
Generalizations paint a picture of public school failure that is just not the truth. The truth is that there is magic in classrooms; creative outlets for writers, thinkers and performers. There is calculus camp, football teams, feminist clubs and music rehearsals. There is pride and learning.
The truth is also there are filthy campuses, broken buildings, exhausted teachers and students stuck in a poverty cycle. There are resource starved programs, inadequate classroom seating, antiquated equipment and no air when the temps reach near 100*. There are special needs and behavioral concerns. With a district population over 700k you have it all.
But private charters are not the answer. Exorbitant testing schedules do not increase academic success. Short track teacher training is an insult to certified educators. Attaching pay scales to scores doesn’t make sense when not all achievement is measured in numbers. Terms like ‘market share’ and ‘human capital’ do not apply to education. Pretty monikers like ‘Students First’ shouldn’t fool anyone. Data results, published from insider paid sources tell only the story that supports their claims (read the footnotes).
We must see this as a calculated attempt to demoralize a gullible and vulnerable public with selfie statistics and the appearance of rescuing the ‘underserved’ by profiting on the backs of that very same public. Let’s all pull back the curtain and start recognizing this for what it is.
The only thing the charter industry is relying on in relation to public schools is the public money it can siphon away per-pupil and for property to occupy at minimal or no cost. The industry moans about inadequate financing for charter facilities. That complaint reflects the intent to create a second system of education with property that is “public” in name only.
The charter industry seeks ”markets” where charters can look good. The industry targets districts with a high proportion of low income and minority students. It usually avoid districts with a majority of white students because, well, those students actually do worse in charter schools.
There are also economies of scale that the industry looks for in multiplying charters. The objective is to reach the 50% mark of eligible students in a market.
CREDO (Stanford-based Center for Research on Education Outcomes) reports on 41 markets. Of these, some are turning out to be bummers—the school performances are so bad that they do not help marketing.
When charters enroll 50% or more of eligible students in a market, they have sufficient market share to take over the entire district and privatize it. Charters then become the majority “provider.” That’s what the Eli Broad wants for Los Angeles.
His plan is are strictly bottom line in thinking on how to privatize the whole district under the pretense that charters are public schools. The charter schools will be tax subsidized, called PUBLIC schools when they are not, and it is clear that Broad, Walton, and others with excess billions will use every legal means to prevent transparency in accounting except to their “stakeholders.” It is remarkable that the press got a copy of the Broad plan for Los Angeles, which includes many of the nuts and bolts for the takeover.
An up-to-date report from charter-friendly Bellwether lets the cat out of the bag when speaking of the “problems” when charters are the majority providers in a district.
Begin direct quotes:
Special Education. Charter schools often serve a lower percentage of students with disabilities. Meeting needs of all students will require building charter capacity to serve special education students in a variety of settings
Transportation. Lack of transportation can be a major barrier to families’ ability to access choice All-choice or all-charter systems must develop new approaches to transportation to enable families to access a variety of schools outside their neighborhoods
Backfilling. Charter schools in most states have autonomy over the grades and times of year in which they choose to enroll new students. •Many charter schools only enroll new students in certain grades and do not accept mid-year transfers. To ensure access for all children, high-market-share cities may need to require or incentivize more schools to backfill.
Discipline. Charter schools typically have autonomy to set their own discipline policies. Some charter schools have adopted strict discipline policies that result in higher rates of suspensions and expulsions, with those students returning to traditional district schools. High-market-share cities must reduce expulsions or create new options for expelled students. (p. 87)
Charter growth can only be sustained in the long run by protecting the claim to equity, qualifying for public funds on that basis, and ‘”attracting more middle-class parents” which, according to Bellwether, “has both benefits and risks.” Here are few of the problems with that kind of expansion.
1. Branding: Attracting more middle class kids could undermine the equity case for charters and raise concerns about creaming.
2. Politics: Attracting more middle class parents could strengthen the political base for charters but also fuels opposition from other middle class families who see charter competition threatening their schools. but also cause middle class parents.
3. Performance Existing charter schools produce greater learning gains for low-income students and students of color but not for white and non-poor students.
Charters schools do not always serve low-income students—Colorado, only 17.1% of students are low-income, in Utah only 19%. In more than one state, urban market shares are increasing due to charters seeking middle class parents especially with millennials. Among these charters are Montessori, bilinqual, expeditionary learning, college prep exclusively. (p. 89) Of course, many public school systems offer similar choices.
Thanks for the outline of the devious plot to destroy public education in Los Angeles. Unless parents are willing to step up and fight back, I don’t know what else can be done to stop someone with such vast resources.
Diane,
Does what happened today mean anything? My husband found a good sized dent on the left rear bumper of his car and a biz card containing a note from the person who claims to have done it. The card says the person is a principal of this company and his office shares the same building where my husband was parked. When my husband called, the man tried to get him to agree not to go through insurance. Hubby offered to meet the guy in the lobby but the guy called back two hrs later saying he was on his way to the airport. My husband had reported the damage to his insurance agent.
Well, what’s on the biz card matches the company here in this doc. “Private Market Solutions for Charter School Facilities”
Click to access Private%20Market%20Solutions%20for%20Charter%20School%20Facilities%20-%20EdTec%20Facilities%20Forum%20-%20021015.pdf
I think you need look no further than “Fiddler on the Roof” for an explanation of why billionaires are setting educational policy:
The most important men in town would come to fawn on me!
They would ask me to advise them,
Like a Solomon the Wise.
“If you please, Reb Tevye…”
“Pardon me, Reb Tevye…”
Posing problems that would cross a rabbi’s eyes!
And it won’t make one bit of difference if i answer right or wrong.
When you’re rich, they think you really know!
It is all part of America’s infatuation with wealth and financial success. We do not think so much any more in terms of right and wrong, of reasonableness, only in terms of dollars and cents and we somewhat deify those who have attained great wealth, though it may have more to do with envy than deification.
Cordially,
J. D. Wilson, Jr.
I’ve been binge-watching all six seasons of Breaking Bad this month — a veritable study in Sociopathic Drives and Their Vicioussitudes — and I think I see the potential of a new epic for TV —
Breaking Broad
I agree. I would say Eli Broad is akin to Noah Cross from CHINATOWN, and this school privatization bears a striking resemblance to the corrupt water and land deal in CHINATOWN.
Here’s a couple clips
(2:06 – 2:12)
(2:06 – 2:12)
NOAH CROSS: “Public buildings, politicians, and whores… they all get respectable if the last long enough.”
or this one..
JAKE GITTES: “I just want to know what you’re worth. Over ten million?”
NOAH CROSS: “Oh my, yes!”
JAKE GITTES: “Why are you doing it? How much better can you eat? What can you buy that you can’t already afford?”
NOAH CROSS: “The future, Mr. Gittes! The future!….
You see Mr. Gittes, most people won’t face the fact that at the right time and the right place, they’re capable of… anything.”
and as for Broad…
ELI BROAD: “I am unreasonable.”
The resemblance, on so many levels, is uncanny.
The LOS ANGELES TIMES did an article about
the responses of the seven current LAUSD
Board members to Broad’s privatization plan.
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-lausd-charters-20150923-story.html?utm_content=bufferd3d26&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer.latimes.com
The article states the responses of the 7 LAUSD Board
Members to the Broad’s plan. Predictably, it breaks
down like this:
VIRULENT OPPOSITION: Zimmer, Schmerelson, Ratliff, & McKenna
NEUTRAL TO MILDLY AGAINST — Vladovic
ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT: Monica Garcia & Ref Rodriguez
————-
The most encouraging quote came from new Board
Member Scott Schmerelson: (had his opponent,
Tamar Galatzan won, she would be in the
Ethusiastic Support camp)
SCOTT SCHMERELSON:
” ‘The concept (of Broad’s plan) amazes and angers me.
Far from being in the best interest of children, it is
an insult to teaching and administrative professionals,
an attack on democratic, transparent and inclusive
public school governance and negates accountability
taxpayers.”
Here’s more…
——————————————
L.A. TIMES: ‘Board President Steve Zimmer also had a
strongly negative response, saying that the financial
impact would be devastating for the students who
remain in traditional schools.
” ‘Everyone understands 250,000 kids will not be part of
‘this,’ said Zimmer, who has criticized the rapid growth
of charters. ‘There is collateral damage: We won’t be ‘
able to lower class size or provide comprehensive support
our kids need (in the remaining traditional public schools,
should this plan’s goals be reached).’
(If used elsewhere, that same) private money, he said, ‘could
ensure every child living in poverty in L.A. County … could
have access to high-quality early education.’
“Board member George McKenna, along with Monica Ratliff,
said he wanted foundation money ‘directed toward the public
schools that are already established and need all the private
support that we can get.’
“Ratliff also said that the charter plan underscores the need
to hire a new superintendent who will promote L.A. Unified’s
own successes. The district has launched a search to replace
schools Supt. Ramon Cortines who has said he wants to leave
by year’s end.
” ‘It’s important that a superintendent publicizes that LAUSD
schools are extremely competitive with the best charter
schools,’ Ratliff said.”
THE AMERICAN PROSPECT’s Rachel Cohen compares what Broad is doing to Los Angeles’s schools, to what Mark Zuckerberg did to Newark, New Jersey’s schools. According to the recent book THE PRIZE, by the WASHINGTON POST’s Dale Russakoff, the school “reform” efforts in Newark have been an unmitigated fiasco in every way.
http://prospect.org/article/new-philanthropy-education-reform-and-eli-broads-big-plan-la-schools?utm_content=buffer4b5f7&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
RACHEL COHEN: “We don’t yet know what’s going to happen with Eli Broad’s plan to ‘reach 50 percent charter market share’ within Los Angeles public schools. And it wouldn’t be fair to assume he’ll behave just as Mark Zuckerberg did in Newark, or as other billionaires have elsewhere. Still, paying attention to historical precedent is important, and there seems to be sufficient reason to be wary.
“As The Washington Post’s art critic Philip Kennicott wrote just days ago, Eli Broad ‘is a self-made man…who has also built and burned bridges all across [Los Angeles]. Ask around, and no one seems to like him, though many call him effective…They admire his brilliance, covet his money, fear his power and lament his character, which is described as imperious, egomaniacal and relentless.’ ”
“What (Broad puppet and former
LAUSD Superintedent) John Deasy
tried to do to this school district.
He tried to bring public education DOWN!
And the MISIS crisis was NO accident.
That is… that WAS INTENTIONAL!”
STEVE ZIMMER
May 2015
————————————-
Steve Zimmer recently gave this speech
in support of fellow Board Member Bennett
Kayser’s (ultimately unsuccessful) re-election—
given at a Kayser fundraiser:
(try reading along with the transcript
BELOW, in the following post…
it’s so poetic you can set it to music)
What’s telling is how Zimmer has done “a total 180″
on John Deasy. Remember the days when
Zimmer would reverently refer to Deasy as
“a catalytic change agent” for schools and children?
(That “change agent” quote is from a radio i
nterview with someone (Adolfo?) that is somewhere
on the net… right after Zimmer’s & the Board’s
October 2013 Board vote to keep Deasy and
extend his contract.)
Well, Zimmer’s “catalytic change agent” gushfest
days are totally OVER apparently.
In this latest speech, Zimmer channels
Emile Zola (“J’accuse!!! J’accuse!!!) and boldly
claims that Deasy deliberately caused severe
“disruption”, and willfully wrecked any “stability”
in LAUSD, in order to further privatization, even
if that meant causing “real collateral damage to
real children EVERY DAY” in the process.
In essence, Zimmer argues, and makes the accusation that …
… corporate reformers’ / privatizers’ ultimate and ignoble “ENDS”– privatization and teacher union-busting—in the long run…
… JUSTIFY…
… the corporate reformers’ / privatizers’ strategic and ignoble “MEANS” —“real collateral damage to real children EVERY DAY”—in the short run.
That’s some pretty rough stuff.
In the middle of the speech, Zimmer concedes
that Bennett Kayser had tried to enlighten and
give warning to him about all of this, but
Zimmer says that he had long dismissed
Kayser’s dire forewarnings…
… until NOW., that is.
Zimmer proclaims that… finally (!!!)…
he (Zimmer) gets it regarding what Deasy
is / was all about, and what his corporate
backers are all about.
Thank Jesus.
As promised, here’s the full transcript:
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
STEVE ZIMMER:
“This (election) is NOT just about Board District 5.
This is about the ENTIRE CONTROL and FUTURE of LAUSD.
“This is about CONTROL. Make NO mistake about it.
The control of the (LAUSD) school board hangs in the balance.
“And listen…. you don’t have to applaud on this line,
but you can.
— (CROWD LAUGHS)
“I have a lot of dear friends in the room,
and sometimes we have disagreed,
and sometimes we look at an issue,
we see it from a different lens,
and sometimes there are painful moments.
“That’s true for me.
That’s been true for Jackie (Goldberg) in her service.
That’s been true for Bennett.
“But the difference between the people
who believe that it’s ALL of us TOGETHER—
—that it’s ALL of us working together,
that… that… that our employees,
that our teachers are our greatest partners.
“NOT our enemies,
NOT … NOT… litigants to be challenged in court,
NOT … NOT…. people to be blamed for
the crisis that is facing our children,
but the VERY PEOPLE who can
lift our children out of this crisis.
“Even if we disagree on some issues,
the difference between
the folks like Bennett Kayser,
the folks like Jackie Goldberg,
Jeff Horton before her…
“ … the folks… the folks who have tried
to fight the fight over the years that
I am proud to associate myself with.
“The difference between THAT and…
“And what the folks who are
trying to destroy Bennett Kayser—
NOT BEAT Bennett Kayser—DESTROY him
AS A PERSON, not just as a political figure, but
DESTROY him as a person.
“The difference between…
we who believe that it’s ALL OF US together.
“and …
“those who believe that it’s ‘us against them’…
“It’s NIGHT and DAY.
“We CANNOT let them
take control of the school board
because if they take control of the school board,
they’ll have control of who becomes the
next Superintendent of this district.
“They’ll have control over the budget.
They’ll have control over the policies.
They‘ll have control over the schools.
“And it took us too long for us to realize it—
Bennett realized it WAY before I did,
and I give him credit for it EVERY day—
“What John Deasy tried to do to this school district.
“He tried to bring public education DOWN.
And the MISIS crisis was NO accident.
That is… that WAS INTENTIONAL, because
if you read their websites,
if you read what they’re trying to do…
“ ‘Stability’ is an ugly word.
“ ‘Disruption’ is what it is about.
“But WE know
WE the teachers
WE the principals
WE the school workers
WE KNOW
WE THE PARENTS
WE KNOW that disruption causes
REAL collateral damage
to REAL children EVERY DAY!
“And Bennett and I have been
about trying to re-STABILIZE and
re-HUMANIZE our schools.
“And at the end of the day,
we are about an ALL-kids agenda—
ALL kids, NOT SOME kids.
“And if you go to a door, and if you’re on a phone.
and people say,
“ ‘Why should I care?‘
“ ‘Why should I vote?’
“PUBLIC education is about
EVERY CHILD that comes to the
schoolhouse door—those who are the most gifted,
and those who have the most DIFFICULT
of challenges that are facing them.
“What makes public education PUBLIC education is
that it’s EVERY child that comes to the schoolhouse door,
and no one, NO ONE—NOT ME, NOT anyone else—
has been a better champion of that than Bennett Kayser.
“That said…
the MOST reprehensible,
the most DISGUSTING thing that they have done
is to somehow challenge—that while
Bennett has struggled, and continues to struggle
valiantly, publicly, VICTORIOUSLY
against Parkinson’s disease,
they have SOMEHOW THOUGHT that it is okay
to suggest… to suggest that somehow,
because of this struggle, he is incapable of serving.
“Every … ANY one of us could go to a neurologist
some time over the next year,
and come out with that diagnosis—ANY ONE of us.
“And thank God we have Bennett Kayser to
show us that this is NOT a death sentence,
that it’s NOT a way of having to fade into
the background,
that you can serve with pride,
with integrity,
with intelligence
with capability.
“And DAMN THEM, DAMN THEM
for questioning that!
Damn them for questioning that!
“Don’t let that win!
“Because I’ve known Bennett for over 20 years,
but in our private conversations…
what he now knows is that there is a new
empathy for what our children with
the most challenges face.
“THERE IS NO ONE MORE APPROPRIATE
to serve on the Board of Education.
than someone who INTIMATELY
and PERSONALLY understands those challenges
because he will NEVER turn way from them.
“So these next three weeks, Bennett…
these next three weeks…
they are about you, but they are also about
the future of public education
in this country, and in this city.
“We will NOT let this stand, Bennett,
and we WILL stand by you.
“But the last thing I want to say, Bennett, is….
“Thank you for your courage, for enduring this
on behalf of all of us, and most especially
on behalf of all the children who need you
the most.
“Thank you, Bennett!”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
LAUSD School Board Members Ref Rodriguez’ and Monica Garcia’s backers DON’T EVEN BELIEVE IN THE EXISTENCE OF DEMOCRATIC SCHOOL BOARDS LIKE THE ONE FOR WHICH THEY ARE NOW SERVING. The California Charter School Association’s true and openly-expressed (BELOW) end game is to abolish the LAUSD Board that meets down at 3rd and Beaudry (and abolish all school boards everywhere, by the way), and convert all current public schools into privatized charter schools, which will be profit centers for Eli Broad and their other wealthy backers.
Their goal is to eliminate any voting or input from the public, and have unelected charter school boards—made up of businessmen, profiteers, and non-educators—who meet in secret, and are free to whatever they want, whenever they want to maximize profits, and with no one to stop them.
In short, LAUSD School Board Members Rodriguez and Garcia cynically ran and were elected for an elected position, and to serve on an elected body—per their masters’ marching orders—whose functioning they will endeavor to undermine and hopefully eliminate… or, failing to do that while in office, Garcia and Rodriguez will do his corporate masters’ bidding and do as much damage to the board’s functioning, and lessen the number schools under its oversight, and make as much progress towards the board’s elimination as Garcia and Rodriguez can while serving on it.
Garcia’s and Rodriguez’ whole campaigns were an affront to the citizens and taxpayers in his district. STRATEGY: Tell the public a bunch of lies to trick them into voting for two people—funded by out-of-state billionaires—who will endeavor to… END THOSE SAME CITIZENS’ POWER TO VOTE FOR, AND ULTIMATELY TO CONTROL PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
The mind boggles.
Netflix CEO and billionaire school privatization proponent Reed Hastings recently dumped $1.2 million dollars into the PAC that is backing the slate of Rodriguez, Lydia Guttierez, and Tamar Galatzan (with only Rodriguez getting elected).
In his keynote address at the California Charter School Association’s annual dinner last year, Netflix CEO and corporate ed. reformer Reed Hastings stated the CCSA’s goal should be to abolish all democratically elected school boards, and end any input and participation of citizen-taxpayers in how their tax money in spent in education, and in which people are chosen to decide how money is spent. (CCSA IS Rodriguez primary financial backer… at one point, Rodriguez even served on CCSA’s board)
————————–
REED HASTINGS (March 3, 2004): “The importance of the charter school movement is to evolve America from a system where governance is constantly changing… (i.e. democratically elected school boards, where the citizen-taxpayers have decision-making power.) to an all-charter school system, with no traditional public schools under the governance of an elected school board.
————————–
Hastings further says charter school chains are superior because “they don’t have an elected school board.” He celebrates New Orleans system where every school is a privately-run charter with ZERO accountability to the public, and where the public has ZERO power to influence their governance.
————————–
REED HASTINGS (March 3, 2004):
“Now if we go to the general public and we say, ‘Here’s an argument for why we should get rid of school boards,’ of course, no one’s going to go for that. School boards have been and iconic part of America for 200 years.”
————————–
We’re still going to do it to those citizens. We’re just not going to tell them, and by the time they wise up, it will be too late.
Since in most cities, corporate reformers cannot do a New Orleans-style wiping out of democratically controlled school boards—as there’s no Katrina-like catastrophe to exploit—Hastings instead recommends a slow, deceptive, stealth strategy. He instructs the charter schools and their advocates to “work with districts” quietly and “grow steadily”. This means that the charter industry will falsely profess that they wish to co-exist with the traditional public schools, and complement the public school system, while the truth is that they are merely putting on that façade with the ultimate goal being the total elimination of public schools via this “slow growth” strategy.
The other prong of this strategy—one that Garcia and Rodriguez will be engaging in—is to sabotage the traditional public schools through starving of them of funds, jacking up class size, cutting the arts, libraries, etc. … all to trigger low performance… and use that low performance that they initially and actually caused, as justification for closing public schools and replacing them with private charter management.
Eventually, as the percentage of traditional LAUSD public schools shrinks, and the percentage of charter schools within LAUSD grows, they cost of maintaining the salary, health benefits, retirement, for those staffing traditional public schools, etc. will cause the district to collapse from within. The end game is a small pseudo-“board” whose sole function is to rubber stamp charter school authorizing… and no control actual over charter schools’ functions after doing so… no transparency to the public, no accountability to the public, and that can and will refuse to educate all of the public—i.,e. those who are expensive to educate, and who will not produce high scores on tests… special ed., English language learners, recent immigrants, homeless, foster care.
That’s why out-of-state billionaires, Wall Street hedge fund charter proponents, etc. pumped millions into the school board campaigns of Garcia and Rodriguez.
And right after Hastings’ speech at the same CCSA celebration, guess who gets an award from the CCSA—the “2014 Hart Vision Elected Official of the Year”?
Why it’s the privatizers’ and corporate reform’s bought-and-paid-for LAUSD School Board Member Monica Garcia: (and look who introduced her, and who is standing next to her while she gives this speech… it’s Ref Rodriguez)
The best part of her speech is when Garcia courageously uses this opportunity of her acceptance speech to respectfully contradict Hastings’ fervent dream—expressed moments earlier to a rapturous standing ovation—that school boards like the one on which she serves should not be wiped off the face of the earth, as Hastings so desires… as, you know, Hastings’ goal would end two centuries of democratic control of schools in the United States… and how not responding and contradicting Hastings would be a total betrayal of the voters who voted for her to serve on the LAUSD Board, not destroy it through a Smarick-ian, Hastings-ish slow stealth charterization / privatization.
Just kidding 😉 she never says anything of the kind.
It’s like two members of the U.S. Senate attending an annual convention for a group that wants to wipe out democratic institutions such as… oh… the U.S. Senate, then getting on stage and getting awards from this group… and this award and acceptance speech all happens… right after one of the group’s main leaders just gave a speech about their goal to eliminate the U.S. Senate.
WTF???!!!
Seriously, when Garcia asks the charter honchos in the audience, “Do you believe that all kids can learn?” and they chant “Yes”, keep in mind that included in those charter leaders who are chanting along are folks who have unashamedly kicked out… errr… counseled out up to 70% of their students before graduation. (see Caroline Grannan’s investigation on charter school attrition)
One more tidbit—(from one Allie Wall)—regarding Monica Garcia’s ties to billionaire privatizers: (it’s a hoot!)
Back when she was running for re-election in 2012, Garcia gave an interview on that very topic a reporter from L.A. School Report (LASR).
Check out these interesting (to say the least!) answers to these two conflict of interest questions:
(KEEP IN MIND… these are YES or NO questions, so the first word out of Garcia’s mouth should be “Yes” or “No”, and then a further clarification and explanation behind the “yes” or the “no.” That’s not what happened here.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/monica-garcia-lausd-board_n_2347337.html
–
LASR: “You’ve raised a lot of money from charter schools. Isn’t that a conflict of interest since it’s the school boards job to approve or disapprove of charters?”
–
MONICA GARCIA: “I’ve raised money from a very diverse set of folks. Charters are one of them. That’s a separate conversation than the way I do my job.
“I need people to invest in the campaign. Whether it’s the largest public works program that built 129 new schools, 160,000 new seats, and the equivalent of 8 acres of parkland, or the people that, everyday we buy paper and pencils and toilet paper and napkins from — those people care about who’s here.
“Like I said, there are people who contribute to a campaign and want to support my reelection. I welcome that.”
–
LASR: “If a Congressman was on the Energy committee and was taking money from the coal industry, I think people would look at that as a story. Isn’t this the same thing?”
–
MONICA GARCIA: “The effort to raise money for my campaign reelection is not about the influence in how I do my job. Or the decisions. I’ve done my job, I have a record, it’s been very clear, it’s about kids. I’m inviting whoever wants to invest. They can do their $1,000.”
–
Great questions… ridiculous answers….
Let me see, Monica… you get millions from privatizers, yet you tell LASR with a straight face that there are no strings attached or expectations from the privatizers for donating those millions to your campaign?
And yet you want the public to believe it’s just pure coincidence that—before and since—you’ve said and done everything that that your privatizer backers wanted you to?
Whatever you say, Ms. Garcia.
Somebody emailed me and asked what “Smarick-ian” mean? That’s a reference to corporate ed. reform theorist and strategist Andy Smarick, who has let the cat out of the bag as to their secret game plan… still available on-line. (link BELOW) In districts where there is still an elected school board, people like Reed Hastings, Bill Gates, Eli Broad, etc. finance the campaigns of corporate puppets like Monica Garcia and Ref Rodriguez to carry it out.
BELOW Smarick details this plan of using a slow, stealth charterization to cause the collapse of public school districts and public education overall:
http://educationnext.org/wave-of-the-future/
(If any privatization ever tries to claim that they want charter schools to complement the public school system, or co-exist with public schools to provide parents with “a family of different school options—public, charter private”… RE-READ THIS BELOW. The privatizers don’t want co-existence; they want to conquer and devour all… and don’t you forget it—check out New Orleans… THE WALL STREET PRIVATIZERS / CHARTERIZERS WANT IT ALL).
(CAPS MINE and parentheticals () mine, Jack)
————————-
——————–
ANDY SMARICK:
“Clearly we can’t expect the political process to swiftly bring about charter districts in all of America’s big cities. However, if charter advocates carefully target specific systems with an exacting strategy, the current policy environment will allow them to create examples of a new, high-performing system of public education in urban America.
“Here, in short, is one roadmap for chartering’s way forward:
“FIRST, commit to drastically increasing the charter market share in a few select communities until it is the dominant system and the district is reduced to a secondary provider. The target should be 75 percent.
“SECOND, choose the target communities wisely. Each should begin with a solid charter base (at least 5 percent market share), a policy environment that will enable growth (fair funding, nondistrict authorizers, and no legislated caps), and a favorable political environment (friendly elected officials and editorial boards, a positive experience with charters to date, and unorganized opposition).
“For example, in New York a concerted effort could be made to site in Albany or Buffalo a large percentage of the 100 new charters allowed under the raised cap. Other potentially fertile districts include Denver, Detroit, Kansas City, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Oakland, and Washington, D.C.
“THIRD, secure proven operators to open new schools. To the greatest extent possible, growth should be driven by replicating successful local charters and recruiting high-performing operators from other areas (see Figure 2).
“FOURTH, engage key allies like Teach For America, New Leaders for New Schools, and national and local foundations to ensure the effort has the human and financial capital needed.
“LAST, commit to rigorously assessing charter performance in each community and working with authorizers to close the charters that fail to significantly improve student achievement.
“In total, these strategies should lead to rapid, high-quality charter growth and the development of a public school marketplace marked by parental choice, the regular start-up of new schools, the improvement of middling schools, the replication of high-performing schools, and the shuttering of low-performing schools.
“AS CHARTERING INCREASES ITS MARKET SHARE IN A CITY, THE DISTRICT WILL COME UNDER GROWING FINANCIAL PRESSURE. The district, despite educating fewer and fewer students, will still require a large administrative staff to process payroll and benefits, administer federal programs, and oversee special education. WITH A LOPSIDED ADULT-TO-STUDENT RATIO, THE DISTRICT’S PER-PUPIL COSTS WILL SKYROCKET.
“At some point along the district’s path from monopoly provider to financially unsustainable marginal player, the city’s investors and stakeholders—taxpayers, foundations, business leaders, elected officials, and editorial boards—are likely to demand fundamental change.
“That is, EVENTUALLY THE FINANCIAL CRISIS WILL BECOME A POLITICAL CRISIS.
“If the district has progressive leadership, ONE OF TWO BEST-CASE SCENARIOS WILL RESULT:
“THE DISTRICT COULD VOLUNTARILY BEGIN THE SHIFT TO AN AUTHORIZER, developing a new relationship with its schools and reworking its administrative structure to meet the new conditions.
“Or, believing the organization is unable to make this change, THE DISTRICT COULD GRADUALLY TRANSFER ITS SCHOOLS TO AN ESTABLISHED AUTHORIZER.
(In other words… Bye, bye, traditional public schools—the ones accountable and transparent to the citizen-taxpayers! Hello, total privatization of schools where the public loses all input and decision-making power to the private sector! Andy Smarick’s wet-dream-come-true!)
“A more probable district reaction to the mounting pressure would be an aggressive political response. Its leadership team might fight for a charter moratorium or seek protection from the courts. Failing that, they might lobby for additional funding so the district could maintain its administrative structure despite the vast loss of students. Reformers should expect and prepare for this phase of the transition process.
“In many ways, replacing the district system seems inconceivable, almost heretical. Districts have existed for generations, and in many minds, the traditional system is synonymous with public education.
“However, the history of urban districts’ inability to provide a high-quality education to their low-income students is nearly as long. It’s clear that we need a new type of system for urban public education, one that is able to respond nimbly to great school success, chronic school failure, and everything in between. A chartered system could do precisely that.”
————————–
That’s the billionaire privatizers’ gameplan that, if elected, useful (and well-paid) privatization puppets like Garcia and Rodriguez will execute as they follow the orders of their corporate masters. In short, there’s no New Orleans’ Hurricaine Katrina to go all “Shock Doctrine” on the public school systems in other cities like Los Angeles, so what’s a privatizer to do?
Just induce a financial and political crisis that will eventually destroy the public schools (re-read Smarick’s plan above). Again, it’s straight out of The Shock Doctrine.
Eventually, as the percentage of traditional LAUSD public schools shrinks, and the percentage of charter schools within LAUSD grows, the cost of maintaining the district’s salary, health benefits, retirement, etc.will cause the district to collapse from within.The end game is then to replace our current board (and democratic system) with a small pseudo-“board” whose sole function is to rubber stamp charter school authorizing… and which has no control actual over charter schools’/charter chains’ functions after doing so… no transparency to the public, no accountability to the public, and that can and will refuse to educate all of the public—i.,e. those who are expensive to educate, and who will not produce high scores on tests… special ed., English language learners, recent immigrants, homeless, foster care.
That’s why out-of-state billionaires, Wall Street hedge fund charter proponents, etc. are pumped millions into the campaigns of LAUSD School Board Members Monica Garcia and Ref Rodriguez. Bennett’s first race for the board.)
Again, for a short video summary of Smarick’s plan, watch the Reed Hastings’ speech again:
How to finance your Charter School from A to Z: Private Equity Firm will pony up the money and own the land and the building. Just follow these guidelines and pay up! http://edtec.com/news/Private%20Market%20Solutions%20for%20Charter%20School%20Facilities%20-%20EdTec%20Facilities%20Forum%20-%20021015.pdf
What happens when you kids go to Charter schools? You don’t get answers if the powers that be choose not to reply to your questions. Your kids are not protected equally. Right to Know Act is not available to you if you live in CA.
http://www.splc.org/blog/splc/2013/09/charter-schools-are-public-schools-except-apparently-when-they-arent
Yale EXComm reminds me of Kafka’s The Trial. Is this what will happen once schools are c(h)auterized? Tribunals that fail to inform the students and parents. Guilty before being heard? “Students simply want to know what is going on, what is being decided, by whom, and why.”
Article by Katy Osborn at Yale also explains how the inexplicable process or lack there of may be create a bias based on income.
http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2015/04/29/confidential-or-else/