Archives for category: California
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Should Republican Billionaires Pick Democratic Candidates? Attention, Politico Morning Education.

By dianeravitch
August 8, 2018 //
47

In the education world, we have become accustomed to the intrusion of billionaires into local and state school board races, bundling money for candidates committed to privatizing—not helping—our public schools. The most prominent such group calls itself Democrats for Education Reform, but we have no way of knowing whether its contributors are Republicans or Democrats. Some of its most prominent members are billionaires who donate to both parties, depending on which candidate is likeliest to protect charter schools and low taxes.

This post in the Blog “Crooks & Liars” notes a broader phenomenon of Republican billionaires inserting their money into Democratic primaries to choose rightwing candidates.

I noted on Twitter and on this blog that Politico’s Morning Education recently published a lengthy interview with DFER spokesmen about where they plan to target their millions, which school board elections they plan to invade, without noting that DFER represents Wall Street and contains not a single educator in its midst. Politico didn’t bother to question why hedge fund managers in New York and Connecticut are swaying elections in Colorado and California. Nor did they point out that DFER was censured by the Democratic parties in both states, which said they stop calling themselves Democrats because they represent corporate interests. I don’t know nor does Politico whether DFER is actually a Republican front group with one or two show Democrats.

Politico Morning Education has NEVER interviewed a critic of Corporate Reform, has NEVER discussed the distorting effect of outside money bundled by hedge funders on state and local school board elections. Why do the Waltons—a fiercely anti-union, anti-public school family of billionaires—invest in school board elections across the nation? Why is this story NEVER reported by Politico? Why do they keep hands off the billionaires intent on privatizing public schools?

Conversely, why has Politico never seen fit to interview public school supporters other than National Union leaders? Why have they never interviewed Carol Burris or Anthony Cody or Julian Vasquez Heilig or Jesse Hagopian or the BATS?

When the Network for Public Education released a carefully researched 50-State report ranking states on their support for public schools, Politico did not consider it worthy of even a mention, let alone a paragraph with a link to the report.

What gives at Politico Morning Education?

Categories Billionaires, California, Charter Schools, Colorado, Democrats for Education Reform, DFER, Education Reform

California: Charter School Growth Slowing After a Quarter Century of Expansion

By dianeravitch
August 7, 2018 //
16

Is the air coming out of the charter school bubble?

Are parents tired of seeing their children attend faux schools in shopping malls or schools that open and close like day lilies?

California has been the Golden State for charter schools until now, but the fever is subsiding.

Maybe it was the impact of the scandals, the waste, fraud and abuse.

After a quarter century of steady expansion, the rate of growth for charter schools in California has slowed to a crawl over the past five years.

During the just completed school year, the number of charter schools grew by a mere 1.6 percent — from 1,254 schools in 2016-17 to 1,275 in 2017-18. That was even lower than last year’s 1.9 percent growth, which set a record for the lowest rate of growth in at least two decades.

These sluggish rates of growth, mirrored by similar slowdowns nationally, present a sharp contrast to the double-digit rates of expansion of charter schools for most years since California approved its charter law in 1992.

Far outpacing every other state, California charter schools now enroll over 630,000 students, or 1 in 10 of the state’s public school students. The slowdown in their growth could increase competition among parents and students to get into the most sought-after charter schools and in general limit the choices that they have beyond traditional public schools. It is also stirring concerns among charter school advocates that the slowdown may represent a permanent feature of the California education landscape, not just a temporary pause.

The slowdown is accelerating at precisely the time President Donald Trump and his Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos are trying to expand education options for parents and children, which includes more charter schools, as well as tax-payer subsidies for private school tuition.

What is happening in California is being watched closely by national charter school advocates. “California is a place where you see charter schools in a wide variety of urban communities as well as in rural areas,” said Todd Ziebarth, senior vice president of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. “We don’t see that in every state.” A slowdown in California, he said, will have “a big impact on the national numbers (of charter schools), and given its size and diversity it is the place to look for lessons for why it is happening and how to jumpstart growth in California and across the country.”

Maybe the time for “jumpstarting growth” was a quarter century ago. Maybe that time is gone. Maybe parents are sick and tired of seeing their local public schools taken over by corporate chains.

Maybe the Gold Rush has panned out.

Categories California, Charter Schools

California: Report Finds Charters Neglect Local Control Obligations

By dianeravitch
August 2, 2018 //
11

For Immediate Release

August 1, 2018

Contact:
Duc Luu, Communications Manager, Public Advocates, 857-373-9118; dluu@publicadvocates.org
Rigel Spencer Massaro, Senior Staff Attorney, Public Advocates, 707-761-5672, rmassaro@publicadvocates.org

New Report Uncovers Systemic Failure by California Charter Schools
to Meet Local Control Obligations

SAN FRANCISCO—A new report by Public Advocates Inc. uncovers a massive failure on the part of California charter schools to be transparent about how they spend millions of taxpayer dollars to benefit high need students, as required by state law. The report also reveals disturbing trends about the availability of public documents and the ability of parents to exercise their legal rights to participate in charter school spending decisions as promised by California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) law. The report, which is the first systematic analysis of charter school Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) found critical financial and engagement information missing, unavailable, or incomplete at a shocking number of charter schools.

For example, not a single school analyzed for this report properly documented how it was increasing or improving services for high need students, services for which those charter schools received $48.6 million this past year. Even more concerning, two-thirds of that amount was completely unaccounted for. Statewide, charters receive over $900 million annually to increase or improve services for high need students.

“Charter schools are part of California’s public education system. They receive $3.4 billion in public dollars every year and they need to be held accountable for how they spend those funds, just like every other school,” said Senior Staff Attorney Rigel Spencer Massaro.

Public Advocates looked for LCAPs at 70 schools and systematically examined 43 schools in Oakland, Sacramento, Richmond, Los Angeles, and San Jose which had published LCAPs for the 2017-2018 school year. The report found that:

One-third of all charter schools examined had no LCAP online. These public documents were still missing after email requests to the school, its authorizer, and the County Office of Education
More than two-thirds of the state funds generated by high need students—over $30 million—were unaccounted for; of the $48.6 million these schools received specifically for high need students in 2017-2018, there was only documentation for $15.8 million in planned spending
Only 21% clearly measured how they engaged parents in school decision-making, and only 37% described how community engagement impacted their planning process
91% of charter schools examined serving 15% or more English learners did not post their LCAPs in a language other than English
Of the 12 Charter Management Organizations examined in the report and that manage 123 charter schools in multiple cities, 100% adopt LCAPs at a single meeting in a single location, with minimal public comment

Assemblymember Patrick O’Donnell, chair of the Assembly Education Committee, commented, “Public Advocates’ newly released report, Keeping the Promise of LCFF in Charter Schools, raises concerns about transparency and accountability in charter schools. The fact that Public Advocates could not get copies of some charter schools’ LCAPs despite multiple requests is beyond troubling. Parents and local communities cannot ensure that student achievement and needs are addressed if the LCAPs are not easily available. The State Legislature should close a loophole requiring traditional public schools, but not charter schools, to post LCAPs on a school’s website.”

Community engagement and transparency are pillars of California’s groundbreaking Local Control Funding Formula law and every parent has a right to know and participate in how their school is spending money.

Abadesa Rolon, a charter school parent in Richmond commented, “We need our charter schools to complete their LCAPs so parents can understand the goals, actions, progress and funding that support student success. I understand how my school is spending S&C funds, but that’s because I’ve asked a lot of questions. Other parents don’t know, because this information isn’t in our school’s LCAP.”

The report calls for expert oversight and improved support over charter school LCAPs, especially when it comes to transparency for funds designated to improve services for high need students. The report also recommends legislation that would hold charter schools to similar standards of transparency and engagement as public schools.

Click here for a copy of the report
Click here for a list of the charter schools examined for this report

###

Image removed by sender.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Reform

Los Angeles: School Board in Limbo after Ref Rodriguez’s Conviction and Resignation

By dianeravitch
August 1, 2018 //
18

Now that Ref Rodriguez, the charter founder who was convicted of money laundering, has resigned, the Los Angeles school board has a 3-3 tie.

While Rodriguez was under indictment and awaiting trial, the board hired a non-educator venture capitalist as Superintendent.

Now the board must either select a replacement or call a special election in Rodriguez’s district.

The three-year scandal that has embroiled the Los Angeles Unified school board concluded anticlimactically this week when besieged District 5 board member Ref Rodriguez tendered his resignation. The bow-out followed a Monday court appearance in which Ref pleaded guilty to one felony count of conspiracy and three misdemeanors connected to his laundering $24,000 of his own cash during his successful 2015 election campaign.

It ended an ethically challenged 10 months in which Ref’s legal bills were paid by his lone legal-defense fund donor – billionaire charter school enthusiast and Netflix CEO Reed Hastings. The patronage had kept alive LAUSD’s slim, 4-3 pro-charter school board majority as it doggedly ticked off a dream list of California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) wins. Gut “district required language” for charter petitions? Check. Deny CCSA bête noire Ken Bramlett a contract renewal as inspector general? Check. Hire non-educator venture capitalist Austin Beutner as a disruption-prone superintendent? Check.

The suddenly even-split LAUSD board now has 60 days to either appoint a successor or to follow recent board precedent by letting District 5 voters decide in a special election.

One group paying close attention will be L.A. teachers, whose union on Tuesday submitted its “last, best and final offer” in contract talks that it says have again ground to a deadlock. “Anti-union, pro-privatization ideologues are currently running the school district but are setting us up for failure,” UTLA President Alex Caputo-Pearl charged in a statement. The district has 48 hours to respond to the LBFO.

Meanwhile one of the state’s major charter scandals received new attention, following the court settlement “stemming from 2017’s catastrophic failure of Tri-Valley Learning Corporation (TVLC). The undisclosed payment to bond trustee UMB Bank, by municipal bond law firm Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, was for its part in brokering a 2012 bond issue for the Livermore-based charter management organization.

This latest fallout covers only a fraction of the $67 million in tax-exempt, facilities-funding bonds at the center of a bankruptcy that affected over 1,200 students and shuttered four TVLC schools.

The closures led to a devastating June, 2017 audit by the Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District, which forwarded multiple allegations of possible fraud and misappropriation of assets against Tri-Valley and its former CEO, Bill Batchelor, to the Alameda County DA. It also resulted in state Assembly calls for closing regulatory loopholes that have allowed millions of dollars to be converted into the private real estate holdings of limited liability companies and charter management organizations.

“There is no authority, body [or] entity that I know of that [a charter management organization] has to answer other than to a self-selected board of directors,” testified Livermore Unified superintendent Kelly Bowers at 2017 Education Committee hearings.

All legislative efforts to hold charters accountable and make them transparent have been vetoed by Governor Jerry Brown. Two years ago, he vetoed legislation that would have made charters subject to open records laws and conflict of interest laws.

To learn more about the unregulated squalor in the charter sector in California, read Carol Burris’s “Charters and Consequences.”

Categories Accountability, California, Corruption, Los Angeles

Los Angeles: Celerity Charter School Closes in Response to Under-Enrollment and Financial Woes, Stranding Students

By dianeravitch
July 27, 2018 //
11

The Celerity charter chain in Los Angeles was raided by the FBI because of the financial shenanigans of its founder and CEO, who resigned. The chain did an overhaul, worked to change the management, but one of its schools just closed due to under-enrollment. Where was that waiting list with tens of thousands of students that we always hear about?

Celerity Rojas was unable to attract enough students to balance its budget. Its doors will close, and its students are on their own. The deadline has passed for most charter schools, so–sob!–it is fortunate that public schools accept every student who walks in the door.

The closure is the first public sign that Celerity is under considerable financial strain.

In the aftermath of the January 2017 raid and news that the FBI was investigating the nonprofit and questioning its employees, Celerity was thrown into turmoil. The State Board of Education refused to renew two of its charter schools, and although both schools were able to reopen under different names, the network said some its families never came back.

At Celerity Rolas, an elementary and middle school split between two sites — one in Eagle Rock and one in Highland Park — the school needed 435 students to break even, according to the organization’s correspondence with the state. But only 309 students enrolled last year.

The loss of students meant less funding from the state. Meanwhile, the organization’s legal fees were rising.

Facing investigations by federal agencies and L.A. Unified’s Office of Inspector General, the group hired the law firm Gibson Dunn to aid it during the inquiries and help it separate from its founder, Vielka McFarlane, a target of the investigations. Celerity has also continued to pay a separate firm that specializes in charter school law.

The group’s most recent financial projections show that while its individual schools are bringing in more money than they are spending, the organization that manages them is on less firm ground.

An L.A. Unified analysis described the fiscal condition of the group as weak. Within a year, the nonprofit’s expenses are expected to exceed its revenue by $826,000. Out of its total budget of $5.3 million for the coming school year, the group expects to spend more than $500,000 on legal fees alone.

The former CEO of the chain, Vielka McFarlane, got into trouble for her profligate use of the schools’ credit card for her luxurious lifestyle. Chauffeur-driven cars, expensive dinners, designer suits, etc. It was good while it lasted. She became the poster person for the lack of oversight and regulation of charter schools in California, at least for a few days.

Don’t expect the California Charter School Association to care about the closure of another charter school. They are busy hatching more.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization

Tom Ultican: Privatizing Charters Invade San Joaquin Valley in California

By dianeravitch
July 17, 2018 //
8

Tom Ultican has been documenting the advance of the Destroy Public Education Movement in different cities. Now, he shows, they are pushing into rural areas, into California’s San Joaquin Valley.

“Efforts to privatize public schools in the San Joaquin (pronounced: whah-keen) Valley are accelerating. Five disparate yet mutually reinforcing groups are leading this destroy public education (DPE) movement. For school year 2017-2018, Taxpayers sent $11.5 billion to educate K-12 students in the valley and a full $1 billion of that money was siphoned off to charter schools. This meant that education funding for 92% of students attending public schools has been significantly reduced on a per student basis.

“In July 2017, California’s State Superintendent of Education, Tom Torlakson, announced that the revised 2017-2018 budget for K-12 education totaled $92.5 billion. Dividing this number by the total of students enrolled statewide provides an average spending per enrolled student ($14,870). The spending numbers reported above were found by multiplying $14,870 by the number of students enrolled.

“The five groups motivating the privatization of public schools are:

“People who want taxpayer supported religious schools.

“Groups who want segregated schools.

“Entrepreneurs profiting from school management and school real estate deals.

“The technology industry using wealth and lobbying power to place products into schools and support technology driven charter schools.

“Ideologues who fervently believe that market-based solutions are always superior.

“The Big Valley

“The San Joaquin Valley is America’s top agricultural producing region, sometimes called “the nation’s salad bowl” for the great array of fruits and vegetables grown in its fertile soil. Starting near the port of Stockton, the valley is 250 miles long and is bordered on the west by coastal mountain ranges. Its eastern boundary is part of the southern two-thirds of the Sierra bioregion, which features Yosemite, Kings Canyon, and Sequoia National Parks. The valley ends at the San Gabriel Mountains in the south.

“Seven counties (Stanislaus, San Joaquin, Merced, Tulare, Kings, Fresno and Kern) govern the valley. Its three major cities are Fresno (population 525,000), Stockton (population 310,000) and Bakersfield (population 380,000). The entire valley has a population of more than 4 million with 845,369 K-12 students enrolled for the 2017-2018 school year….

“In her 2017 report on California’s out of control charter school system, Carol Burris made a point about the unsavory nature of the independent study charter school. She pointed out that these schools have poor attendance, and terrible graduation rates. Unfortunately, they are easy to set up and very profitable. Of all the independent study charters, the virtual charters have the worst performance data and are widely seen as fraudulent. About one-third of the valley’s charters are independent study and half of those are virtual.”

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

DFER Attacks Efforts to Help Low-Scoring Schools, Demands More Charters

By dianeravitch
July 10, 2018 //
9

The Democratic Party in Colorado and California have passed resolutions attacking Democrats for Education Reform as a phony, corporate-controlled front organization and demanded that it stop sullying the Democratic Party by using its name.

In New York, where hedge fund money flows freely to DFER, it continues to be a political player, having no popular political base but owning corporate politicians who wants its campaign contributions. It has filled the vacuum left by the collapse of the phony “Families for Excellent Schools,”also funded and owned by billionaires who never set foot in a public school.

Now DFER in New York is speaking out to call for more school closures and more privately owned charter schools.

If only New York’s Democrats had the fortitude of their counterparts in California and Colorado and were brave enough to call out DFER as DINOS, whose only purpose is to destroy public schools in communities of co,or.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Colorado, Democrats, Democrats for Education Reform, DFER, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

California: Charter Advocates Lost in Gubernatorial Primary, Now Giving to Gavin Newsom

By dianeravitch
July 8, 2018 //
21

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom squashed the charter industry’s candidate, Antonio Villaraigosa, in the primaries despite huge spending by the usual billionaires for the latter. Newsom was endorsed by the California Teachers Association. While not anti-charter, Newsom pledged to call for a moratorium until laws are passed for charter accountability and transparency.

Now the same billionaires are dumping cash into Newsom’s campaign, hoping to buy him as their puppet.

Newsom is seen as a shoo-in, since he is running against a Trump Republican in a blue state. He doesn’t need the charter lobby’s money to win.

Here’s hoping it’s too late for them to buy influence.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization

Tom Ultican to the California Charter School Association: “Destroying Public Education in America Is Wrong”

By dianeravitch
June 21, 2018 //
14

Tom Ultican, retired teacher of physics and mathematics writes an open letter to the monied, powerful California Charter School Association, whose lust for more power and unchecked, unaccountable control is insatiable.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools

Jane Nylund: Who is the Wolf at the Door?

By dianeravitch
June 20, 2018 //
2

Jane Nylund is a parent activist in Oakland, California, trying to stave off a charter takeover of the school district.

The charter wolf that’s supposed to guard and hunt with us in lean times? That wolf? He’s flipped you on your back and is now tearing at your throat. And who is the dominant one now?

I admit, I still use the privacy-sucking, venom-spreading, kitty-loving social media platform that is Facebook. It makes it easy to stay connected with friends and issues that I care about. Imagine to my surprise when one recent morning, this video pops up on my Facebook feed. Let’s see what behind Door #1?

Ok, a flattering piece of advertising from the newly-created OaklandCharters.org (it was sponsored content) on Kimi Kean, from Aspire. Given the recent controversy regarding Aspire, is the timely appearance of this ad just a happy coincidence? Don’t think so. Maybe just a well-timed piece of Aspire marketing/branding? Probably.

Around the same time, this article came out from the East Bay Express. Now, let’s see what’s behind Door #2?

https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/ousd-backs-down-after-charter-school-threatens-lawsuit/Content?oid=17013863

In the Door #1 video, it poses this question, “How can Oakland Charters help all our public schools, district and charter?” Um, by threatening a lawsuit? If that’s their idea of what collaboration means for OUSD, then please, no more help necessary, thanks very much.

So which example honestly portrays the true nature of whether Oakland charters and district schools can collaborate together? Think hard before you answer. Door #1 or Door #2? My vote goes to Door #2. But that’s just me.

The worst thing about this latest episode is that it goes beyond emotional arguments and and name-calling. It is the subversion of the democratic process. That the collective “we” would allow Aspire/CCSA to intimidate any elected board into postponing needed legislation is unacceptable, but not entirely unpredictable in the Age of the Orange One Who Shall Not Be Named. The board has a right (don’t they?) to draft any piece of legislation that it wants, and it is scary when the charter schools are given so much power that they can bully and threaten a democratically-elected board into backing down from doing their job. I’m sure there’s more going on behind the scenes, but this incident makes it even more critical that both the OUSD board and the Oakland City Council know exactly what they are dealing with and who is behind it. That would be Door #2. Even more enlightening is that Reed Hastings, the founder of Aspire and hater of school boards everywhere, is probably cheering the loudest at this point. The idea that CCSA/Aspire made the school board blink is, in his mind, a small but significant step towards eliminating the school board entirely. He’s loving this stuff. I, for one, did not participate in the democratic process only to have it dismantled by a guy like Reed Hastings. He is simply one of many in a long line of corporate billionaire ed-reformers who has made it clear that he’s no friend to public education. This is an article from 2016, but you get the idea…

The Battle of Hastings: What’s Behind the Netflix CEO’s Fight to Charterize Public Schools?

I hope that going forward, both the OUSD board and the Oakland City Council understand the degree of propaganda put forth by those who will stop at nothing to get what they want, including trampling on the rights of the citizens who elected them, regardless of what kind of school their children attend (or not). I will also reiterate that this discussion has nothing to do with Ms. Kean’s clear passion and dedication to Aspire. But everyone who has voted for members of either the OUSD board or the Oakland City Council has a reasonable expectation for democratic representation and should resist any effort to interfere with that representation. Don’t allow CCSA and its backers to erode that responsibility. We have too much of that nonsense going on in the rest of the country already.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Oakland, Privatization, Resistance
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »