Julian Vasquez Heilig reports on his blog that the ACLU in Southern California has released a report finding that 20% or more of the state’s charter schools are breaking state and federal laws.
This is very likely the tip of the iceberg and signals that the state should launch a full investigation of illegal activities in charter schools.
Will the state dare to investigate privately managed schools that operate with little or no supervision? Will they dare to cross the state’s most powerful lobby, the California Charter Schools Association?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
No, the state won’t do anything worthwhile. They will fake it, investigate a few but not do what they should, mandate regular oversight of charters like public schools.
You DO NOT respond….let alone answer my questions. Why?
On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Diane Ravitchs blog wrote:
> dianeravitch posted: “Julian Vasquez Heilig reports on his blog that the > ACLU in Southern California has released a report finding that 20% or more > of the state’s charter schools are breaking state and federal laws. This is > very likely the tip of the iceberg and signals ” >
I will respond. What are you talking about?
Looking at the link to the schools that are in violation, one wonders if there are any charters in CA that aren’t breaking state laws
Dear God,
Please make it so the biggest oil and ag corporations in central and Southern California have to start paying up (because I doubt they will end up in jail) for the illegal insidious crap they have been doing in the name of serving migrant farmworkers’ children!
This is the tip! CA corporate charters won’t stay hidden any longer!
Amen!
Diane has written extensively about the issues relating to lack of proper oversight of charters in general and in California. And, what are the penalties for not following the ed code? NOTHING. Sure, either the local or state agency will request that the charters in question change their policies, and that will be it. So, why shouldn’t the charters try to get away with this? After all, it’s much cheaper and easier to control your demographics and eliminate the most challenging and costly students. Also, we shouldn’t forget that the criteria for charter renewal is heavily weighted on improved test scores. This puts extra pressure on charters who do attempt to serve all populations because this can result in lower test scores. In a way, this law is self-defeating and has in itself created the incentive to eliminate those exact students who were supposed to be better served by charters in the first place/
The reason for no penalties- watch a one-minute video of Chester Finn, right-wing Hoover Institute ed reformer, former Gov. Jeb Bush and John Podesto, Hillary’s campaign manager (posted in a comment to Molly Knefel’s Truthout article about the recent Camp Philos meeting, at the DNC convention. Ann O’Leary, senior Hillary advisor, was present). The three men unite in suggesting that wealthy donors contribute to politicians who are public school corporatizers and privatizers.
Podesto’s influence-peddling firm has, as CEO, “a veteran GOP political operative and deputy campaign manager for former Gov. Jeb Bush”.
Podesto’s corporate “Wins”, in a tab at the firm’s site, explains to us, what the game is.
ANOTHER LONG POST FORM JACK:
It’s interesting to read about California Charter Schools Association President Jed Wallace trying to spin his way out of today’s ACLU Report, figuratively tap-dancing away like Savion Glover & this animated penguin BELOW:
https://edsource.org/2016/report-charges-many-charter-schools-exclude-children-in-violation-of-the-law/567622
————————————————
EDSOURCE:
“In a lengthy statement, Jed Wallace, president and CEO of the California Charter Schools Association, said,
“ ‘We agree with the ACLU and Public Advocates that charter schools must be open to any student interested in attending.’ No one, he said, should be ‘excluded or discriminated against as a result of enrollment and admissions policies at any public school, including charter public schools.’
“He said he was encouraged that the report identified only a small number of charter schools with what he felt were “clearly exclusionary practices” based on academic performance.
“ ‘We believe there is an urgency to work with these schools to make changes immediately to ensure that students are not unlawfully excluded from applying or being admitted,’ he said.”
————————————————
Hold up, Jed-ster. You know very well that — over and over and over and over again — you, CSSA, and your school privatizing allies have fought tooth-and-nail against any and all such “changes” or statutory regulations THAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS STUFF IN THE ACLU REPORT FROM HAPPENING IN THE FIRST PLACE … so your call for “urgency” to “ensure that students are not unlawfully excluded” is about as hollow as the Grand Canyon.
Also, there’s some wiggle room in his wording. Jed only wants it so “students are not unlawfully excluded.” Huh? So does that make to okay to not admit or to kick them out, just so long as they “are not unlawfully excluded”… or to put it another way, there’s nothing wrong if a charter operator “lawfully excludes” them. In the present (and past), you actively fight (and have fought) against laws that would compel charters to simply adopt the same due process rights for parents and students that the traditional public schools have.
Last spring, I watched a YouTube video of this mega-douche giving the opening speech at the California Charter Schools Associaltion convention:
(NOTE: Jed invokes their “March to a Million” plan to enroll one million California students in charter schools within so many years of something … Just remember that, next time charteristas or school privatizers try to claim they’re not competing with public schools, and genuinely just want to co-exist peacefully with the public school …
“Yeah, pay no attention to our openly stated goal to poach 1 million of your students away from your schools, and in the process, devastate your schools. Just ignore all that and let’s be friends.”)
What really got my dander up was him recalling a heartwarming chat with his future lawyer daughter — and future employee in the school privatization industry … the Wallace family business, doncha know — about how charters are not getting equal access to traditional public school campuses.
I wrote a comment under the YouTube video of Jed’s speech, and it was gone in less than an hour.
However, I saved it… here it is, with an intro:
———————————————————————————–
Jed and his daughter were bemoaning the lack of “reasonable equality” in charter schools which co-locate on public school campuses.
He was trying to make this some kind of heart-warming charter-school-promoting story… and I went off in the COMMENTS section:
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
(first to COMMENT … see how long this stays before being removed)
“Jed,
“Your daughter and you are kvetching about wanting ‘reasonably equivalent facilities’ for your CCSA charter schools, yet you simultaneously seem to be against ‘reasonable equality’ in another key aspect of the education of California’s students.
“To wit, parents whose children have been denied entry and/or later booted out (err… counseled out) of CCSA charter schools sued these charter school officials —- CCSA members, of course —- because, when giving them the boot, the school officials did not afford those students the same due process rights as those in the traditional public schools. These plaintiff parents & students wanted a judge to compel California charter schools to make charter school students ‘reasonably equivalent’ with public school students when it comes to due process in expulsions.
“And what did CCSA’s lawyers do?
“They argued in court that charter schools were ‘private entities’ and, as such, their leaders/operators had no legal obligation to provide any due process to students, making those students/parents the analogous equivalent of the ‘at will’ teachers who teach at charter schools.
(So much for the “charter schools are public schools” mantra. When it suits them, charter operators momentarily drop the “We’re-public-school,-too!” canard, and instead identify themselves as “private entities” or “state actors contracted from the state”, and, thus, are totally exempt from any and all regulations that the truly “public schools” are required to follow.)
“If you’re a student (or parent) and the charter school people don’t like you for whatever reason (extra cost, being troublesome in some way, low test scores, Special Ed., immigrant who’s brand new to learning English, homeless, foster care, etc.) .. you’re gone, baby, gone… and there’s nothing that the parent or the child can do about it.
“Jed, why don’t you chew on that sad legal and educational reality with your future lawyer daughter that you’re bragging so much about about in your speech?
“Jed, if and when you and your daughter question your consciences in the dark hours of the night, and consider this specious charter school policy, will your daughter think or believe that you and the CCSA are the ‘good guys’, or that your are on ‘the side of the angels’ when you and your CCSA legal team makes such a repellent legal argument?
“In response to this, in Sacramento, a proposed law — Assembly Bill 2032 — was being considered that would compel charter schools to provide their students the same legal rights to a due process that their counterparts in the traditional public schools enjoy.
“What did you and CCSA do?
“True to form, you flooded the relevant state politicians with lobbyists in an all-hands-on-deck maneuver to kill, or at least block this legislation, and it worked. It’s been temporarily tabled. … so as a result, you can throw as many kids in the metaphorical trash all you like, and not have to answer for it.
“Way to go! You guys are all about the kids!
“Regarding those tens of thousands of students who are dumped by charter schools like so much trash, where do you think they end up, Jed?
“I’ll tell you WHERE.
“At the traditional public schools that you and the CCSA love to malign so much. I’m teaching three of these charter school dumpees myself in my class right now, including one who, along with a her mother and siblings, lives a nomadic existence going from shelter to shelter… and you know what, Jed?
“She shows up to my class every day feeling the little security she has in life, knowing full well that neither I nor my principal are going to kick her to curb when the issues and circumstances of her life manifest themselves — in being late for school, or in her acting out with bad behavior or her low test scores… or whatever.
“In other words, when it comes to my moral obligations as an educator, I can sleep at night.
“How about you?
“How about your fellow charter school CEO’s in that audience?
“How about those teachers who work in your charters and who do not fulfill these same moral obligations to students in the manner that my fellow public school teachers and I do?
“Indeed, how DO YOU charter honchos sleep at night?
“Oh, I know… on a bed full of money (I stole that from Don Draper — “Babylon” — SEASON ONE, MAD MEN).
“Regarding this dual standard for due process that charters school officials’ claim for their schools, I recommend this article by Dr. Preston Green (posted on Jennifer “Edushyster” Berkshire’s blog) :
“Signing Their Rights Away
http://edushyster.com/signing-their-rights-away/
—————–
PRESTON GREEN:
“Charter advocates claims that charter schools are public schools because they are open to all, do not charge tuition, and do not have special entrance requirements.
“But what about student rights?
“State and federal courts have issued rulings suggesting that students attending California charter schools do not have the same due process rights as those enjoyed by public-school students.
“In Scott B. v. Board of Trustees of Orange County High School of Arts, a state appellate court found that charter schools were exempt from due process procedures that applied to public-school expulsions. In reaching this conclusion, the court observed that the state education code generally exempted charter schools from rules that applied to traditional public schools, and the expulsion statute was one of those rules.”
—————————
AB 2032 would have changed all that, so Jed & the privatizers had to kill it.
On that score, check out the public statement and directive that Jed and CCSA put out about the above-mentioned Assembly Bill 2032 — a bill that again, HAD IT PASSED, WOULD HAVE PREVENTED SOME OF THE VERY EXCLUSIONARY PRACTICES that the today’s ACLU report is condemning, those same practices that two-faced Jed today hypocritically NOW claims that he and CCSA “agree with the ACLU” need to be stopped.
Last spring, however, he called such a bill “unnecessary” in the release BELOW:
http://www.ccsa.org/advocacy/statewide/ab2032.html
(The Parentheticals and CAPS are mine, JACK)
————————-
————————
CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION STATEMENT:
CCSA: “AB 2032: Oppose
“Unnecessary State Regulation of Charter School Discipline Policies
“Summary
“Expands the current suspension and expulsion petition requirement to specify that the procedures listed include:
” — List of acts for which a student must or may be suspended or expelled
” — Suspension and expulsion procedures
” — Procedures by which parents and students will be informed about the action, and their due process rights
” — Process by which the procedures will be periodically reviewed
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
(Sounds pretty reasonable. Right, folks? … Well guess again. … JACK.)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CCSA: “Impact on Charter Schools
“This bill seeks to correct a problem that does not exist, by presuming that charter schools are not providing due process to students, are using flimsy and petty reasons for expelling students, and that charter schools are not sharing expulsion decisions with the school district.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
(Jed, you know very well that the bill is not addressing any potential or in-the-future hypothetical practices that “do not exist” as yet in CCSA charter schools, as you’re trying to argue here. THE BILL SPECIFICALLY IS ADDRESSING MOUNTAINS OF DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE — SOME OF IT LAID OUT IN CIVIL LAWSUITS — OF THESE PRACTICES THAT HAVE ALREADY TAKEN PLACE. So be honest about that. … JACK)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CCSA: “The sponsor cannot demonstrate a widespread problem that justifies the massive re-regulation that would result from imposing statutory expulsion requirements on charter schools.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
(Jed, first of all & once again, the bill’s sponsor was in possession of ovewhelming evidence of this “widespread problem that justifies massive re-regulations.”
Secondly, if, as you claim, you and your fellow charter school operators were not and are not wrongfully excluding or wrongfully kicking out kids, then you should have no problem with such a law. Indeed, you should welcome it.
“Hey, we don’t do any of that stuff anyway, so go ahead and pass the law. We don’t care. It’s not relevant to how we operate.” … but you don’t say that, do you?
To wit, the average person has neither the desire nor the inclination to molest children and is utterly disgusted with the very thought of it. Therefore, he or she welcomes, and has no problem whatsoever with laws prohibiting and punishing such behavior.
Indeed, who-the-hell WOULD have any kind of a problem with laws punishing child molestation?
Why, that would be child molestors, of course — people who, in secret, currently engaging in such behavior, and wish to engage in such behavior in the future.
Get what I’m sayin’, Jed? … JACK)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CCSA: “Currently law already addresses this issue – the current charter school petition elements must describe the procedures the school will use in expelling or suspending a student, and must be reviewed by the charter school authorizer prior to approving or renewing a charter school; the authorizer may ask for additional detail.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
(Like the 13th Amendment in the movie LINCOLN preventing any states from enacting laws legalizing or continuing slavery — or any federal amendment with federal law being supreme over state or local laws — this law proposed in AB 2032 would ensure that all charter school authorizers at any level (local, county, state) would be barred from including in their charter any vague or underhanded wording that would enable charter school to weasel out and engage in those exclusionary practices that he ACLU report condemns. If the authorizer or the charter school operator did engage in such practices, they would be in violation of Califonia law, and suffer the penalties for doing so.
Again, Jed, if, as you claim, you and your fellow charter operators are not, and in the future, will not be engaging in any of these exclusionary practices, and, like the ACLU, you all are against your CCSA Charter School operators engaging in these practices, WHY-IN-HELL ARE YOU FIGHTING SO HARD TO STOP PASSAGE OF A LAW THAT WOULD OUTLAW SUCH PRACTICES? Shouldn’t you be supporting this law, if nothing else, as a way to make your CCSA members more honest and fair in their treatment of students … a goal you claim the CCSA embraces? … JACK)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CCSA: “If an authorizer is concerned with a charter school’s suspension or expulsion policies, it has authority to compel changes to that process.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
(Again, just as 13th Amendment in LINCOLN that takes away any state’s ability to legalize slavery, AB2032 would make it illegal for any authorizer (local, county, state) to in any way allow these practices to exist, and that would deliver penalties to any charter operator who does engage in such practices.
‘Again, I ask you, Jed. Why are you fighting this law so hard?
I’ll tell you why, because the dark secret, is that that such practices are necessary for CCSA to reach it’s “March to a Million” goal of poaching away 1 million students from the traditional public school system. The autonomy and right to treat certain kids like sh#% is in the very DNA of the marked-based business model of corporate ed. reform movement in general, and of CCSA specifically. … JACK)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CCSA: “Charter schools are unique public schools of choice – this one size fits all would restrict the charter school’s ability to maintain that unique character; for example, a school that requires its students to wear a uniform would find it difficult to remove a student who refuses to wear a uniform.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
(What a bunch o’ baloney! This blather about “one size fits all” and “the ability to maintain the unique character” is just code to your CCSA authorizers saying in effect,
“Hey, you guys can go ahead and be as discriminatory as you want in your admissions and your expulsions of students, and we at CCSA will back your right to do so in every venue — the legislature, the courts, the authorizing process. We got your backs on this.”
The rights of parents and students, be damned, of course.
Now, here comes Jed’s “KILL THE BILL” celebration and marching orders. … JACK)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
CCSA: “CCSA Action & What You Can (and Did) Do
“CCSA opposed this bill, and advocated against it in Sacramento
“AB 2032 was held on the suspense file of the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and will not move forward this year
“Thank you for your advocacy on this bill, and for sharing your stories of how you and your authorizer have worked together to ensure an appropriate suspension and expulsion policy is in place at your school.
“Email your questions about this bill and other charter school bills to governmentaffairs@ccsa.org
——————————–
Well done, Jed & Co!
Once again, you and CCSA show that you’re all about the kids!
Here’s a link to the actual ACLU Report:
“Unequal Access: How Some Charter Schools
Illegally Restrict Enrollment”
Click to access Report-Unequal-Access-080116.pdf
EXCERPTS:
————————————
ACLU REPORT:
“The policies identified in this report are likely only the tip of the iceberg.
“Many charter schools do not post their admissions procedures, student handbooks, or enrollment materials online, and we have received reports from students and parents/guardians across the state that charter schools are engaging in exclusionary practices that are not apparent in the public materials.
” … ”
“The California Constitution requires that all students, whether they choose to attend traditional public schools or charter schools, have equal access to educational opportunity. Like other public schools, it is illegal for charter schools to select which students to enroll. The state legislature made this principle clear in the California Charter Schools Act, which plainly requires charter schools to “admit all pupils who wish to attend.”
“In other words, except for limitations due to space, charter schools may not enact admissions requirements or other barriers to enrollment and must admit all students who apply, just as traditional public schools cannot turn away students.”
” … ”
“These practices disadvantage certain groups of students, including legally protected classes such as English-language learners, students with disabilities, and immigrants, among others, by deterring or outright precluding enrollment. These exclusionary policies violate the California Education Code, the California and U.S. Constitutions, and state and federal civil rights laws.”
The fact that the websites, handbooks, and other public materials of so many schools contain plain violations demonstrates a clear failure of accountability. The entities that authorize charter schools, which include the California State Board of Education, county offices of education, and local public school districts, are responsible for ensuring that charter schools follow all laws and abide by the terms of their charters.
“Regardless of whether this failure is caused by a lack of resources, a misunderstanding of the law, or inadequate procedures for reviewing charter policies, it is troubling that so many authorizing entities have missed these clear violations of the law, all of which are publicly posted on the schools’ website.”
” … ”
“The original vision of charter schools in the 1990s was to provide new opportunities to improve the quality of education for thousands of students living in under-resourced communities. However, charter schools can also heighten existing inequities.
“Through admissions policies that exclude vulnerable students by erecting various barriers to entry, charter schools have the potential to create a two-tiered system of public education.”
” … ”
“These policies are part of a larger trend.
“Other exclusionary programs:
“In California and across the nation, certain charter schools have adopted other requirements and entrance barriers, some of which are beyond the scope of this report, including:
” — applications made available just a few hours each year;
” — lengthy application forms, often printed only in English; barriers
based on disciplinary records;
” — requiring teacher or other recommendations; medical records requirements; assessment exams; requiring documentation of a disability; and requirements about students’ behavior at home.
7
“Examples:
• Willow Creek Academy, Marin County:
“ ‘Willow Creek Academy’s program must be determined to be an appropriate setting in which to implement your child’s current IEP [Individualized Education Program] before they can be enrolled.’ ”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
• West Sac Prep Charter, Sacramento County:
“ ‘West Sac Prep Charter follows a lottery policy that gives preference to students who meet the following criteria. Please complete all
questions: Please indicate parent(s) education level. ‘ ”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
• SunRidge Charter, Sonoma County:
“Parents must enter into a partnership with the school to ensure their children receive “[w]holesome, minimally-processed family meals”; have “[p]rotective layers of natural fibers, including hats for warmth and protection from the sun”; and have a “media free experience . . . at home.
“Media refers to electronic and screen technology, including handheld devices.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“The majority of charter schools in California that make their policies available online appear to accept all students. However, at least 22 schools in California have policies that expressly exclude low academic performers:
(the report lists examples with names of offending charter schools, and what they did wrong)
” … ”
(Oh and how about this discriminatory and illegal treatment of parents not born in the United States
————–
ACLU REPORT:
“The U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR) and U.S. Department of Justice have made clear that schools:
• “may not prevent your child from enrolling in or attending school if you choose not to provide your child’s social security number;”
• “may not require you to provide your own social security number in\ order for your child to enroll in or attend school;” and
• “may not prevent or discourage your child from enrolling in or attending school because he or she lacks a birth certificate or has records that indicate a foreign place of birth, such as a foreign birth certificate.”
“Still, at least 132 charter schools in California require that students or parents/guardians provide a birth certificate or Social Security number without clarifying that applicants can provide alternative forms of documentation or explaining that non-citizens are eligible for enrollment.
(Visit aclusocal.org/unequal-access for a list of offending schools).
“Many of these schools directly ask students or parents/guardians about their immigration status or whether they are citizens – a question that might cause some non-citizens to avoid the application process altogether.
“Birth Certificates and Social Security Numbers
• “ASA Charter, San Bernardino County: “Birth Verification – State or hospital issued birth certificate, current passport, NUMI printout [Social Security application printout], Certificate of US Naturalization, Alien registration card or other INS work papers.”
• “Morris E. Dailey Charter Elementary, Fresno County: “Enrollment Kindergarten
Requirements: Birth Certificate – Must be a State Certification of Vital Records, not a hospital birth notice, Social Security card (office can make a copy).”
Citizenship
• “Juan Bautista de Anza Charter, San Diego County:
“ ___ Check here if student was born outside the U.S., but granted U.S. citizenship at time of birth;
“ ___ Check here if foreign student temporarily schooling in the U.S.;
“ ___ Check here if student is foreign born and has been enrolled less than 3 cumulative years in the U.S.”
• Sacramento Valley Charter, Yolo County:
“When did/will your child first enter the United States?”
“From what country did your child enter the United States?”
“When did/will your child first attend school in the United States?”
——————
and on it goes … read the whole thing. It’s a scorcher:
Click to access Report-Unequal-Access-080116.pdf
30% of those lawbreaking schools are district run charters (non-autonomous. You can’t make this stuff up!
http://www.ccsa.org/blog/2016/08/ccsa-responds-to-report-from-aclu-foundation-of-southern-california-and-public-advocates.html
“CCSA reviewed the list of 252 charter schools identified in the report to identify the level of autonomy for each school. The following is a breakdown of autonomy of those 252 charter schools:
12 or 5% of schools are semi-autonomous
70 or 28% of schools are non-autonomous
167 or 66% of schools are autonomous”
Which means that the vast majority are privately controlled ——–> 70%. It also means that maybe intradistrict charters aren’t such a great idea either. Which is the reason why so many people are looking more carefully at the community school model instead of charters with various types of autonomy.
Thanks,Cynthia. They should ALL be regulated so they don’t break laws
A book that has a passage about the thinking of current power brokers, sheds light on the “tough love” being exacted on Americans. The united plutocratic front (both political parties) view is, “There was a time, not so long ago, when this country was in the hands of great men. Our country is being run by people who don’t really believe in America. They want to spell it with a K. They want to bring it so low we can all wallow in our sins. This country needs to be saved through tough love. When there are people who deplore America’s role in the world, wandering the corridors of power, we think, ‘Get out of the damn cockpit. You people are not flying this plane.’ ”
The “tough love” prescription is the deprivation of both money and voice, forced onto people, by the richest 0.1%. It has created racial tension, increases in suicide rates for men, who are no longer able to provide for their families, poverty for 1 in 5, U.S, children, etc. Ed. reform is part of the plan. And, IMO, the Aspen Institute embodies the undeserved entitlement of the “great men” myth. It is a myth that has huge costs for the world, in terms of violence and misery.
Our supposedly semi and non-autonomous are just as bad. Not sure how they made these distinctions. They aren’t real.
Scapegoating and vilifying our teachers doesn’t make for better public schools: An open conversation with Michael Steinger who is currently running for Florida Senate.
http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/senate-district-30-candidates-stress-their-experie/nr6nk/?lf-content=169870152:549395876&hubRefSrc=permalink
Love how CCSA spins it to say that less than 2% of schools were found to exclude students based on academic performance but fails to mention anything about how many charters they could not access info for. Although, the ACLU’s methodology provides little help when they state they were “able to review a substantial cross-section of California charter schools.” But I do agree with the report stating this is most likely just the tip of the iceberg. Many charter school operators are scam artists and it’s disgusting.
When states allow charters to be “for profit” and give funding to private companies, this is the result and just the tip of the iceberg. There needs to be investigation done on the quality of special education services to students in charters as well, particularly in Pennsylvania. It’s a Pandora’s Box.
In addition, the fact that these schools are paid for from public money, yet they are usually more segregated than public schools, should be challenged. Why are we using taxpayer funds to resegregate schools? Shouldn’t public desegregation laws apply to them if they are using public funds?
Tangential topic – The good that the federal government could do, was ruined by the influence-peddlers in both the Democratic and Republican Parties.
Dear Diane,
First time posting here nonanonmously about a specific school. The time has come. It’s been over two years; I can’t be silenced anymore. There is no libel here.
Just came across this! Please please share! They own Paramount Charter Schools in Central Valley in Delano, California. This is one of the faces behind charter schools in California! They are beyond the law; they own everything! I once met this woman and she sanitizes her hands after shaking “regular” teachers’ hands. I know this because I was a literacy coach there for a short time. I had to get out before I lost my sanity and integrity.
http://m.motherjones.com/environment/2016/04/lynda-stewart-resnick-california-water
It’s the kind of mafia in the name of education that one couldn’t even imagine.