Archives For author

ALEC is a super-conservative organization that writes model legislation for vouchers, charters, and every imaginable way to privatize public education, undermine unions, tenure, certification, and anything else that is associated with teacher professionalism.

ALEC is supported by major corporations. It writes legislation on every topic of interest to its backers, reducing government regulation, reducing the role of government, attacking unions and maximizing profits. It also opposes gun control and seeks limits on voter rights.

Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, said on the Diane Rehm show that he regretted that Google had given money to ALEC because it denies climate change. Google cares about the environment.

But Google spokesmen would not say whether Google had actually quit ALEC. Facebook, AOL, and Yelp belong to ALEC.

Learn more about ALEC here.

You probably don’t remember the claims made by charter advocates when they were starting this dual system of schools; they said they could get better results for less money, which would be a huge cost savings for taxpayers.

 

As we have seen in state after state, charters usually get worse results than public schools, except when they cherry pick the students they want and kick out the ones with low scores.

 

Better results for less money? Forget about it.

 

Charter operators in New York are suing for more money, saying that it is not fair that public schools get more money. The parent plaintiffs are from Buffalo and Rochester. You would think that with their capacity to tap hedge fund managers for millions, they would be satisfied to let public schools–which have larger proportions of students with disabilities and English language learners–get the money they need for the students they enroll.

 

Ed Justice Newsblast – Charter Operators Want More Money in New York

 

 

CHARTER OPERATORS WANT MORE MONEY IN NEW YORK
September 22, 2014
Similar Lawsuits Expected in Other States

 

On September 15, 2014, the Northeast Charter Schools Network (NECSN) and charter parents filed a lawsuit against the State of New York, seeking more taxpayer support for charter schools, specifically for facilities.

The lawsuit, Brown v. New York, which was filed in Buffalo, claims the funding system used by the State to allocate money to charter schools violates the state constitution. The plaintiffs argue that the state funding formula denies children enrolled in charter schools access to a “sound basic education,” as required by the New York State Constitution. Additionally, they allege that the funding scheme has a disproportionate and discriminatory impact on minority students.

The parent plaintiffs are from Buffalo and Rochester and are represented by Herrick, Feinstein LLP, Park Avenue, New York, NY.

As reported in the Rochester City Newspaper, the Alliance for Quality Education, a statewide group that advocates for high quality public education for all New York students, issued a statement calling the suit a “deceptive PR stunt.” “Despite the fact that public schools are severely underfunded, Wall Street-backed charter school groups continue to use aggressive propaganda to win more public school dollars,” the statement asserts.

The plaintiffs ask the court to issue an injunction and a declaratory judgment that the State’s funding scheme violates the Equal Protection and Education Clauses of the New York Constitution and discriminates on the basis of race.

As reported in the Hartford Courant, one of the co-founders of NECSN, Michael Sharpe, falsified his academic credentials, resigned from leadership of a charter school organization, and was convicted of embezzling public funds years earlier.

In North Carolina and Washington, DC, charter school organizations filed cases seeking additional public funding. And, Connecticut, because NECSN is active there, could anticipate a similar suit. It bears watching to see if charter organizations take similar actions in other states.

 

Related Stories:
Charters and “Choice” Increase Segregation and Reduce Achievement for Students in North Carolina

 
Education Justice Press Contact:
Molly A. Hunter, Esq.
Director, Education Justice
email: mhunter@edlawcenter.org
voice: 973 624-1815 x19
http://www.edlawcenter.org
http://www.educationjustice.org

Copyright © 2014 Education Law Center. All Rights Reserved.

I recently criticized PBS for ignoring the corporate assault on public education (with the exception of Bill Moyers), but the current airing of Ken Burns’ monumental series on “The Roosevelts” is television at its finest. We would not expect to see this seven-part, fourteen-hour series anywhere but on PBS. I sat glued to the television for seven straight nights. What struck me most forcefully was that the three great figures chronicled: Theodore, Franklin, and Eleanor–all felt a keen responsibility to stand up to the members of their own class and fight for the majority of Americans. Seeing this was a reminder that no one in high political office today is capable of defying the source of political campaign cash: Wall Street, the billionaires, and the big corporations.

 

No one has expressed these ideas better than this article by historian Joseph Palermo, which appeared on Huffington Post.

 

Palermo writes:

 

By exploring the lives and times of TR, FDR, and ER Burns shows that in our not-so-distant past the governing institutions of this country were actually responsive to the needs and desires of working-class Americans. This superb and moving portrait is a perfect fit for our times. The utter failure of our current “leaders” is glaring by comparison.

 

Yes, TR was a warmonger, and FDR signed the order that imprisoned innocent Japanese Americans. There are long lists of both presidents’ failures. But we shouldn’t let those flaws bury the fact that both TR and FDR were not afraid to stand up to big corporations and Wall Street if they viewed their actions as damaging to the country. That alone is probably the biggest difference between those leaders of the early decades of the 20th Century and today….

 

Over the past thirty years, Presidents and Congresses have become so subservient to corporations and Wall Street that the two major political parties are all but indistinguishable.

 

One of the reasons why our politics have become so volatile and opinion polls show over and over again that our people have nothing but contempt for the whole political class in Washington is the widespread recognition that the plutocrats, CEOs, and Wall Street bankers have effectively seized our governing institutions.

 

Another subtext for our times of the Burns documentary is the reminder that people who come from the richest .01 percent of Americans don’t have to be total assholes. Unlike the Koch Brothers, or the Waltons, or Representative Darrell Issa (the richest man in the House of Representatives) the Roosevelts didn’t feel they had a class interest in keeping their boots on the necks of America’s working people; they strived to uplift them.

 

And they saw the federal government not as a bazaar of accounts receivable to vacuum up precious tax dollars for the already rich but as a means to improve the lives of the 99 percent…

 

Today, when we see Democratic politicians like New York Governor Andrew Cuomo or Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel bludgeoning teachers’ unions while supping at the table of big campaign donors from Wall Street we’re left with the realization that working people have few reliable advocates for their class interests anymore….

 

Ironically, in the 1990s, when the Democratic Party grew more diverse based on race and gender, it shifted far closer to the Republicans in terms of class. We’ve seen one Democratic president (Bill Clinton) push NAFTA and other “free trade” deals that decimated labor unions; unravel the social safety net in the name of “welfare reform”; and deregulate Wall Street. And we’ve seen another Democratic president (Barack Obama) refuse to send any bankers to jail for the massive fraud they committed in the mortgage markets; choose to beat up teachers’ unions with Arne Duncan’s “Race to the Top”; and accommodate the profiteers inside our health care system.

 

All of these policies represent a capitulation to the interests of big corporations and Wall Street on the part of Democratic administrations at the expense of their own constituencies. The Burns documentary leaves one wondering what TR or FDR would do regarding these same policies. We’ll never know because history doesn’t work that way. But we can use our imaginations a little and recognize that compared to the responsiveness of the federal government during the Square Deal and New Deal eras, our current crop of “leaders” from both political parties have failed the majority of Americans and in doing so they’ve failed the country.

Another aspect of the Burns documentary is a revealing look at the kind of patriotism that TR, FDR, and ER exhibited throughout their lives. It was a patriotism that recognized that the country is strongest when all Americans had opportunities and the federal government not only helped to uplift them materially, but also protected them from the rapacious predators of the Wall Street ruling class.

 

Politico reports this morning that the giant for-profit charter chain Corinthian College is in deep financial trouble and is under criminal investigation as well:

“MORE CORINTHIAN INQUIRIES: Corinthian Colleges is facing two more criminal investigations, the dismantling for-profit giant reported in an SEC filing late Friday [http://bit.ly/1mwDAFi]. The company disclosed a federal grand jury subpoena in Florida related to employee misconduct and the return of student aid funds, plus one in Georgia requesting information on job placement, admissions, attendance and graduation rates. The subpoenas follow last week’s news that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is suing the company for nearly $569 million over an “illegal predatory lending scheme: http://1.usa.gov/1oW68U3″

For a real eye-opener, read the charges made against this for-profit corporation by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This “illegal predatory lending scheme” is stunning in its scope. The administration and Congress should regulate these predatory institutions or put them out of business. Unfortunately, Congress has held off because the industry hired the top lobbyists from both parties to fight needed regulation. If it were up to me, I would ban for-profit education, including for-profit charter schools and colleges. Many, most, are worthless diploma mills whose purpose is profit, not education. Why urge young people to get a diploma when the choices include places like this one?

Peter Greene has an endless willingness to read the steady deluge of think-tank reports on how to fix teaching, how to fix schools, etc. it is not necessary to be a teacher to write these reports. That’s what think tanks do.

In this instance, he has read and dissected TNTP’s new report on how to fix tenure. Bear in mind that the original name of the organization, founded by Michelle Rhee (some claim that it was actually founded by Wendy Kopp but what difference), was The New Teacher Project. Its purpose was to place new teachers in urban districts. Thus, TNTP has a vested interest in teacher turnover as it creates more slots for its recruits to fill.

Given that anywhere from 40-50% of teachers don’t last five years, there are already plenty of slots anyway. One would think that a genuine reform would focus on how to recruit, support, and retain excellent teachers who want to make a career of teaching. But no, we still live inn an era when reformers are obsessed with he idea that schools are granting tenure too easily, and tenured teachers are in need of constant watch, lest they slip into their lazy, slacker habits bred of complacency.

Recommendation number one of the report is that no one should get tenure in less than five years. Greene says that any administrator who needs five years to decide whether a teacher is worthy of due process is a dope. (My word, not his.) it is also suggested that tenure be revocable based on test scores, which means it is not tenure at all.

Talk about “no excuses”!

Blogger and retired teacher Norm Scott broke the story that Girls Prep Charter School in New York City posted a warning to parents about the dire consequences of arriving late to pick up their children. If the parent did not arrive by 3:45, the child would be taken to the local police precinct. Repeated failure to pick up on time would lead to a report to the city’s Administration for Children’s Services.

Referral to ACS might trigger an investigation of the parent and family. Chalkbeat picked up Scott’s report, based on an anonymous tip. ““You’re almost criminalizing parents. You’re calling them neglectful,” said Ocynthia Williams, an advocate with the Coalition for Educational Justice. “The bottom line is it’s a terrible policy for parent engagement at that school.”

Officials told Chalkbeat’s Geoffrey Decker that it was probably an idle threat. Girls Prep earlier came under criticism for offering $100 for referring students who remained enrolled at least three months.

Norm Scott ran another exposé of the same charter, posting a letter from a disgruntled parent, who claimed that the school was a “boot camp” that was training children in robotic behavior.

Joanne Yatvin, now retired, wrote the following commentary in 1990, almost 25 years ago. It was published in Education Week. It remains as pertinent today as it was then. In fact, with the Common Core adopted by most states, it is even more pertinent today than it was in 1990. Special thanks to Education Week for granting permission to reprint the article in full.

 

 

 

Published: September 19, 1990

 

Let More Teachers ‘Re-Invent the Wheel’

 

By Joanne Yatvin

 

 

 

As a young teacher, I served from time to time on committees charged with writing curricula and selecting new materials for teaching language arts and reading. Often, during committee deliberations, someone would come up with an idea that involved having teachers produce their own classroom strategies and activities. There was something very appealing about many of these ideas–at least to me–and we would spend a lot of time exploring their possibilities.

 

Invariably, however, some old hand on the committee would haul us up short and remind us that Faraway Publishers had already produced the kinds of materials we needed and that Next Door School District had already developed an efficient method for teaching what we wanted to teach.

 

“Let’s not re-invent the wheel,” Old Hand would say, and we wild-eyed visionaries, sobered at last, would agree. We stopped talking, adopted the publisher’s materials, accepted the other district’s method, and went our separate ways.

 

Nowadays, I am not so compliant. Maybe that’s because I have become an old hand myself and an administrator to boot. But I prefer to think it is because I have learned something along the way: You have to re-invent the wheel, whether you want to or not, because nobody else’s wheels will work on your wagon.

 

 

I recount this personal reflection now because it bears on a key issue in education today: Should we use “top-down” or “bottom-up” models for improving our schools? Which way works better for school districts, particularly large and troubled ones where a few people at the top are bright, capable, dedicated, aware of the newest research and theory, and well paid; and the masses at the bottom may not be any of those things?

 

Under such circumstances, wouldn’t it be better–no, the only way–to give those folks at the bottom a well constructed6wheel, teach them how to use it, and make them accountable? Of course, some clods would never catch on but, at the very least, every teacher would be using a proper wheel, so the kids would be sure to get some benefit.

 

 

My answer to the question is swift and unequivocal: No, dammit! For three good reasons. The first has to do with the so-called “Hawthorne effect” that all those bright, well paid types may have heard about in graduate school but, in my opinion, didn’t quite understand. In that famous experiment in an Illinois manufacturing plant, dimming the lights so it was harder for workers to see was found to increase production.

 

Many graduate students (and unfortunately, some of their professors) think that the Hawthorne anomaly illustrates the fact that human subjects who know they are part of a scientific experiment may sabotage the study in their eagerness to make it succeed. What it really shows is that, when people believe they are important in a project, anything works, and, conversely, when they don’t believe they are important, nothing works.

 

The second reason for championing greater creativity for all is that, through the process of inventing, people learn to understand what their inventions can and cannot do. They learn how to fine-tune them for optimum performance, and, maybe, figure out what changes are needed to produce even better models in the future. In short, they acquire the intimate knowledge of object, system, and use that makes an invention truly their own.

 

The third reason is simply that a big part of teaching is inventing. Good teachers invent successfully all day long, every day. They invent better ways to explain lessons, to entice reluctant learners, to bring unruly classes under control, and to fire children’s imaginations. When teachers won’t or can’t invent, believe me, the kids will–100 ways to shoot their teachers down. If we want good teaching at the bottom of the pyramid, we’ve got to let all teachers learn their craft.

 

But given the structure of schools and school districts we now have, changing to an inventing mode is extremely difficult. The model of school operation in use for more than 50 years rests firmly on premises of industrial efficiency, institutional uniformity, whole-into-parts logic, and worker obedience that are completely antithetical to the concept of invention. That model never takes into account the fact that the people who make up the mass of the school pyramid have professional and personal needs that–however we try to suppress or sublimate them–will screw up efficiency and logic every time.

 

Ultimately, the only way to improve American education is to let schools be small, self-governing, self-renewing communities where everyone counts and everyone cares. Yet the people who have the power to make that happen–legislatures, state departments of education, superintendents, and school boards–will not. Convinced that they are the only intelligent, competent, and caring people around, they fear those barbarians in the classroom, teachers and children, who, if allowed, would dissipate all our public treasure of time and money hacking away at rough stone wheels as our nation sank into chaos.

 

They are, of course, dead wrong. But even if they were right, those rough stone wheels, forged by people who needed to use them, would roll and carry the load of learning, while the smooth round ones sent down from the central office would languish in classroom cupboards.

 

 

Joanne Yatvin, a former elementary-school principal and classroom teacher, is now superintendent of Clackamas County School District 107 in Boring, Oregon.

Update: Yatvin is a former teacher, superintendent, and president of the National Council of Teachers of English. She is retired but remains concerned about education issues.

 

 

Hal Salzman, sociologist and professor of public policy at Rutgers University, says there is a shortage of jobs for graduates who have studied science and engineering. The so-called STEM jobs, he says, have an excess of applicants.

Salzman wrote recently in U.S. News and World Report:

“All credible research finds the same evidence about the STEM workforce: ample supply, stagnant wages and, by industry accounts, thousands of applicants for any advertised job. The real concern should be about the dim employment prospects for our best STEM graduates: The National Institutes of Health, for example, has developed a program to help new biomedical Ph.D.s find alternative careers in the face of “unattractive” job prospects in the field. Opportunities for engineers vary by the field and economic cycle – as oil exploration has increased, so has demand (and salaries) for petroleum engineers, resulting in a near tripling of petroleum engineering graduates. In contrast, average wages in the IT industry are the same as those that prevailed when Bill Clinton was president despite industry cries of a “shortage.” Overall, U.S. colleges produce twice the number of STEM graduates annually as find jobs in those fields.”

The “crisis narrative” about these fields is wrong, he says.

“Cries that “the STEM sky is falling” are just the latest in a cyclical pattern of shortage predictions over the past half-century, none of which were even remotely accurate. In a desert of evidence, the growth of STEM shortage claims is driven by heavy industry funding for lobbyists and think tanks. Their goal is government intervention in the market under the guise of solving national economic problems. The highly profitable IT industry, for example, is devoting millions to convince Congress and the White House to provide its employers with more low-cost, foreign guestworkers instead of trying to attract and retain employees from an ample domestic labor pool of native and immigrant citizens and permanent residents. Guestworkers currently make up two-thirds of all new IT hires, but employers are demanding further increases. If such lobbying efforts succeed, firms will have enough guestworkers for at least 100 percent of their new hiring and can continue to legally substitute these younger workers for current employees, holding down wages for both them and new hires.

“Claiming there is a skills shortage by denying the strength of the U.S. STEM workforce and student supply is possible only by ignoring the most obvious and direct evidence and obscuring the issue with statistical smokescreens – especially when the Census Bureau reports that only about one in four STEM bachelor’s degree holders has a STEM job, and Microsoft plans to downsize by 18,000 workers over the next year.”

Read his article for the links.

Egged on by Governor Chris Christie, the privatization movement has targeted Camden, Néw Jersey.

 

PARENT ADVOCATES CALL ON LEGISLATURE TO HALT UNPRECEDENTED EXPANSION OF UNACCOUNTABLE CHARTER CHAINS IN CAMDEN

 

 

NJ Senate President Stephen Sweeney is poised to pass S2264, legislation that amends the 2013 Urban Hope Act in order to accommodate illegally approved renaissance charter schools in Camden. Senator Sweeney is bringing this legislation to a full Senate vote on Monday, September 22, without first introducing it in committee. This legislation was already snuck through the Legislature once in late June.

“The handwriting is on the wall,” said Susan Cauldwell, Executive Director of Save Our Schools NJ Community Organizing.

“If the legislature allows this undemocratic transfer of Camden public education to private control, district schools will be forced to close, and the education of Camden schoolchildren and the oversight of hundreds of millions of our tax dollars will be in the hands of entities that are unaccountable to New Jersey families and taxpayers.”

“The people of New Jersey deserve more transparency and accountability from their elected officials, especially when our children’s futures are at stake,” Ms. Cauldwell added.

Last spring, Commissioner of Education David Hespe approved renaissance school proposals submitted by out-of-state charter chains, Mastery and Uncommon, knowing they did not comply with the current Urban Hope Act law.

Save Our Schools NJ objected to the illegal Mastery and Uncommon approvals in three letters to the Commissioner. In what appears to be an acknowledgment of the validity of these objections, a bill amending the Urban Hope Act to allow some of Mastery and Uncommon’s illegal activity, was quickly passed through the Legislature in late June. That bill was vetoed by the Governor.

In August, after Senator Sweeney indicated that he would support a reintroduction of this legislation, Save Our Schools NJ and the Education Law Center sent a letter to Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto calling on him to reject the new UHA legislation. The two organizations recently sent the same letter to all State Legislators (please see below).

“The Camden school district currently turns over $72 million, or 26% of its budget, to charters, because of the new KIPP, Mastery and Uncommon schools that have opened this year. That number will continue to grow,” said David Sciarra, ELC Executive Director. “We urge Legislators to oppose any expansion of the Urban Hope Act. The purpose of the act was to encourage construction of new school buildings in Camden, not to privatize public education in the district.”

LETTER TO LEGISLATORS

Dear Senator,

We urge you to vote no on Senate Bill 2264, scheduled for a full Senate vote on Monday, September 22!

This legislation extends by one year the Urban Hope program, which allows up to four private, non-profit organizations to open and operate multiple schools in Camden. This legislation also allows these organizations to open schools in temporary facilities, expanding the Urban Hope Act far beyond its intended scope of authorizing only “newly constructed” renaissance school projects.

We strongly oppose this bill because it expedites and further facilitates an unprecedented and unaccountable transfer of public education in Camden from public to private control, under the Urban Hope Act.

Governor Chris Christie’s administration has approved, behind closed doors, three renaissance projects for out-of-state charter chains over the last year. These approvals have set in motion dramatic changes that will result in the hyper-segregation of Camden students; the closing of many of Camden’s district and “homegrown” charter schools; and a near complete absence of accountability for hundreds of millions of New Jersey tax dollars.

1) Transfer of Public Education to Out-Of-State Private Charter Chains

In early July, the Commissioner of Education approved applications for renaissance schools from the Mastery and Uncommon charter chains. Mastery is based in Philadelphia, and Uncommon in New York. The Commissioner authorized these chains to open 11 schools serving 6,194 Camden students. In 2013, the former Commissioner authorized the KIPP charter chain, also based in New York, to open 5 schools serving 2,300 students.

Thus, under the Urban Hope Act, the Christie Administration has given the green light to three charter chains – KIPP, Master and Uncommon – to open 16 schools serving 9,214 Camden students over the next several years. This constitutes 62% of the approximately 15,000 students that attended Camden’s 26 district-operated neighborhood and magnet schools and 13 “locally-grown” charter schools during the 2013-14 academic year.

2) Hyper-Segregation of the Camden Student Population

These charter chains have a poor track record of serving very low-income students, English language learners, students with disabilities, and students at-risk of failure and with other special needs. As a result, the district would be left to educate, with a severely diminished budget, the most academically challenged students, whom the charters chains are either unwilling or unable to serve.

3) Closing of Camden’s District and Charter Schools

As Mastery, KIPP and Uncommon open schools and increase enrollment, the State-operated district will close many, if not most, of the 26 schools currently in operation. The State in recent months closed two charter schools. It is likely that more of these “homegrown” charters also will be closed.

4) Absence of Fiscal and Educational Accountability

The system created by the Urban Hope Act is shockingly lacking in accountability. It relegates the State-operated Camden district solely to the task of transferring enormous amounts of school funding to Mastery, KIPP and Uncommon Schools. In fact, the district’s 2014-15 budget already shows a nearly 30% projected increase in payments to charter schools, from $55.5 million to $72 million, as a result of the opening of the first KIPP, Mastery and Uncommon schools. This amount equals approximately 26% of the Camden district’s FY15 budget and will only increase in the coming years.

Aside from a cursory review by the Commissioner of Education every two years, the renaissance chains also are exempt from the State accountability and oversight requirements applicable to district and charter schools. Instead, responsibility for the education of Camden’s children and the effective and efficient use of hundreds of millions in New Jersey tax dollars would shift to the boards of trustees of the private charter chains. The Urban Hope legislation does not indicate how these organizations would be held accountable for providing a “thorough and efficient” education not just for some, but for the majority of Camden’s schoolchildren.

The Urban Hope Act has been used in Camden to serve a purpose far beyond its intent of creating four newly constructed school projects. Rather, it has been used to remake public education, shifting governance and control over the city’s schools to private organizations based outside New Jersey. This has occurred with almost no information about the specifics of the State’s plans, no meaningful opportunity for parent and community input, and no assurance of accountability going forward.

For these reasons, we oppose any further expansion or extension of the Urban Hope Act. We also urge the Joint Committee on the Public Schools to conduct investigative hearings into the Commissioners’ decisions allowing the Mastery, Uncommon and KIPP chains to, in effect, take over public education in Camden and to determine if any steps can now be taken to address the impact of these decisions on students and schools in the State-operated district.

Sincerely,

David Sciarra
Executive Director
Education Law Center

Susan Cauldwell
Executive Director
Save Our Schools
NJ Community Organizing

Jumoke Academy, once the star charter school of Governor Malloy and State Commissioner of Education Stefan Pryor, paid over $1 million to the husband of an executive for renovations, according to the Hartford Courant.

“HARTFORD — The Jumoke Academy charter school organization, now facing a state probe into allegations of nepotism, directed more than a million dollars in construction work to the husband of one of its executives, a Courant investigation has found.

“Jumoke’s payments to HSK Home Improvements included at least $85,000 in state grant money used to renovate a Victorian mansion and convert its second floor into an apartment later occupied by the charter group’s longtime leader, Michael M. Sharpe. The apartment, built in 2012 to Sharpe’s specifications, featured a new $12,000 master bathroom with a custom glass shower door.

“State records show HSK Home Improvements is owned by Kenneth Hollis and operated out of his East Hartford home. His wife, Anette Hollis, served as Jumoke’s facilities director and later became chief operating officer of Family Urban Schools of Excellence, the charter management group that ran Jumoke’s schools after Sharpe founded FUSE in 2012.

“Anette Hollis, who lost her job when FUSE collapsed this summer, said in August that she had no role in any of the work her husband performed for Jumoke, “because it was obviously a conflict of interest.”

“But Jumoke financial records show more than $26,000 in purchase orders for HSK that bear her name; among them, a $1,615 job in July 2011 that included painting her office. Anette Hollis did not respond to a subsequent request for comment.

“Kenneth Hollis was most active at Jumoke in 2012 and 2013, when his company received about $540,000 from the state-funded charter operation. But records obtained from Jumoke through a Freedom of Information request show that HSK has performed work for the organization dating back to at least 2000 and has been paid more than $1 million in total.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 111,069 other followers