A charter school comeback? Top NYC candidates support the alternative schools - Politico/New York

After years in the wilderness of the de Blasio administration and waning influence in Albany, charter schools are gaining a foothold in the city again — if the race for mayor is any barometer.

The three leading candidates in the Democratic primary are decidedly supportive of charter schools — a dramatic shift from when Mayor Bill de Blasio was elected eight years ago and another sign of the citywide electorate hewing closer to the center in the June 22 Democratic primary.

Last week, “Our City” — a left-leaning political action committee headed by Gabe Tobias — hosted a rally urging New Yorkers to not rank Adams or Yang, referencing the candidates' support from hedge fund billionaires linked to school privatization.  ... Politico

Of course, They're in it for the children

With the latest charge against Stringer -- how more perfectly timed could they be, 20 and 30 years after the fact -- the charter industrial complex is in great position to renew the charter wars. 

Even as charters see a new dawn of sorts this election season, there is still a movement of families and advocates who remain wary of charter growth and are taking steps of their own to fight it. City Comptroller Scott Stringer remains a strong candidate in the race and his skepticism over charters was among the factors that won him the endorsement of the United Federation of Teachers — the city’s powerful teachers union which is helping fund a multimillion dollar, independent expenditure in support of his campaign.

The more charges against Stringer, the better a charter comeback looks. With him and Morales damaged, the best progressive shot might be Wiley - but don't be shocked to see something drop on her in the next week.

The charters have been given renewal by the awful manner in which de Blasio handled the schools during the pandemic and have opened up a dangerous channel of support from people who would risk trying something new as an alternative to any mayor running things for them. Thus the door is open to privatizing as it hasn't been since the height of the Bloomberg years. In three years the jobs crunch will come for the UFT which should take a message from the Chicago Teacher Union which actually has a clue on how to organize charter schools.

https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2021/06/02/a-charter-school-comeback-top-nyc-candidates-support-the-alternative-schools-1384871

 

Two to one Loss for Charter Lobby in Mass Charter School Expansion - $23 million down the drain

The woim is toining.

Massachusetts Ballot questions, 2 - Expand Charter Schools 

No

62.4%

1,626,237 votes

Yes

37.6%

981,658 votes

80% reporting

Boston Globe
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/11/08/charter/v34OA3vMI8dRABDsFc4JuM/story.html

Massachusetts voters appeared to reject a major expansion of charter schools Tuesday, brushing aside calls for greater school choice amid concerns about the overall health of public education.
With 50 percent of the vote counted, the opponents were leading 62 percent to 38 percent — a wide enough margin for both sides to acknowledge the outcome. The Associated Press called the race.
The vote, if it holds, would be a major victory for teachers unions and civil rights organizations, which argued that charters are diverting too much money and attention from traditional public schools that serve the overwhelming majority of students.
”We’re claiming victory,” said Steve Crawford, a spokesman for Save Our Public Schools, the opposition group, at an election night party at the Fairmont Copley Plaza in Boston. “It’s substantial, too.”

Voter rejection of Question 2 would be a significant setback for Governor Charlie Baker, who campaigned heavily for the referendum, saying it would provide a vital alternative for families trapped in struggling urban schools.

Voter rejection of Question 2 would be a significant setback for Governor Charlie Baker, who campaigned heavily for the referendum, saying it would provide a vital alternative for families trapped in struggling urban schools.

But the survey, like other polls this fall, showed that the “no” side had made substantial gains nonetheless — winning over more Democrats, independents, and women than they had in the spring.
Christine Fischer-Rothman, 51, a Jamaica Plain lactation consultant with a son at Boston Latin School, said she voted against charter expansion.

“I want to have the money poured into the Boston Public Schools and not out,” she said, adding that it is “not a solution” to shift funding to schools outside the traditional system that “just do independently what they want.”

Research shows that Massachusetts urban charters have made substantial gains with black and Latino students, in some cases out-performing schools in white, wealthy suburbs. That track record attracted heavy interest from national charter advocates, who saw the state as an important testing ground for the movement.
It also made race became a key battleground in the fight over Question 2.

Baker, in a television ad that ran at the close of the campaign, made a direct appeal to the conscience of white, suburban voters. “Massachusetts has many great public schools,” he said, sitting in his Swampscott living room. “And we took it for granted that our kids would go to great public schools. But some kids aren’t so lucky. Where they live, they don’t go to a great school and they have no choice.”

But opponents like Juan Cofield, president of the New England Area Council of the NAACP, warned that charters were creating a two-tiered system, draining money from the traditional public schools that serve the bulk of black and Latino students.
“As Brown vs. the Board of Education taught us,” he said at the “No on 2” campaign kickoff, invoking the landmark school desegregation case, “a dual school system is inherently unequal.”
The most important existing state cap on charter growth limits how much money charter schools can divert from individual school districts. In most districts, it’s 9 percent of “net school spending,” which includes many, but not all spending categories. In the lowest-performing districts, it’s 18 percent.

Cities like Boston that are bumping up against the cap would not be able to add many charter seats in the short run if Question 2 failed. But that would not spell the end of the movement. Over time, as Boston’s school budget naturally grows, there should be more money available to ship to charters — opening up an estimated 4,000 charter seats between 2018 and 2028, according to a city analysis.

The Fat Lady Has Sung -- WHAT CHARTER GROUPS WANT IN 2015

....those leaders are beginning to craft their legislative priorities, which will include eliminating the state’s cap on charter schools, increasing funding for established charters, and establishing more accountability measures for district schools and teachers. .. Capital Education, http://bit.ly/1xIwy5b

Well, here you have it. I think the fat lady has sung. Accountability for DISTRICT SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS BUT NOT FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS. I spoke to an elementary school teacher yesterday who said the teachers in her school don't see the charters as a threat - yet - because it is an area they have not invaded - yet. It is in places like Central Brooklyn where public schools have been emptying as the more upwardly mobile parents, who used to have the safety valve of the top tracked classes which have been eliminated under BloomKlein through heterogeneous mixing and now get a retracked system through charters.

Pretty soon every area of the city will have charters creeping up their asses and teachers will find colleagues disappearing as their schools get cut and co-located. And for those senior teachers who think they are safe - the attack on tenure and the use of VAM will finish off the higher salaried people. Oh, da doom and gloom for the New Year.

But it’s still too soon to assume they’ll have the cooperation they need from the Legislature to get their agenda items passed...the unions’ allies in the Assembly could deliver on what the charter groups are seeking in exchange for action on some of their own education priorities.

Do you think the current attack on Shelly Silver is unrelated to this point? Not that I consider him a great defender of our rights but possibly somewhat of an obstacle to the charter lobby plans.

The de Blasio camp will not even put up much of a fight, seeing their pre-k initiative as higher priority and also realizing they won't win the charter battle. The UFT/NYSUT is basically toothless at this point.

Here is a summary of a very good piece at Capital, which you should read in full at http://bit.ly/1xIwy5b

WHAT CHARTER GROUPS WANT IN 2015—Jessica Bakeman and Eliza Shapiro for Capital magazine: New York’s charter school advocates have poured millions of dollars into electing a State Senate hospitable to their agenda items for the upcoming legislative session. Now, those leaders are beginning to craft their legislative priorities, which will include eliminating the state’s cap on charter schools, increasing funding for established charters, and establishing more accountability measures for district schools and teachers. After a hugely successful session in 2014—at the political expense of teachers’ unions and their highest-profile champion, Bill de Blasio—pro-charter groups say they expect the Senate and Governor Andrew Cuomo once again to come through for them. 

In the last session, back before Cuomo’s humbling re-election campaign spoiled his aura of invincibility, the governor put the full force of his power at the disposal of the charter cause, rebuking the teachers and de Blasio and, along with the Senate, delivering sweeping charter protections that now require New York City to accommodate or pay for new schools approved by the state. It wasn’t a close fight: substantively and politically, the fight ended in a knockout. Before Election Day, Cuomo promised to fight the public school “monopoly” in New York.

Perhaps more important than Cuomo’s priorities is his willingness to take on the state’s powerful teachers’ unions. … Leading pro-charter and anti-status quo groups have plenty of resources, even after their considerable (and highly effective) spending in the last election. But it’s still too soon to assume they’ll have the cooperation they need from the Legislature to get their agenda items passed. http://bit.ly/1xIwy5b

Show Us the Money? When Charter Schools Are Nonprofit in Name Only

The contracts are an example of how the charter schools sometimes cede control of public dollars to private companies that have no legal obligation to act in the best interests of the schools or taxpayers. When the agreement is with a for-profit firm like National Heritage Academies, it’s also a chance for such firms to turn taxpayer money into tidy profits....“It’s really just a pass-through for for-profit entities,” said Eric Hall, an attorney in Colorado Springs.....When Charter Schools Are Nonprofit in Name Only

Perdido Street posted about the charter lobby in Albany spending $3 million: Pro Charter Group Families For Excellent Schools On Tap To Have Most Expensive Lobbying Campaign In New York History

Lobbying is an investment. Break the charter cap in NYC and it's "Katy bar the door" time. Using the word "excellent" = charter slugs.

http://www.alternet.org/education/when-charter-schools-are-nonprofit-name-only?paging=off&current_page=1#bookmark

When Charter Schools Are Nonprofit in Name Only

Trying to open the books of pro-profit management companies hired by charter schools is a difficult task.

When Mulgrew Won't Punch Someone in the Face: Breaking NYS Charter School Cap Will Doom Public School System and Unions

Will the UFT/NYSUT leadership oppose this with every bone in their body - witness the silence over the Cuomo charter giveaway law last spring. But the UFT/NYSUT leaders will challenge those who oppose the common core.

Leonie Haimson comments:

If the de Blasio administration doesn’t oppose this with every bone in their bodies we are doomed.

Moskowitz] is sitting on a goldmine, and would make a great advocate to make the case for lifting the cap," said Rees, whose group recently appointed Moskowitz to its "charter hall of fame." A spokeswoman for Moskowitz declined to comment.
Devora Kaye, a Department of Education spokeswoman, said "as we work to support all children and educators, we look forward to collaborating with all community stakeholders." ... Leonie Haimson

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/city-hall/2014/08/8550463/new-york-charter-sector-prepares-fight-over-limits

Also available on Norms Notes. 

De Blasio Wasting His Charter Election Mandate - It is Time for He and Tish James to Make a Stand

Candidate de Blasio promised he’d start charging well-financed charter schools that got rent-free use of space in public schools. He did not like the idea of two different sets of kids getting different educations under the same school roof. One group gets a quasi-private school with no overhead in public school space.
Grade that F — for favoritism.
Mayor de Blasio is just doing what he promised to do during campaign... There has been a lot of barking over Mayor de Blasio's plans to tax-the-rich to fund pre-K and take a hard line on charter schools that take resources from public school students. But that's what got him elected in the first place... Daily News columnist Dennis Hamill

Finally, a piece that makes this point. Didn't he defeat pro-charter Joe Lhota with 75% of the vote? How inept politically on his part. But Michael Powell in the Times has the wrong take on the ineptness.

He decided last week to let most plans for charter expansion go forward — save for three schools run by Ms. Moskowitz. As a result, many dozens of children are without schools for next fall. Credit is due the mayor. With this decision, he succeeded at the devilishly difficult task of making a martyr of Ms. Moskowitz.

WTF, Michael. You mean deB's mistake was not giving in to everything she wanted? No, his big error is NOT going on the attack -- pointing the money she spends on advertizing, her salary which is higher than his, the chancellor and the president. Or her voracious attacks on schools she occupies. There is just so much stuff out there. But we get silence.

And the charter lobby alliance with Cuomo may well cow the other charter critics like Public Advocate Tish James, who is holding a meeting Saturday regarding this issue (Tish James Calls for March 8 Meeting: Dear CEC, PTA presidents and Elected Officials Impacted by Co-Locations)
and will "update" people on the status of the lawsuit she and City Council speaker Mark-Viverito filed but put on hold. My guess is that they are both being scared off. The James powerful speeches at the PEP meetings (here and here) seem to be turning into little squeaks. Just to remind you, let me run the first James clip from the Oct. 15 PEP.



Dennis Hamill seems to be the only media person who gets it.

So this week, it’s charter schools.
Every week, his sore-loser critics want Mayor de Blasio to break another campaign promise to those who elected him.
De Blasio, a progressive Democrat, ran on a platform of complete reform of the NYPD’s out-of-control “stop, question and frisk” policy under Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly. Joe Lhota, his Republican opponent, promised to continue the policy and reappoint Kelly.
The city went to the polls and gave de Blasio about 75% of the vote.

And when de Blasio appointed Bill Bratton police commissioner to implement stop-and-frisk reforms, the mayor’s “shocked, shocked” critics painted him as a Socialist Sandinista who is inviting a return to the bad old days of the crack epidemic.
They wanted de Blasio to break his campaign promise.
This is ridiculous. Especially since under de Blasio/Bratton, this city has already enjoyed a 21% dip in murders during the first two months of the year.
De Blasio the candidate promised to tax the rich a paltry sum to help fund universal prekindergarten in public schools.

When Mayor de Blasio moved to keep that promise, his critics had a meltdown. They preferred a different plan suggested by Gov. Cuomo, who, in an election year, must appeal to a much broader statewide electorate.
De Blasio’s critics got headlines. But they are the minority who either voted for his opponent or did not have the civic pride to vote at all.
Now de Blasio’s sore-loser critics demand he break this campaign promise, too.
And this week, it’s charter schools. 

Candidate de Blasio promised he’d start charging well-financed charter schools that got rent-free use of space in public schools. He did not like the idea of two different sets of kids getting different educations under the same school roof. One group gets a quasi-private school with no overhead in public school space.
Grade that F — for favoritism.
De Blasio’s critics like to point out that many charter school students are minorities. So what? So are most New York City public school students.
The mayor’s critics even resort to making this a contest of how many people show up at rallies in Albany. One thousand people at a pro-de Blasio prekindergarten rally as opposed to 7,000 at an anti-de Blasio save-the-charter-school rally. Both are laughable numbers out of a public school system of 1.1 million students.

But Dennis Hamill gets this part wrong too. People showed up at the Moskowitz rally because SHE WAS ALLOWED TO CLOSE HER DAMN SCHOOLS AND FORCE PARENTS, STUDENTS AND STAFF TO ATTEND.

Not one word about that outrage in the press. What if de Blasio closed Brooklyn schools tomorrow so they could support the rally at Seth Low? Oh, would the press be screaming. 

Hamill finishes with a powerful point.

The only rally that mattered was the election last November.
De Blasio ran as a liberal Democrat on a progressive platform against Lhota. The choice was clear: Turn left or turn right.
De Blasio won in a landslide.
Some rich and powerful people don’t like the people’s choice of taxing the rich for pre-K. The police union doesn’t like the new stop-and-frisk policy. Parents of charter school students don’t like de Blasio’s new policy.

But the people have spoken.
The bottom line is: De Blasio was elected to reform stop-and-frisk, tax the rich to fund pre-K and curb the freeloading charter schools in public school buildings.
Now his sore-loser critics want him to break all those campaign promises.
Which would make de Blasio a phony and a liar to all those who elected him.

The NY Times' Michael Powell has a different slant. While absolutely correct on the inept de Blasio politically on the charter issue, Powell focuses on the Cuomo factor.

“Cat in Albany Is Outfoxing New York City’s Mouse”: “Credit is due the mayor. … [H]e succeeded at the devilishly difficult task of making a martyr of Ms. Moskowitz.” http://goo.gl/h8IY1m

Maybe the problem was with the metaphor.

Mayor Bill de Blasio took office and talked “progressive,” with ambitious plans for an income tax on the wealthy and an increase in the minimum wage. He rallied unions and activists and parents, and the sense was of a dog howling, and putting on notice the bigger dog in Albany.

Two months later, it turns out that the more apt metaphor was of cat-and-mouse.

Mr. de Blasio has taken the role of the impulsive mouse, demanding this cheese and that, and not quite knowing how to end his game. And Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has taken the role of the big cat who can treat the mouse kindly — and, with a whack, send it tumbling back into its hole.

Evidence of the mayor’s diminished state came on Tuesday, when he took his crusade for a tax to fund universal prekindergarten to an armory in Albany a few blocks north of the Capitol. The turnout was not much to boast of, and it was made up mostly of union members who were in town to lobby for various causes.

Continue reading the main story

Related Coverage below the jump