Archives for category: Privatization

 

Jennifer Berkshire and Jack Schneider interview Arizona Republic reporter Craig Harris about the charter school scandals in Arizona, the “wild west” of charters.

Harris was a member of the investigative team that won the prestigious George Polk Award for its coverage of charter schools in their state.

You can listen here.

Or, you can read the interview here. 

Here is a small excerpt, where they begin to interview Craig Harris:

Craig Harris​: It started about a year ago on two fronts. One, there was a relatively prominent charter school, a notorious charter school that abruptly closed on the west side of Phoenix in a town called Goodyear. And the reason that school had gained some notoriety is because a few years earlier, one of the students had gone missing and died. And what happened, now we’re finding out later, is that the school was being fraudulent on its attendance in order to keep it running because people had left the school because of the tragedy. And so the school got shut down. And that piqued our interest.

And then I live on the east side of Phoenix in town called Gilbert, which is kind of like ground zero of where charter schools are. They’re very, very popular out in my neck of the woods. And part of the reason is that a lot of the operators that run the charter schools belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. They’re Mormons. And so a lot of them have developed charter schools and they’ve been able to grow because they have pretty good academics, but they also focus on morality and wholesomeness and things like, so that, that gets a lot of parents to enroll their kids at those schools.

Berkshire​: Well, we are obviously here to talk about some of the less wholesome aspects of Arizona’s charter school industry over the last year. You’ve written one unbelievable exposé after another about the edupreneurs, as I like to call them, who are getting rich off of running charter schools. I know it’s hard to choose, but I want you to pick your favorite scandal for us and just sort of break down for us the nature of the scam.

Craig Harris​: Well, Arizona, depending on how you look at it—if you’re a charter organizer Arizona is considered one of the best states in the country for charter schools because it has some of the fewest and weakest oversight and regulations of any of the 44 states that have charter schools. And so one of the stories I wrote about was a guy named Eddie Farnsworth. And coincidentally Eddie is my state senator. We actually live within two miles of each other. And he ran a series of charter schools called Benjamin Franklin Charter Schools. They built them from the ground up. So what happened is that Mr. Farnsworth, who’s also a legislator who’s been in the office for like two decades, created a nonprofit company with three friends of his, two of whom were lobbyists who got votes from him to favor their clients to buy his schools, and they paid top dollar for those schools.

And he made about $14 million in profit on the sale of his schools, which were privately owned, to a nonprofit company that he set up. And then that nonprofit hired him as a consultant and then also agreed to lease buildings from him and agreed to hire his brother as the chief executive. And so he has gotten extremely rich from this. And then during his time when he was in the legislature, we went back and look and he repeatedly voted on bills that increased funding for charter schools. And at the same time he blocked bills that would have brought more restrictions and oversight on charter schools.

The legislature responded to the series of exposes in the Arizona Republic by promising to pass a law reining in the wrongdoing. But, here’s the catch: the charter lobbyists wrote the “reform” legislation!

Harris said:

The Charter Association, which is a nonprofit business that represents the 500 plus charter schools, their lobbyists wrote most of the bill. And so what happened when the lobbyist for the Charter Association or basically the charter industry wrote most of the bill is the legislation is what critics call window dressing. It doesn’t stop any of the self dealing. It doesn’t stop organizations like another one wrote about, which is an online school called Primavera. Their CEO, he paid himself $10 million over the last year and a half, while having incredibly high dropout rates and very low test scores.

The bill also doesn’t stop self dealing from giving no-bid management contracts that are worth tens of millions of dollars.

 

 

The board of Houston Independent School District is reviewing three charter networks founded by one woman, who is both the highest ranking employee and pays her “related companies” $17 million dollars.

Lois Bullock runs the networks and pays rent to companies she owns.

“Over the past half-decade, Bullock’s company has served as the landlord for Energized For Excellence Academy, taking in $10.8 million in lease payments, and received a $4.2 million loan from the organization, records show. Bullock’s company also earned about $2 million over five years for her “labor and job benefits,” an annual amount roughly equivalent to the compensation of HISD’s superintendent. The three charter networks enroll about 4,000 students at eight campuses, while HISD serves nearly 210,000 students.

“HISD trustees are scheduled to vote Thursday on whether to authorize the renewal of contracts with the three charter networks, as well as five other in-district charter operators. The vote will determine whether the eight networks, which have a combined enrollment of about 11,000 students, can remain open past the 2018-19 school year.”

Remember, this is taxpayers’ money, intended for classrooms and instruction.

 

A federal judge ruled that Charter Day School’s dress code–which requires girls to wear skirts and does not permit them to wear trousers or shorts–is unconstitutional.

“Yes, the boys at the school must conform to a uniform policy as well,” Senior U.S. District Judge Malcolm J. Howard wrote. “But plaintiffs in this case have shown that the girls are subject to a specific clothing requirement that renders them unable to play as freely during recess, requires them to sit in an uncomfortable manner in the classroom, causes them to be overly focused on how they are sitting, distracts them from learning, and subjects them to cold temperatures on their legs … .”

Also, the judge ruled that the organization that holds the charter for the Charter Day School, a K-8 school in Leland, N.C., acted under state authority, or “color of state law,” when it incorporated its disparate dress code into its disciplinary code.

“In this matter, CDS, Inc. has brought the uniform policy under extensive regulation of the state by making violations of the uniform policy a disciplinary violation,” the judge said.

Howard went on to rule that the manager of Charter Day School, an entity known as Roger Bacon Academy Inc., was not a state actor because it does not contract with or received funding directly from the state and had no power to change the dress code, which was set by the CDS board.

CDS is a “traditional values” themed school and the school’s founder, Baker Mitchell, has asserted that the dress code requirement that girls wear skirts was part of a climate of “chivalry” and “mutual respect.”

Too bad that Education Week did not delve deeper into the management company of this charter school. Roger Bacon Academy operates the charter school. RBA is a for-profit corporation owned by Baker Mitchell and is a favorite of the Koch brothers. Marian Wang of ProPublica investigated RBA in 2014 and reported that it was making millions for Mr. Mitchell, a politically-connected businessman with deeply libertarian views.

Every year, millions of public education dollars flow through Mitchell’s chain of four nonprofit charter schools to for-profit companies he controls.

How Public Dollars for Charters Flow to For-Profit Companies

Over six years, Mitchell’s two companies have taken in close to $20 million in fees and rent — some of the schools’ biggest expenses. That’s from audited financial statements for just two schools. Mitchell has recently opened two more.

The schools buy or lease nearly everything from companies owned by Mitchell. Their desks. Their computers. The training they provide to teachers. Most of the land and buildings. Unlike with traditional school districts, at Mitchell’s charter schools there’s no competitive bidding. No evidence of haggling over rent or contracts.

The schools have all hired the same for-profit management company to run their day-to-day operations. The company, Roger Bacon Academy, is owned by Mitchell. It functions as the schools’ administrative arm, taking the lead in hiring and firing school staff. It handles most of the bookkeeping. The treasurer of the nonprofit that controls the four schools is also the chief financial officer of Mitchell’s management company. The two organizations even share a bank account.

Mitchell’s management company was chosen by the schools’ nonprofit board, which Mitchell was on at the time — an arrangement that is illegal in many other states.

Hello, Education Week! How about reporting on Baker Mitchell’s charter chain and its outlandish profits?

.

 

 

Republicans were once the party that advocated for local control of schools. No longer. Now they support state takeovers. This is the Big Bad Wolf technique.  State Control makes it easier to privatize public schools. No need to listen to parents or communities. No raucous school board meetings. No democracy. State control of schools is autocracy in action.

In Arkansas, a state that is almost wholly owned by one wealthy family, the Little Rock School District wastaken over by the state because six of its 48 schools had low test scores. A Democrat proposedto End State Control after five years. That bill failed. A Republican state legislator has proposed to extend state control to nine years.

The Republican legislator puts the onus on the district for failing to improve while it is under state control. This is whacky. If the district hasn’t improved under state control, it’s the state that has failed, not the district. Why punish the district for the state’s failure? Why not hold the state accountable?

This report was published by the Arkansas Public School Resource Center, without a link.

 

“BY CATHY FRYE
“LITTLE ROCK –  Senator Kim Hammer, R-District 33, on Monday filed a bill that would allow the Arkansas Department of Education and State Board of Education to retain control of public school districts for up to nine years.
”SB668 accomplishes this by letting the State Board grant two 24-month extensions if a district that has been under state control for five years still isn’t meeting expectations.
“The bill appears to be a response to Senator Will Bond’s failed legislation that would have required ADE and the State Board to return school districts to local control within five years of a takeover.
“Bond, D-District 32, testified last week in the Senate Education Committee that the bill would apply to any and all school districts taken over by the state.
“Current law states: “If the public school district has not demonstrated to the State Board and the Department of Education that the public school district meets the criteria to exit Level 5-Intensive Support within five years of the assumption of authority shall annex, consolidate or reconstitute the public school district…”
“Bond’s bill, SB553, proposed another option – returning a district to local control as long as it met certain criteria.
“At that committee meeting, ADE Commissioner Johnny Key contended that approval of the legislation would create an uncertain situation where “we’re back to not knowing,” adding that in the case of the Little Rock School District, which is approaching the 5th anniversary of its takeover, “the exit criteria was recently communicated.”
“Per Bond’s bill, the State Board would be able to return a school district to local control if the following criteria were met:
  • “The public school district has adopted a plan to correct the issue or issues that caused the classification of the public school district as being in need of Level 5-Intensive support; and
  • “All public schools within the public school district that is classified as being in need of Level 5 – Intensive support are making demonstrable progress towards the removal of the Level 5-Intensive support classification; or
  • “The number of public schools that are classified as in need of Level 5 – Intensive support within a public school district has increased while under the authority of the state board.”
“The bill further states: “The state board may promulgate rules to establish regarding the criteria by which a public school district may exit Level 5-Intensive support as established under subdivision (c)(2) of this section.”
“In closing for his bill, Bond asked committee members to think about how their school districts would feel about remaining under state control for more than five years. This isn’t just about Little Rock, he said.
“In the end, the bill failed.
“Hammer’s bill has been referred to the Senate Education Committee and could run as soon as Wednesday. The committee meets at 10 a.m. in Room 207. An agenda has not yet been posted.
“Hammer’s bill still offers the State Board the options of annexation, consolidation or reconstitution of school districts. At the end of five years, the State Board could consider those choices or extend the state takeover by another 24 months. When the two-year extension ends, the bill states, the board would then be allowed to grant a second two-year extension.”
Senator Kim Hammer hates democracy and local control. 
From Wikipedia:

Kim David Hammer is a Missionary Baptist pastor and hospice chaplain in Benton, Arkansas, who is a Republican member of the Arkansas House of Representatives for District 28 in Saline County near the capital city of Little Rock.

Bentonville is the home base of the Waltons, where most of them attended and graduated from the local PUBLIC schools. The Waltons, having benefitted from their good public education, are now using their multi billion dollar ($150 billion) to destroy public schools across the nation. Ingrates.

 

Bob Braun was a reporter for New Jersey’s biggest newspaper—the Star-Ledger—for fifty years. Now he writes what he wants, without any constraints.

In this post, he lacerates the series of articles about charter school corruption and theft of public dollars in New Jersey because it failed to reach the logical conclusion of the evidence it produced. The logical conclusion would be to call off the heist of public funds by grifters, real estate developers, and corporate chains.

He writes.

The series, far from calling for an end to the theft of public school funds to finance charter expansion, promotes so-called “reforms” that would make it easier for charters to expand—and further degrade  public schools. ..

“Wrong because, the basic, irrefutable truth about charter schools is this:

“Privately-operated charters take away money (construction and operating funds) from public schools—especially in New Jersey’s largest cities where resources are scarce. They are replacing public schools, using public money that should be used to repair public schools.

“Charters are replacing regular public schools and that was never the intent.

“Following the series’ suggestions would mean more charter schools, less money for public schools, and a continuation–even enhancement–of the racism that propels public education policy in New Jersey’s cities.

“The truth about privately operated charters and how they are built and operated with public funds  has been glaringly obvious for years—but few in the commercial press wanted to look at it, including The Record (northjersey.com).”

Once again, like the series in the Los Angeles Times that documented corruption on a grand scale, the series concludes with a timid proposal that pleases and is sure to embolden the charter lobby.

Braun describes in detail how Governor Chris Christie, Newark Mayor Cory Booker, Education Entrepreneur Chris Cerf and their allies engineered the charter school coup, with the help of the Star-Ledger’s zealous Charter love:

“Yes it is too bad that charter schools—with the connivance of Christie, Booker, Cerf, former state-appointed Newark superintendent Anderson and former state education commissioner David Hespe, among others—were able to channel tens of millions of public dollars to privately-owned charter school operations.

“But that wasn’t the worst of it.

              “Children suffered—and the mainstream media didn’t give a damn. Anyone who expressed sympathy for Newark’s children was denounced as a conspiracy theorist.”

To understand the moral and ethical corruption at the heart of charter schools in New Jersey, read Braun’s article in full.

The moral and ethical corruption was even worse than the real estate deals and graft.

 

This article is the last of a five-part series called “Cashing in on Charter Schools,” published by northjersey.com and USA Today New Jersey and written by Jean Rimbach and Abbott Koloff.

The post examines possible fixes for the problems and profiteering described in previous entries in the series. 

This concluding article in a series that revealed widespread theft of public funds is deeply disappointing. Instead of recommending an end to New jersey’s Ill-fated and disastrous experiment in charter schools, turning public money over to secretive and unaccountable entrepreneurs and national corporate, chains, the authors wimp out.

“A short-sighted law, a lack of funding and inadequate oversight has left New Jersey’s charter schools to find their own way when it comes to filling a basic need: finding a home.

“The result is a system that allows charter school operators to use public money to pay for buildings that are privately owned. It can push charter schools and the support groups that own and finance real estate on their behalf into unusual and costly building deals, leaving taxpayers to pick up the tab.

“It’s a system in which financial transactions often play out behind a wall of secrecy, away from the public eye and beyond the reach of open records laws.”

The system of financing charter schools is broken.

The article interviews experts about ways to fix it.

The fix must begin with financial transparency. But the major charter chains refuse to open their books for public inspection.

“Private groups tied to charter schools — many of them created solely to hold real estate — also declined to provide records related to projects and their financing, saying they are not subject to public records laws.

“In many cases, both the schools and their support groups declined to discuss details of financial transactions related to construction projects.

”The state Education Department said that it “does not have the authority to review financing or lease agreements before they are signed” and that it “doesn’t oversee private related companies.”

“I disagree; I think they have the authority because they’re using public money,” said Joseph V. Doria Jr., a former state legislator who was an author of the state’s charter school law. “If they feel they don’t have the authority, just introduce legislation.”

But none of the parties to the transactions wants to open their books.

“The dearth of public information means, for example, that taxpayers can’t see why the Friends of TEAM Academy, which supports the Newark charter school, has earned millions of dollars in development fees or how that money is spent.

“Taxpayers won’t know why Uncommon Schools donated millions to North Star Academy but then required that the money be spent on a building owned by a related company.

“Taxpayers can’t see the agreement that the Friends of Marion P. Thomas Charter School signed with a developer that had the Friends pay out $6.4 million in fees as part of a two-building deal. The group’s attorney would not provide it and the charter school said it did not have a copy.”

In other words, the charters want to be treated as “public schools” to get money but insist they are “private” when the public wants to review their finances.

What the article never considers is whether charter schools are needed and whether the state would be wiser to invest the same hundreds of millions millions in improving the public schools that most students attend.

 

 

Caitlin Reilly of “Inside Philanthropy” writes that philanthropies no longer see charter schools as the means to transform American education. Although a few have doggedly doubled down on their commitment to charters, there seems to be a broad shift underway. Reilly calls it an “inflection point,” a point where change is undeniable.

She writes:

“Though charter schools have acquired a powerful ally on the national level in the form of Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, local backlash and scaling challenges have led to questions about the future of the publicly funded, privately run schools.

“Philanthropic enthusiasm for the charter movement is at a similar inflection point. For now, support for charters seems to be holding. However, the schools have had trouble reaching scale and have yet to catalyze the system-wide transformation many backers hoped for.

“Some of the field’s champions take that as a sign of the work left to do. Those foundations are doubling down on their support for the schools.

“Other funders, including former stalwart backers of charters, see the failure of this model to scale and spread as a reason to pause and consider their future investments. Those foundations tend to see charter schools as an important part of the education landscape, but not as a means to transform the system.

“Meanwhile, major new donors arriving on the education scene from the business world haven’t gravitated to charters in the same way that many such philanthropists did a decade ago. While these schools remain a growing sector within K-12, drawing political support and philanthropic dollars, the momentum around charters among funders has palpably slowed in recent years.”

The bottom line is that charters have become politically toxic, and its hard to paint them as “progressive” when Betsy DeVos is their most potent champion and striking teachers demand a moratorium on them. What’s “progressive” about schools that are highly segregated, overwhelmingly non-union, and have a record of excluding the neediest children?

It’s no accident that the foundation most deeply invested in creating new charters is the archconservative, anti-union Walton Family Foundation, which claims credit for opening 2,000 charters, more than one of every four in the nation. Why is this family, whose net worth exceeds $150 billion, devoted to charters? Charters kill unions. That works for Walmart.

We learn here that Eli Broad seems to losing his once-passionate commitment to charters. Eli  Broad!

“There does seem to be a faction of the charter movement that is stepping back to consider what comes next, and are open to charters playing a smaller role in future efforts.

“One of those people is Andy Stern, a board member of the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation and board chair of the Broad Center.

Stern started out as an unlikely ally of the charter movement. He is the president emeritus of the Service Employees International Union, which grew by 1.2 million workers under his leadership. Given the antagonism many felt charter schools held toward unions, some were surprised by Stern’s decision to get involved with Eli Broad, an early and ardent supporter of the charter movement.

“Stern didn’t see charter schools as antithetical to his work on behalf of workers and unions, though.

“I got involved in charters because of the members’ of my union’s kids,” he said. “To me, giving janitors’ kids a chance to get the best education possible was everything they wanted from coming to this country. In Los Angeles, where we started, that was not their experience.”

“Now, Stern’s enthusiasm for the schools is waning, and it sounds like Broad’s may be, as well.

“So I would say Eli [Broad], absent any of the recent strikes and activities, has been rethinking what he wants to do in education, as he has been thinking about what he wants to do in the arts and science, as well,” Stern said. “As he thinks about his age and what he wants to see happen in a transition, I’d say there is a natural rethinking and reprioritizing going on.”

Reilly did not speak to any critics of charter schools, other than Randi Weingarten, whose union operates a charter school in New York City. She did not speak to Carol Burris or me or Jeff Bryant or Peter Greene or Anthony Cody or Leonie Haimson or Julian Vasquez Heilig or Mercedes Schneider or Tom Ultican or any of the many others who have warned about the rise of charters and the danger they present to public education.

Nor did she examine the many scandals that have brought down the repute of charters, like UNO in Chicago or ECOT in Ohio.

The good news is that many philanthropists are disenchanted with school choice.

 

 

 

The militant Chicago Teachers Union issued a statement following the election of Lori Lightfoot, who was not its first choice. The CTU celebrates the end of the nightmare rule of Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Governor Bruce Rauner. And it commemorates the historic leadership of its President Emerita Karen Lewis, who inaugurated a historic awakening of teacher militancy with the Chicago teachers’ strike of 2012, which laid the seedsfor the walkoutsof the past year.

 

Our militancy is not dictated by who sits on the fifth floor of City Hall

The Chicago Teachers Union and SEIU Local 73 will continue to fight for an elected, representative school board and progressive revenue for the schools our students deserve.

CHICAGO, April 2, 2019The Chicago Teachers Union and Service Employees International Union Local 73 issued the following joint statement tonight regarding the election of Lori Lightfoot as mayor of Chicago:

The most obvious win for our movement is that Chicago will be Rahm-less by May 20, for which we have a movement of educators, parents, workers, community organizers and activists to thank. Elections are about contrast, and at least on the surface, tonight’s results represent a contrast to the last eight years.

Tonight, the city of Chicago elected a new mayor out of a desire for bold and progressive ideas, and a commitment to building a more fair, just and equitable city. Mayor-elect Lori Lightfoot has her work cut out for her on day one.

We did not win class size limits for students in kindergarten, first and second grades, TIF distribution to our school communities, or a special education monitor appointed by the state because we asked nicely or behaved politely. We will aggressively bargain, aggressively defend our platform and aggressively organize for social, economic, educational and racial justice in Chicago and Springfield. The Chicago Teachers Union and SEIU Local 73 have fought for fairness alongside our allies for nearly a decade because our city deserves it.

As a movement, we helped defeat the twin privatization forces of Rahm Emanuel and Bruce Rauner. But the millionaires and billionaires who supported them remain, along with astroturf education “deform” groups they fund that continue to support the push-out of Black families, the under-funding and closure of public schools, pension theft, marginalization of democracy and privatization of public services.

There is a significant amount of hope for city government, with checks and balances, that represents the will of this movement. Governance in the Chicago City Council will shift significantly with newly elected movement leaders like Matt Martin, Byron Sigcho-Lopez, Jeanette Taylor and Andre Vasquez, who join progressive champions Sue Garza, Carlos Ramirez Rosa, Maria Hadden and Mike Rodriquez. The progressive agenda is advanced by a powerful community organizing presence that was largely built against the policies of Rahm Emanuel, and is committed to taxing the rich and funding our schools.

The only reason either mayoral candidate embraced this agenda was because of this presence, and these leaders will hold the mayor accountable to her campaign promises. Congratulations to our endorsed winners whose victories represent a repudiation of the Rahm and Rauner agenda, and the vision of independent political organizations like United Working Families.

A Black woman will lead a city with a tragic history of racial strife and segregation. A Black woman will lead the nation’s third-largest school district, whose current leader closed 50 Black and Latinx schools in a single year and fired thousands of experienced Black female educators. Mayor-elect Lightfoot’s leadership must stop the hemorrhage of Black families from our city, prioritize affordable housing and rent control, secure a Community Benefits Agreement for the Obama Center, make the wealthy pay their fair share, and stabilize and fund public services. We expect her appointments to the Chicago Board of Education to be stakeholders—the very people who inhabit communities and neighborhoods that have lost the most under the racist influence of neoliberal school leadership.

And to be clear, we do not reach this moment—this moment—as a city without Chicago Teachers Union President Emerita Karen Lewis.

Mayor-elect Lightfoot’s work begins immediately. Our school communities need $2 billion and the wealthy must pay their fair share of the bill. School communities need justice and equity; an elected, representative school board; fully resourced school communities; Black, Latinx and veteran teachers in classrooms; and full restoration of our collective bargaining rights. Our parks need to be fully funded and staffed so they are safe and clean, no longer subsidized by an over-reliance on part-time workers who are paid poverty wages with little or no benefits, and provide the programs and services our community deserves.

School communities need a nurse and librarian in every building; counselor and social worker staffing levels that meet recommended ratios; special education classroom assistants, teaching assistants and restorative justice coordinators; clean and safe buildings that place our students’ interests above the profits of outside contractors; and 75 sustainable community schools. Our movement will continue to beat this drum, as well as demand adequate special education services and sanctuary for immigrant students.

Rahm and Rauner are gone. Their policies must go as well. We hope Mayor-elect Lightfoot separates herself from the dubious interests that funded her campaign, and governs like the progressive she claims to be by ending the funding of #NoCopAcademy and the Lincoln Yard TIF. We expect her to fight for an immediate $15/hr minimum wage in the city, for real and meaningful criminal justice reform, and for equitable investment in all of Chicago’s communities—especially those that have been habitually overlooked and underfunded.

We will also demand that Mayor-elect Lightfoot use her authority to make sure that Chicago is a city of unions for all, and that everyone has the opportunity to join a union no matter where they work.

If not, she will face immediate pushback. Elections are moments. We are a movement. See you at City Hall on April 9.

Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from Chicago Teachers Union, please click here.

 

Sometimes it helps to solve a mystery when you put it out there for public review. Like posting photos of the “Ten Most Wanted Criminals” in every postoffice. Tips come in.

An hour ago, I learned the identity of the person who named the members of the Task Force that is supposed to propose reforms to the state’s notoriously weak charter law. Seven of the 11 members of the Task Force are connected to the charter industry. The choices are so brazen that the chair of the board of the charter lobbying group (California Charter School Association) was named to the Task Force, along with another CCSA employee.

A tip came in. It makes perfect sense.

Governor Newsom’s chief of staff Ann O’Leary selected the Task Force.

O’Leary served as a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, which is unflinchingly pro-charter school.

She was education advisor to Hillary Clinton during her campaign in 2016. Early in the campaign, Carol Burris and I met with her at the Clinton headquarters in Brooklyn. We tried to persuade her that Clinton should oppose charter schools because they are the first step towards privatization. We mustered all our evidence about the dangers to public schools, the risks of deregulation of public money, persistent corruption, suspicious real estate deals, profiteering, etc. She was unmoved. She was insistent that Hillary would not oppose charters. We came back for a second meeting, and the best we could get was that Hillary would oppose for-profit charters. Hillary would not oppose charters.

During the campaign, while in South Carolina, Hillary was asked about charters, and she spontaneously spoke critically about charter schools, saying that they don’t accept everyone. O’Leary must have gotten loud complaints from some funders, because she quickly wrote an article for “Medium” walking back Hillary’s mild critique and reassuring readers that yes, indeed, Hillary supports charter schools, just like Arne Duncan.

Don’t worry, California charter lobbyists and billionaires, corporate charter chains, and entrepreneurs! Ann O’Leary will protect your charters!

 

 

Blogger Red Queen in LA (Sara Roos) has combed through tax filings to reveal the exorbitant salaries paid to charter school execitives, demonstrating that the ban of for-profit charter corporations has not limited the raid on taxpayers’ dollarsby charter profiteers. At the same time that charters executives are pulling down hefty salaries, charter enrollments are declining.

She writes:

“Overall, enrollment in LAUSD’s 37 CMO/Gs dropped 16.5% between 2016-17 and 2017-18, from a total of 93,842 to 78,315.”

But executive salaries are staggeringly high.

Dan Katzir, formerly Eli Broad’s Foundation Leader, now brings in more than half a million dollars a year in salary, although he was never a teacher or principal.

The CEO of Green Dot rakes in a tidy $386,000 per annum.

These are private-sector salaries, yet charters have the gall to dub themselves “public schools.”

If they really want to be considered public schools, they should be paid the same as their counterparts in the public sector.

But that might lead to executive flight that exceeded the declines in pupils choosing charter schools.

Next time you hear about those fabled “wait lists” for charter schools, recall that 80% of charters in Los Angeles have vacancies, a fact released to the public by LAUSD board member Scott Schmerelson.