Report of the Invisible (to UFT Until Today) Discontinued Meeting at UFT

Ed Notes took up the case of the Discontinued (untenured summarily fired and blacklisted) many years ago when I first heard about the situation.

Recent articles on ed notes:

1.  Speech on DOE Discontinue Black List at ...
2. Readers of Ed Notes know about the horrendous Discontinue, where any principal is given the power to terminate the career of any non-tenured teacher, even if another principal wants to hire them - as was the case for Lydia.
3. How the UFT Sits By and Watches Discontinued Teachers ...
4. I often get calls from the Discontinued - non-tenured who have been let go by their principals resulting in a lifting of their teaching license and a blackball from the system pretty much forever (if they have another license they ...
5. Ed Notes Online: Time to put an end to The Discontinued ...
6. Mar 26, 2014
7. Ed Notes has been covering the story of the Dreaded D - Discontinue - since teachers who have been blackballed by the vicious act of principals who were handed a loaded gun by the DOE without a peep from the UFT.

Over the years people have told me their stories and it makes you want to punch a wall. Or maybe a union leader in the face. Actually wouldn't it be great to have a union leader who would threaten to punch someone at Tweed in the face (instead of punching someone opposed to the common core) for despicable acts that the union has ignored for years.

But this past summer, some higher profile Discontinue cases started to roil the waters in public and behind the scenes, and some people at the UFT began to wake up - you know, the prospect of bad pub always shakes the tree.

What do I think? Watch what they do, not what they say. Show me the money - otherwise it just more masturbation to deflect militiancy. As the report below indicates, some of the D teachers are not going to sit by passively.

I attended the meeting for discontinued teachers today at 52 Broadway tonight.

Most of the very brief meeting was a typical and predictable UFT rep meeting, giving a little bit of nothing and acting like they want to help their members.

The reps who were conducting the meeting were Emil Pietromonaco and Leroy Barr.\

Approximately 15 -20 members showed up for the meeting  (Norm, I know you will like this part, since the discontinuance cases has been one of your pet causes).

Pietromonaco did most of the leading and Barr stayed silent and watched as everyone else talked.

Pietromonaco  did say that the UFT can not make any promises they will try to see what they can do. They are not going to ask to 'undo' anything (or at least as of yet).  He also mentioned that the superintendent has the right to discontinue anyone who is probation for any reason (thanks but  we already knew that, we want our cases to be re-evaluated).  He also mentioned that since the superintendent has the right to discontinue, they will be looking and reviewing cases again, to take to court.

It was also discussed on what we know about the infamous blacklist for discontinued teachers. If a principal wants to hire someone a discontinued teacher who is qualified, the principals are swayed by HR  to a) not hire them  or b) convinced not to because it is a pain in the ass to go through the process.  This process needs to be tossed out too because it is not right. I can tell you first hand, that I have gone on interviews which lasted for over an hour because the administration or school leadership team were impressed with me and my capabilities in early childhood education. As soon as they called HR, I became a distant memory and tossed out of the candidate pool.

Pietromonaco  and Barr collected a list of all of the teachers and SBST who attended the meeting, asked for their name, school, email address and when they were discontinued. They will be contacting everyone on their list tomorrow asking to give a summary as to why they were discontinued.  They said they will update everyone on their list with a reply by an email on Thursday evening.

One other point which was mentioned, Pietromonaco mentioned they would like to realistically go back 3 years for anyone who was discontinued but they are willing to overlook some cases.

A second point that I would like to mention. Francesco P was waiting for everyone outside of Shanker Hall after the meeting. For anyone who is unaware, he was the one who helped get the UFT to re-evaluate  certain cases again.  A bunch of us debriefed on what occurred at the meeting.  

The main concerns which most of us had were 'how they would go about to clear a discontinued teacher and not be blacklisted to work in the entire city". The second concern, the UFT were kind of talking out of both ears. Before the meeting began, it was sounding like the discontinued cases would go to the chancellor's office to be re-evaluated. Now the UFT is making it sound like they will take 'select' cases and take them to  court on behalf of those teachers and SBST. 
I personally do not think that is good enough. Who knows how long that will take in court? Most people who are 100% eligible to work, want to get back to working right away and not have anything drawn out anymore.

There was even talk about a possible class action lawsuit in regards to the discontinuance and blacklist issue (this was still after the meeting outside of Shanker Hall.

** Norm, I think you would be interested in that issue,  a class action lawsuit on behalf of those teachers.

Here are some more ed notes articles:

On the Dreaded D's and U's: Discontinued and Unsatisfactory

Nov 07, 2011

On ICE-mail there was a question asked about the U vs Blacklist though it is not clear whether the writer understands the impact of the Dreaded D which is a real blacklist. Given Jeff's response below I want to point out that D's ...

http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/

Ed Notes Online: The Dreaded "D" and the UFT

Mar 18, 2010

Now on to the UFT. If you find you are blacklisted by the dreaded D and ask the UFT for help you will get 12 different answers. The most common is: Don't worry, that is only for your district. You can be hired by another district.

Which Side Are You On? Randi Weingarten's high level collaboration with Rahm Emanuel, the CGI, and corporate America's agenda

When American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten came to Chicago in June 2012, it was to be at the Clinton Global Initiative and join other union leaders in promising to help finance infrastructure projects through union pension funds -- rather than demand that a progressive tax system be restored in the USA so that federal and state taxes can be used to pay for the much needed work.... In video of the press conference with union leaders held at the beginning of this year's CGI conference, it can be seen that the main impetus for this initiative of using union members pension funds in risky investments for construction projects formerly financed by municipal, state, and federal governments, is Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers....

On December 13th, 2012, Weingarten held a press conference with Bill Clinton and Obama’s housing secretary Shaun Donovan to announce the NY Teachers’ Retirement Fund would invest $1 billion from the NYC teachers pension fund for Hurricane Sandy relief for the NYC area. NYC Mayor Bloomburg criticized the investment because taxpayers would have to bail out the pension fund if the investment failed. One month later the U.S. Congress allocated $50.5 billion dollars for Hurricane Sandy relief. This is another example of the highly secretive and highly dubious goings on in public pension funds. ... Ken Derstine, http://www.defendpubliceducation.net/which-side-are-you-on/

I've known which side Randi Weingarten has been since roughly about May 2001. Vichy.

And also using our pension funds for her political advancement. Harry Lirtzman has been doing research that shows the NYC pension funds are only 65% funded while the NYS funds are over 95% funded. 

Below is a Ken Derstine piece from July 2014 reprinted by George Schmidt at Substance the other day. The point here is that the teacher unions are lining up on the wrong side. We viewed the Chicago TU as being on the right side - usually. If you follow the trail-mix George is laying down we may come to the conclusion that winning union power subverts and eventually turns you into - yikes - Randi Weingarten or Mulgrew.

George is making a point connected to recent events in the Chicago Teachers Union and its leading caucus, CORE in endorsing sitting Cuomo-like governor Pat Quinn and his running mate for Lt. Gov, top level ed deformer slug Paul Vallas (the architect of ed deform in Chicago, New Orleans, Hartford and Philadelphia) - both as the lesser of 2 evils. But more on this aspect later.

Substance - News From Chicago

http://www.substancenews.net/

Which Side Are You On? Randi Weingarten's high level collaboration with Rahm Emanuel, the CGI, and corporate America's agenda

Ken Derstine - October 30, 2014

[Editor's Note: The following article was originally brought to our attention as a Comment on October 30, 2014 following our article exposing the speakers for the CTU LEAD dinner. After reviewing the entire article, we urge our readers to take advantage of reading the entire piece. Those who wish all the active links will have to go to the original, since I cannot include them all here. The URL for the original article is: http://www.defendpubliceducation.net/which-side-are-you-on/. George N. Schmidt, Editor]. 

 

When American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten came to Chicago in June 2012, it was to be at the Clinton Global Initiative and join other union leaders in promising to help finance infrastructure projects through union pension funds -- rather than demand that a progressive tax system be restored in the USA so that federal and state taxes can be used to pay for the much needed work. The union movement of today has been transformed from what the unions were when most started in the 1930’s, increasingly taking on the characteristics of company unions. Ever since the PATCO strike in 1981, when 11,000 air traffic controllers who refused an order from the Reagan administration to return to work or be fired were fired for going on strike, unions have been in decline due to globalization of the world economy with companies searching the globe for the cheapest workforce possible combined with a union bureaucracy willing to give away the gains of the past as long as they could keep the benefits of their connections with the Democratic Party. As a result, union membership has fallen from 28.3 percent of the workforce in 1968 to 11.3 percent today. 

Recently, the increasing collaboration of the union bureaucracy with corporate and financial interests, whose interests are in direct conflict with the workforce the trade union leaders are supposed to represent, was on display at the fourth annual Clinton Global Initiative held in Denver on June 23 - 25, 2014. Former President Bill Clinton, the authorizer of bank deregulation which has unleashed unprecedented social inequality in American society, the autorizer of “welfare reform” which has devastated low income communities where jobs are hard to come by and exploded the U.S. prison population, who carried out George H.W Bush's North American Free Trade Agreement which devastated the Mexican economy and was later expanded by George W. Bush in 2005 to Central American economies to the point that children are crossing the border into the United States without an adult in a desperate attempt to escape the severe poverty that NAFTA has created in their countries…. this Bill Clinton like a benevolent Godfather has held these annual conferences to bring together corporate, financial, and labor leaders to discuss ways to advance the neoliberal agenda of the privatization of the global economy. 

In a Huffington Post article after the conference, Clinton said,
At the inaugural CGI America meeting in 2011, the AFL-CIO and its affiliated unions committed to raising $10 billion over five years from members' pension funds to invest in infrastructure projects and energy-efficient retrofits. Since then, the AFL-CIO has engaged dozens of private and public partners, and has actually exceeded its original goal two years ahead of schedule. So far, just a small percentage of the $10.2 billion that has been allocated has been actively deployed into infrastructure projects, yet they've already created over 33,500 good jobs.” 

Harnessing Innovation and Cooperation to Create Good Jobs and Growth | Bill Clinton @ HuffPost Politics
This benign expression of neoliberal do-gooderism is a cover for the rapacious drive for profit in the corporate world, and in the financial world of banks and hedge funds, who see an untapped gold mine in the public employee pension funds built up in the last fifty years and now being used by the now retiring post-World War II generation. At the same time as Wall Street has a steady drumbeat in cities and states across the country that public employee pension funds are not sustainable (What problems they do have are due to cities and states not paying their legally mandated portion of the pension funds.), they are finding every way possible to loot these pension funds…with the cooperation of union leaders. 

In video of the press conference with union leaders held at the beginning of this year's CGI conference, it can be seen that the main impetus for this initiative of using union members pension funds in risky investments for construction projects formerly financed by municipal, state, and federal governments, is Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers. Joining her at the podium, with many other labor leaders in the audience, were Richard Trumka (President of the AFL-CIO), Lee Saunders (President of AFSCME), and Shaun McGarvey (Building and Construction Trades/AFL-CIO). 

Weingarten had first proposed this initiative at the CGI America 2012 conference in Chicago. Weingarten had flown into Chicago on June 7, 2012, not to support the members of the Chicago Teachers Union who were on that very day voting by 98% to authorize their September strike, but to participate on a panel with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. 

In the video of the panel Rahm Emanuel can be seen giving the example of 10,000 people applying for 75 water department jobs. He praised the unions for work rule and pay scale changes “that saved us a lot of money” and made the 75 jobs possible. Randi Weingarten concluded the panel saying, “People want to work. When labor and business work together to put people into jobs it creates great hope around the country.” 

On December 13th, 2012, Weingarten held a press conference with Bill Clinton and Obama’s housing secretary Shaun Donovan to announce the NY Teachers’ Retirement Fund would invest $1 billion from the NYC teachers pension fund for Hurricane Sandy relief for the NYC area. NYC Mayor Bloomburg criticized the investment because taxpayers would have to bail out the pension fund if the investment failed. One month later the U.S. Congress allocated $50.5 billion dollars for Hurricane Sandy relief. This is another example of the highly secretive and highly dubious goings on in public pension funds. 

Randi Weingarten did eventually join the CTU picket line near the end of the CTU strike in September, 2012. Whether it was to support the strike or end it has not been disclosed. The AFT had only given tepid support to the union during the strike since the AFT had not mobilized other locals around the country to support the CTU. The CTU strike ended on September 19th, 2012. On September 22nd, Weingarten joined Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who was on a bus tour through the Midwest to promote Race to the Top as part of the President Obama's reelection campaign. Race to the Top is an initiative that is key to corporate education reform that uses standardized tests to vilify teachers and close schools, especially in low-income areas. Weingarten has also been helping the Obama administration promote the Common Core. The Gates Foundation, the primary promoter of the Common Core, has heavily funded the AFT to promote it. Weingarten also has a more than ten year history of collaboration with the Broad Foundation, a major promoter of the privatization of public education. 

At both the 2012 and 2014 CGI conference, Randi Weingarten praised a program called “Reconnecting McDowell” in McDowell County, West Virginia. McDowell County in the 1950’s had a population of 100,000 and was a prominent coal mining community. Today its population is 25,000, most of whom are in severe poverty. Forty-six percent of children in the county do not live with a biological parent, according to the school district. Their mothers and fathers are in jail, are dead or have left them to be raised by relatives. 72% of its students come from economically distressed families. 

This business project is using millions of dollars of union dues to create a few thousand jobs in collaboration with the state and county. With “Reconnecting McDowell” the AFT has joined with about 100 businesses to invest in infrastructure projects in the county. 

The AFT collaboration goes so far (see last paragraph) as to include support, through Reconnecting McDowell, for Teach for America teachers whom corporate education reformers have been using to replace laid off or departing teachers all over the country. This includes a Teacher Village for low income housing in McDowell County for the transient, low paid teacher force being created, the latest method by corporate education reformers to undermine teacher unions and lower educators’ living standards. What would Florence Reece and the coal miners in the 1930’s think of this? They could tell you a whole lot about how oppressive company housing is! 

In 1931, as labor unrest was spreading under the gruesome conditions of the 1930’s worldwide economic depression, a song was written that became an anthem of the working people who were rising up against the living conditions they were living under. Which Side Are You On? was written by Florence Reece, the wife of a union organizer for the United Mine Workers in Harlan County, Kentucky. The UMW was waging bitter and violent struggle with the mine owners that came to be called the Harlan County War. Florence Reese and her children had been terrorized one night by the Harlan County police who had been hired by mine owners to search for her husband. After the ordeal she wrote the lyrics to Which Side Are You On? with the melody coming from a traditional Baptist hymn, “Lay the Lily Low”. 

The labor struggles of the 1930’s were bitter and hard fought and eventually lead to the formation of the Congress of Industrial Organizations in 1935. Political activists and militant trade unionists had been able to win three major strikes in 1934: the Minneapolis Teamsters strike, the West Coast Longshore Strike, and the Toledo Auto-Lite strike. 

The CIO split from the conservative American Federation of Labor which represented only craft workers, and started industrial unions such as the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (IUE) in 1936, the United Auto Workers in 1936 after a forty-four day sit-down strike in Flint, Michigan in 1937, and a collective bargaining agreement with U.S. Steel in 1937 (which came after the Memorial Day Massacre where police killed ten and seriously wounded dozens of striking workers at Republic Steel).
Soon after its formation, the CIO leadership joined the New Deal Coalition of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The New Deal was the response to fears of corporate and financial leaders that the strikes would turn into a political struggle to fundamentally change the economic structure of U.S. society. This was to lead to major reforms in 1935-1936 such as Social Security, the Wagner Act which initially protected labor unions, the Works Progress Administration which provided employment to unemployed workers, the United States Fair Housing Authority and Farm Security Administration in 1937, and the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act which set maximum hours and minimum wages for most categories of workers. 

An important law was the 1935 National Labor Relations Act that outlawed company unions making it illegal for companies to create unions to control their workforce. This was a reaction to the growth of fascism in Germany where independent unions were made illegal soon after the Nazi Party came to power. Many authoritarian regimes today have company or state unions for this purpose.
During and after World War II the unions became progressively more bureaucratized with a high paid leadership that was increasingly separate from the rank-and-file. Its political influence increased when the CIO merged with the AFL in 1955. 

Public employee unions were formed beginning in the 1950’s. First came city workers in the late ’50’s, and then in the ’60’s and 70’s unions organized for teachers, clerks, fireman, police, municipal transportation workers and others. In the social ferment of the 1960's, teachers, city workers, and other public employees engaged in strikes, sometimes in definance of no strike laws which lead to jailing of strikers. Workers living standards were gradually improved and the programs of the New Deal were expanded under the Johnson administration to include Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, and the launching of a War of Poverty to relieve inequality. This War on Poverty grew out of the civil rights struggles of the ’60’s, but was to be short-lived as the cost of the Vietnam War came to dominate the federal budget. The trade union bureaucracy was a staunch defender of the Vietnam War and has been a supporter of the military buildup and endless wars ever since. 

All of the social advances of the New Deal and the Great Society are now under assault from right-wing forces who have developed a free market mythology to protect the huge amount of wealth they have accumulated since banking deregulation in the ’90's. The attack on workers having the right to organize unions and collectively bargain is also increasingly under assault. 

The social crisis for millions of Americans makes clear that things cannot continue as in the past. The trade unions being concerned only with the wages and working conditions of their rank and file is no longer the way to protect the workforce. The unions must become a force for social justice for society as a whole. 

Giving charity or investing pension funds in business ventures through collaboration with business and government to create a few thousands jobs from the dues and pensions of union members is not the solution. What is needed is for labor, and working people as a whole, to support a declaration of our political independence from both parties of the 1%. A political party is needed that will run on a program of free, equitable education for all from preschool through college, single payer health care through Medicare for all, and a jobs program to work towards 100% employment and the provision of a social safety net to provide for the basic necessities of life - food and shelter - to those who are unemployed.
So, which side are you on?

Also see:

Randi Weingarten, Twitter, and "Secret Society" Membership
@ The Chalk Face - July 8, 2014

Why Aren't AFT and New York More Enraged About Engageny?
DCGEducator: Doing The Right Thing - July 14, 2014

A Parent/Filmmaker Comments on Ravitch and Unions
Ed Notes Online - July 29, 2014

Weingarten Hearts Cuomo (By Proxy); Willing to Undercut Teachout via Last-minute Robocall
deutsch29 - September 14, 2014

The Unbearable Lightness of Neo-Liberal Historical Revisionism in Education
Schools Matter - September 26, 2014 

Reader comment about “The Unbearable Lightness of Neo-Liberal Historical Revisionism in Education:”
Schools Matter - September 30, 2014 

Weingarten, Broad, and *Collaborative* Privatization
deutsch29 - October 4, 2014

Where the "Broad" Road Will Take AFT
deutsch29 - October 7, 2014 

MORE Election Guide: Yes to Green, NO on Prop 1

After a rough 2 months - details in upcoming posts - MORE seems to be getting back on its feet. I'm going to cross post a few more pieces today. This was sent out to the MORE chapter leader and delegate listserve. If you are a current or prospective (running in this spring's election) get on this list for lots of useful information.





Chapter Leader Delegate --

Please make sure you go to the polls tomorrow!  Below you can find MORE's detailed suggestions on how to vote.

MORE has endorsed Howie Hawkins for Governor  and Brian Jones for Lieutenant Governor (Green Party-Row F on the NYS ballot). We urge all UFT members get out the vote! 

Let’s send Albany (and Cuomo!) a message that attacking teachers and privatizing our education is not acceptable.

You can also read more information about our suggestions on the ballot propositions below.

In Solidarity,

Movement of Rank and File Educators

MORE's Election Guide:

While UFT/NYSUT leadership under Unity caucus has responded to Cuomo’s anti-teacher comments  in an unconcerned manner and has even expressed gratitude to Rob Astorino for writing an open letter to teachers, they have ignored the candidacy of Howie Hawkins. Hawkins is a fellow union brother and is running with UFT member Brian Jones for Lieutenant Governor on a pro-public education and pro-union platform. 

We know full well that Hawkins/Jones are not being acknowledged by union leadership because of Jones’ role as a founder of MORE, our dissident caucus that has challenged Unity caucus for leadership of UFT and NYSUT. This is a great disservice to educators, parents, and students across our state. UFT/NYSUT ought to use their vast resources to educate union members and parents of all their choices in this critical election.UFT/NYSUT has allowed Cuomo to run on the Working Families line, instead of a pro-labor Hawkins.
NYSUT Locals throughout the state have endorsed Howie Hawkins/Brian Jones and their pro-education, anti-high stakes testing stance including, Buffalo Teachers Association and Port Jefferson Station Teachers Association.
 Please see Hawkins/Jones letter to teachers here.
 Here is NYSUT’s voter guide.
There are three referendum proposals on this year’s ballot.
These are suggestions from former Deputy Comptroller for New York State and special education teacher Harris Lirtzman:

Proposition 1:  Revising State's Redistricting Process

It is a sham piece of "reform" brought to us by Governor Cuomo and the Legislature in the form of a "special commission" that would handle the decennial reapportionment of election districts. When you read the text you think, "Well, can't be worse than what we've now got with 'Three Men in a Room.'"

But it's much worse and will only make the electoral process and district apportionment more complex and less democratic.

http://www.noprop1ny.com/endorsements#.VErweIndNvc.

Proposition 2:  Permitting Electronic Distribution of State Legislative Bills

I've seen the results of paper distribution.  The Legislature has its own printing shop and during the end of session it runs 24/7 because the State Constitution requires a bill to be presented three days before it can be voted upon.  The Governor generally issues a "statement of necessity" that eliminates the three day wait so that all the paper bills can be piled up on a legislator's desk at the end of session and voted on without the least chance of review.

Whether any legislator will actually read an electronically distributed bill v. a paper bill is highly doubtful but vast acres of trees in the Adirondacks will be preserved so we might as well vote to "help a tree." Seriously, won't improve the states' broken legislative process but will make it more green.  Can't hurt.  And the next tree you see in Central Park, since they all talk to each other, will hug you if you stop long enough to tell it you voted for Prop 2.

Proposition 3: The "Smart Schools Bond Act of 2014"

Gov. Cuomo, without any consultation with academic leaders or school districts, proposed this $2 billion bond act early this year.  It would allow the following, which might seem hard for educators to oppose:

The proposal would allow the State to borrow up to two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000). This money would be expended on capital projects related to the design, planning, site acquisition, demolition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or acquisition or installation of equipment for the following types of projects:

1. To acquire learning technology equipment or facilities including, but not limited to,
2. Interactive whiteboards,
3. Computer servers, and

c.Desktop, laptop, and tablet computers;

• To install high-speed broadband or wireless internet connectivity for schools and communities;
• To construct, enhance, and modernize educational facilities to accommodate pre-kindergarten programs and provide instructional space to replace transportable classroom units (otherwise known as "Arthur Goldstein's trailers") and
• To install high-tech security features in school buildings and on school campuses

This one comes down to whether you believe this is a good way for the state to bond $2 billion.....

Andrew Cuomo to himself in bed at 3 a.m. some winter night, early 2014:

"Andrew, what do you think would be a good way to spend $2 billion in state bonding this year?"
"Gee, I dunno.  I haven't talked to anyone about this but then I don't usually talk to anyone about anything."
"What do most voters really like, come on, Andrew, this is not rocket science."
"Well, most voters like 'education" and that damned Astorino actually set up an anti Common Core party."
"That's true, but voters usually want to spend more money on schools without having to have their taxes raised."
"Aha, Andrew, you are so smart, why don't you put a really big, eye-catching proposal to spend $2 billion on technology in schools and then also put in a whole lot of other things that people might not be so concerned about such as building pre-K schools and stuff like that--nobody understands that the state is near its bonding limit and that all this stuff will be paid for over 30 years."

Seriously, it might be hard for teachers to vote against something like this but $2 billion is a lot of money for something that no one other than Andrew Cuomo seriously seemed to think was necessary.  The interest cost estimates on the $2 billion range from $40-$50 million a year for a total 30 year cost of about $450-$500 million.  Usually, long-term bonds are used to finance long-term infrastructure, such as the building of roads, tunnels, bridges and buildings, not items with short term expected lives like school technology or even school wireless systems.  Think LAUSD where they handed out $1 billion in iPads and the entire thing was a disaster.  There don't seem to be any particular controls over how the money will be spent but, in true election year fashion, the proceeds of the bonds, have already been apportioned among counties (see the charts in the links, below),

Some older school districts without a property tax base to support this sort of expenditure might benefit from the funds provided by Proposition 3.  But much of the stuff funded by the bond act will be obsolete long before the bonds are retired.

Albany has an addiction to bonding as away to get around tax increases but we all pay for this one way or another.  I'd say this one is doubtful but a case might be made for it if the right controls were in place to make sure the money was spent wisely.  There is a "Commission" that will review proposals but its findings are not binding.
http://www.nysut.org/~/media/Files/NYSUT/Resources/2014/April/FactSheet_1413_SmartSchoolsBondActof2014.pdf
http://www.gothamgazette.com/index.php/government/5389-how-bright-smart-schools-bond-act-prop-3

Judging Farina on the MORE Listserve and Beyond - Yay or Nay?

The real problem is that Farina is completely over her head and, though she has replaced some of the most senior staff in Tweed, much of what was "Tweed" under Bloomberg is still "Tweed" under de Blasio.  The same sorts of lightning bolt from on high memos get sent to schools except with a different name at the top of them, the Networks still function completely as they have for the last five years, the investigative and disciplinary functions still work exactly the same way they have for a decade--teachers get fired, administrators get reassigned--and except for the change in principal qualifications (seven years teaching experience required) they still mostly come from the Leadership Academy.  It's almost impossible to imagine what "new schooling" Farina has "forged" beyond exhortations to put the joy back into classrooms.  I would like to be paid $250,000 a year for a gig like that. .. Harris Lirtzman on MORE listserve.

Harry put out this link to an edweek article asking people for a yay or nay. Here are some comments that came back:

"N.Y.C. Chancellor Carmen Fariña Forges a New Schooling Era for Nation's Largest District"
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/10/22/09newyork.h34.html?cmp=ENL-CM-NEWS2

There is some unhappiness on Leonie's NYC Education News listserve also with Farina, especially over managing parents and some controls put in at PEP meetings. See Leonie's blog for some of that.

NYC Public School Parents

Disturbing lack of financial transparency on the part of the NYC Department of Education and the Panel on Educational Policy
And South Bronx School was cut off at the last PEP (Open Letter to Chancellor Fariña) because he was speaking about a personal matter - even under Bloomberg we could say whatever we wanted for 2 minutes.

And there's this from Chaz:

Chaz's School Daze Principals Love The Chancellor But For Teachers It Continues To Be A Living Hell.

When Carmen worked for Joel Klein, I publicly confronted them at a PEP by declaring that the school systems of Kabul and Baghadad would recover sooner than the NYC system. She made a public comment to someone who quoted me along the lines of "he's (me) crazy - he compared us to terrorists." I'm sure Farina puts me in the "crazy, not to be taken seriously" category. At least she's shown she can be right on one thing.

Comments from the MORE listserve:

Nay! With Fariña, if you've ever heard her speak, it's her way or the highway. Teachers are still being evaluated on student test scores. As to Pre-k, many of the teachers put into those new classrooms had a crash course in teaching early childhood education. The three and four year olds in these programs are assessed up the wazoo. Many of the classrooms have not been given the pre-k designated monies to buy supplies. 
Pre-K teacher

I would also like to add in that many of the pre-k teachers in the current school year specifically requested for pre-k on their preference sheet because pre-k is exempt from Charlotte Danielson and are still under the S/U rating system

Former Pre-K teacher

For me, it's even simpler... Have things improved since any of Bloomberg's chancellors? Because I work at the middle school level, and all I've seen are funding cuts, more corporate-instead-of-teacher-written curriculum, standardized tests being used to evaluate teachers and schools, which renders "not using them to evaluate kids" (which they still are -- 4th is still used to get them into middle schools, 7th still used to evaluate them for entrance to high schools) a publicity stunt, quality reviews stressing us out, abusive principals still rampant, etc. I've been on the job 13 years. My kids used to learn AND have fun in my class. YES, teaching used to be fun. I was the only one I know who was excited to go to work every day. It's a different profession now, and if Fariña's not part of the solution, she's part of the problem.

So remind me why anyone's answer would be "yay"?

Middle School teacher

Here is the rest of what Harry had to say:

Mayor de Blasio cares about pre-K, all to the good.  He cares that he got clobbered over the head this spring about charter expansion and colocations.  He doesn't seem to care that much about "schools," though, or how they work.  He is supposed to give a speech tomorrow about his education philosophy, which will be the first time he's addressed real school pedagogy and administration since in over a year.  Bloomberg cared about Tweed.  Bloomberg knew that once he had control of Tweed he had control over the schools.  That's why he put Klein in and supported him to the hilt.  That's why he booted Cathie Black so quickly when it became clear what a terrible mistake he'd made.  That's why he put Dennis Walcott, an excellent "seat-warmer" but who knew his boss's mind completely.  Bloomberg watched Tweed and Tweed knew it was being watched.

I'm told that the Mayor has installed a ring of his own advisers around Farina because of her poor political judgment and that she doesn't have much independence.  She may give a decent speech to teachers or principals and certainly is more comfortable with Michael Mulgrew et al. than anyone else who's been in Tweed since 2002.  But she's completely over her head when it comes to getting her arms around the school system and whatever her pedagogical principles may be, good or bad, is completely irrelevant since she doesn't have the juice or the inclination to impose them on a sprawling school system. And she works for a mayor who just doesn't care about education beyond pre-K and not getting killed on charters again.  He's being pressured to respond to the state deadline for a plan to manage failing schools--perhaps he'll deliver on his promise not to close them but beyond that it's anyone's guess.

My guess-at the end of the school year, Farina goes back into retirement to spend time with her grandchildren and the mayor tries to find a real schools administrator.

Randi Weingarten Sings the Vichy Tune (Once Again) Via Cuomo

Lots of bloggers have been hammering Randi over the past few days so there is not much point in my joining the pack other than to point you to some of the links.

Perdido Street School parses the Weingarten response to the Cuomo attack on public education. But what else would we expect? It is really not worth much to expose Randi time and again as an apologist, if not an outright agent, for ed deformers.

"American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten attributed Governor Andrew Cuomo’s characterization of public education as a “monopoly” to last-minute campaign rhetoric and called on teachers angered by the governor’s comments not to vote for G.O.P. candidate Rob Astorino as an alternative. “We’re in the political season. At the end of the day, … I’ll chalk it up to politics,” Weingarten told Capital on Friday when asked about the governor’s comments earlier in the week to the Daily News' editorial board.

Got it Randi. How about voting for Howie Hawkins as an alternative? Not on the table. See http://www.howiehawkins.org/cuomo_attacks_schools_as_monopolies.

NYC Educator says, Give Up the Ghost on Andy, Randi

AFT President Randi Weingarten dismisses it as campaign rhetoric, and has apparently taken the extreme step of responding with a strongly worded letter. Actually, we have no idea whether it's really strongly worded since the letter is not public. Nonetheless, a letter was written, a stamp was affixed to it, and an official government representative is likely dispatching it to our esteemed governor even as we speak.

Mercedes Schneider loves to parse Randi-isms and does so here: Weingarten Tries to Steer New York Voters Toward Cuomo.

Perdido came back with another shot today.

How Randi Weingarten And Other Union Leaders Help Andrew Cuomo Bring The "Death Penalty" To New York's Public School System

Just as interesting is how ed deformer Peter Cunningham, executive director of the Chicago-based nonprofit communications organization Education Post and a former assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of Education, wrote an open letter to Randi complaining that her rhetoric aimed at her own base defuses and confuses her support for basic ed deform(ers). Cunningham is vexes over Randi's jumping on the anti-now resigned (finally) LA Supt John (greasy) Deasey bandwagon expost facto - as she usually does.

In the interest of seeding progress, not scoring points, I offer the following feedback to American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten in response to her Oct. 22 speech to the West Coast Labor Management Institute in the wake of John Deasy's recent resignation as the superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District......
And that gets to your decision to go to Los Angeles a week after Mr. Deasy announced his resignation and give a speech where you cast your "longtime personal friend" as a "John Wayne" autocrat. The appearance felt more like a gloating dance in the end zone than a constructive appraisal of how to move forward.

Cunningham seems to be saying that Randi is turning against ed deform:

Wrapped in aspirational language about "collaboration" was a clear signal to your members that organized resistance to reform is the real strategy, and that the AFT supports it. The equally clear signal to reform leaders across the country is that they could be targeted next if they are not sufficiently "collaborative."

But he also points out how Randi has been so supportive of ed deform while also speaking out of the other side of her mouth:

While you've also challenged some of your allies to keep the debate civil, barely a day goes by without some public reference to "test-obsessed corporate reformers." Let's remember that you welcomed philanthropic support in the past and embraced many reform ideas that they support, including the use of test scores in part to evaluate teachers.
You concede that Teach For America has elevated the teaching profession, yet the AFT also funds United Students Against Sweatshops, a student group protesting TFA. TFA, an organization with proven results—even according to the Institute of Education Sciences—that is actively recruiting smart people to join your union and teach poor children is not your enemy.

 What's an ed deformer like Cunningham to do? You've all been counting on Randi to run a straight path to ed deform without detours to obfuscate the issue for the anti-deformers who might doubt that she is really Vichy.

Sometimes she DOES have to play a phony game for her base.

NY Post on Arisleyda Ureña: Principal ‘raffled’ Department of Education’s $12K

Ureña, who took home $154,638 last year, left the DOE in August “before being brought up on any disciplinary charges,” a department spokesman said... NY Post

Sue Edelman of the Post has a story today - we wrote about this last week- The Farina Follies: OSI Charges Substantiated Against Former Principal Arisleyda Urena, Most Recently Director of School Quality.

Ureña left the DOE in August so maybe Farina did give her a push.
Remember -- that Urena had her lawyer, Timothy Parlatore, threaten the teacher and file charges against a teacher whistle blower whom Urena discontinued and had the teacher arrested.

This is a lesson for certain administrators - the blogging world will come back to bite you - one strategy is to make you name hot on google so when you all look for future advancement - there you are for all the world to see. (We do vet people to make sure whistleblowers are not just nuts - and one way is to talk to other people from the school.)

Note this comment by mouthpiece Thomas Parlatore in the Post piece:

Ureña’s lawyer, Tim Parlatore, said she blames the charges on “harassment” by a former teacher she fired and noted the investigation did not find she “took any money for herself.”

 Now here is what Thomas Parlatore was saying not long ago - 

There has been a lot of banter concerning the conduct and actions of Arisleyda A. Ureña. Based on her substantiated OSI memos (shown here and here), people are right to question her decisions as a school leader and “role model” for teachers, administrators, and the Dominican-American community. In Sue Edelman’s article, “Principal ‘raffled’ Department of Education’s $12K,” we learn that Ms. Ureña has hired lawyer Timothy Parlatore to be her “mouth piece” for any sticky situations she gets herself in, meaning investigations or lawsuits. Mr. Parlatore has said a number of false statements in the defense of his client and we would like him to get the record straight.  

Mr. Parlatore claims:	What the facts say:
A story published December 25, 2013 on the NYC Rubber Room Reporter and ATR CONNECT online blog (“Rubber Room Blog”), entitled “Principal Arisleyda Ureña Leaves The Academy For Language and Technology After Conducting Unauthorized Raffles” contains several false representations.	Since the students did not purchase tickets, the event hosted by Ms. Ureña and Mr. Viñales cannot be considered a “raffle,” rather, it is a “lottery.” Regardless, of the semantics, the “event” was not approved by the DOE. You can also view a video of these “lotteries,” which the students call “raffles” here: http://vimeo.com/34768875
The following statement is false: She had improperly purchased these items using her P-card in an inappropriate fashion. See the attached Excel printout (obtained as a result of a Freedom of Information Law request) of the purchases on her Pcard statements.	According to the OSI investigation, Ms. Ureña was unable to account for over $11,700 P-card purchases from Apple; $918 from Modell’s; $379 from Frank’s Sport Shop; and $4428 from CDW Government, LLC. Noli Hourahan, a director from the Division of Financial Operations, stated that items paid for by a P-Card must have an “educational” purpose. The amount of money for student incentives cannot exceed $100 per year. Any event that would have students win prizes based on chance rather than merit does not fall under a school incentive program. Thus purchases paid for by Ureña’s P-Card for the lotteries would constitute a misuse of a P-Card.
The following statement is false: Ms. Ureña has been removed from her position as Founding Principal but only time will tell whether she will be transferred to a different position within the Department of Education or undergo Educational Law 3020a charges for ‘conduct unbecoming.	As stated in the NY Post article, according to the DOE, OSI referred the case to the Administrative Trials Unit (ATU). Prior to being charged and possibly undergoing a 3020a hearing, Ms. Ureña resigned from the DOE.
The following statement is false: Founding Principal Arisleyda Ureña has been involved in very questionable ethics, financial, contractual, and educational violations during her seven years as principal at the Academy for Language and Technology (ALT) in the Bronx.	Please see the above mentioned OSI reports and the following article from DTOE. “When asked, Ms. Ureña acknowledged that she had used her P-Card to purchase sports equipment she distributed as PRIZES [our emphasis] . . . She could not explain why she decided to distribute [the iPods and miniature laptops] piecemeal, years after she obtained them, rather than distributing them equally upon receipt.”
Pursuant to your campaign, you have, and continue, to file Freedom of Information Requests (“FOIL Requests”) under the false premise that it is an effort to discover information to support your outlandish allegations that Ms. Ureña ever committed wrongdoing. Your attempts to extrapolate wrongdoing from these FOIL request are frivolous and serve no purpose other than to harass my client and others.	Are you kidding us? Once again, please see the Edelman article referenced above and the substantiated OSI memo. “Due to the fact that Ms. Ureña failed to maintain itemized receipts and records as mandated by DFO SOP, this investigator was unable to account for over $11,000 in purchases. Regardless of funds used, Ms. Ureña acknowledged using school funds to purchase items that were intended to be used for educational purposes. It is clear that she did not use these items for any educational purpose . . . they items were given as gifts, creating a condition in which other students at X365 were denied access to the same technological resources.”
We have also been informed of your aggressive attempts to contact the media … in an effort to further disseminate such false and disparaging statements. On February 16, 2014, the NY Post article entitled Bronx Principal Probed Over iPad Raffles was published that contained falsehoods made by yourself about Ms. Ureña.	See above please. Not to mention, 5 students were interviewed and gave testimony of some of the items purchased, who won prizes, and when they took place.
Ms. Ureña is a respected professional and has spent years serving the community where she has successfully built a positive reputation. She is well liked by many and maintains a positive influence in the teacher’s community. Your actions have not only offended Ms. Ureña, but offend an entire community of teachers who are fully aware that your defamatory allegations are baseless, devoid of truth.	Let’s look at some data! In 2013, ·      24% of all teachers disagreed with the following statement on the Learning Environment Survey: “I have sufficient materials, equipment, and assistive technology in good condition to teach my class(es).” ·      36% of all teachers disagreed with the following statement on the Learning Environment Survey: “The principal at my school encourages open communication on important school issues.” ·      40% of all teachers responded with “to a lesser extent” or “to no extent” to this statement: “To What Extent do you feel supported by the principal at your school.” ·      32% of all teachers disagreed with the following statement on the Learning Environment Survey: “I trust the principal at her word.” ·      24% of all teachers do not feel that teachers trust each other. ·      44% of all teachers do not feel respected by the principal. ·      46% of all teachers disagree with the statement, “School leaders recognize teachers for their accomplishments.”
Ureña blames the charges on “harassment” by a former teacher she fired and noted the investigation did not find she “took any money for herself.”	This “former teacher” had their record cleared of a termination, discontinuance, and U-rating at a settlement hearing with the NYC Department of Education in September 2014. This individual also had the “problem codes” which Ureña personally placed there as a result of several false investigations over the years expunged as well. Oh, and by the way, the ADA declined to prosecute the teacher for “harassment;” the ADA claimed that no evidence existed that harassment occurred. Do you two need a copy of the settlement to make sure neither of you break any of the stipulations? We think it’s nice that Ms. Ureña never “took any money for herself,” but can this be proven considering her track record?

Leonie Haimson on Success Charter Audit

What about the hundreds of teachers and students who leave her [Eva's] schools each year?  Perhaps that’s why she and the charter lobby fears the transparency that  a performance audit would achieve... Leonie Haimson

“Our critics,” Ms. Moskowitz said, “should speak to the tens of thousands of families who send their children to our schools, or are on waiting lists, and to the thousands of teachers who apply every year to join our magical educational community.”

These are phony waiting lists. Success can't even fill all its seats. Show us the waiting lists. Leonie posted some comments.
Note that Eva ran a PR visit to a Success School on the day the audit was announced.

Here's Leonie's comments.

More on Success Charters and audit

Two new articles about tours of Success charters offered to principals to share their “best practices”.  Both make clear the exceedingly strict discipline and penalties for students: 

Students who are not sitting correctly or who fidget are asked to change their posture in front of the class, and at least one student got a “check mark” for bad behavior for not keeping his hands folded in another classroom. (Three check marks result in a time-out, five in a written letter of apology, and so on.)
Students were often instructed to “sit like a professional.” A sign on one wall read “$cholar dollar fines” and noted the monetary charges for various misbehaviors: $1 for an untucked shirt, $5 for “not loud and proud,” and up to $10 for talking during a “zero” noise period. (Success students are called scholars.)

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/city-hall/2014/10/8555766/success-academy-exposes-methods-outsiders-close?top-featured-image

Does anyone know if these are real dollars or some sort of symbolic ones?

http://ny.chalkbeat.org/2014/10/30/district-leaders-look-under-the-hood-of-a-success-academy/#.VFOhDsm2Wk0

Makes clear that the intensive approach requires lots of staff time, including an asst. teacher in every classroom.  How is this to be replicated in NYC schools unless the DOE provides the budget for this?

See also in relation to the Comptroller audit, Eva claims her schools spend less that per student average for DOE schools.  Hard to imagine w/ two teachers in a classroom , plus her huge advertising and marketing budget.

In a statement released today, Moskowitz said, "Success Academy spends less per student than district schools..”

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/city-hall/2014/10/8555751/stringer-begins-charter-audits-including-success

The NYT features a disagreement over whether the Comptroller has the right to do a performance/operational audit as well as a financial one. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/nyregion/city-comptroller-to-audit-success-academy-charter-network.html

The chief executive of the New York City Charter School Center, an advocacy organization, quickly sent out a statement that Mr. Stringer was overstepping his authority, which the executive said was limited to auditing the finances of charter schools, not their overall operations.

The comptroller’s office “does not have auditing power over charter school operations,” the executive, James D. Merriman, said. “Those matters are overseen by our state’s charter authorizers.”

The disagreement appeared to stem from a difference of opinion about where Mr. Stringer derived his authority to audit charter schools.

A spokesman for Mr. Stringer, Eric Sumberg, said it came from the City Charter, which gives the comptroller broad auditing powers.
But Mr. Merriman pointed to state law, which, in a change made by the State Legislature this year, gives the comptroller the power to audit a charter school “with respect to the school’s financial operations.” Mr. Merriman said that state law superseded city law, and that the state law clearly limited Mr. Stringer’s authority.

Eva also critiques the critics by calling her schools “magical”:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/nyregion/city-comptroller-to-audit-success-academy-charter-network.html

“Our critics,” Ms. Moskowitz said, “should speak to the tens of thousands of families who send their children to our schools, or are on waiting lists, and to the thousands of teachers who apply every year to join our magical educational community.”

What about the hundreds of teachers and students who leave her schools each year?  Perhaps that’s why she and the charter lobby fears the transparency that  a performance audit would achieve.

Support the LES Community - STOP the Evafication of District 1 (Lower East Side) - Sign the Petition

Please help support D1 against Evification by signing the petition below. This new SAC school is the one approved for D2 but bait-and-switched to D1 at the last minute. We are now getting official notification, petitioned by Eva and her army, and maybe even a hearing, (even though none is required), thanks to the mobilization of parents and electeds. So the fight begins!... Lisa Donlan, CEC 1.

Petition Against Success Academy In D1 - PLEASE SIGN

Success Academy Charter Schools in D1!!

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/no-need-for-success-academy?source=c.em&r_by=11493424

One day soon, you might be stopped on the street and asked to sign a petition in support of "great new public school option coming into the neighborhood." At the top of the petition, you will also see the words "Success Academy Charter Schools." 

Here in District 1, we want our schools to reflect our values, cultures, and diversity. Given rising class sizes, rampant overcrowding and inadequate funding, who wouldn't want another great public school? But the Success Academy claim is very deceptive. Success Academy Charter Schools take resources and space from our public schools. What’s more, Success Academy Charter schools do not serve the same number of high needs students as do our district schools. Our schools, which will lose resources to Success Academy, will enroll even more at risk students that Eva's schools will not take. 

Standing up to say no to Success Academy can help protect and support the community schools we already have in District 1. 

By signing this petition you are telling Eva Moskowitz and Success Academy that we are a strong, united community dedicated to supporting schools that truly serve our needs. 

Dear Success Academy, 
THANKS, BUT NO THANKS! 

(click the link to sign the petition)

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/no-need-for-success-academy?source=c.em&r_by=11493424