I Enter Mayoral Control Debate on @BrianLehrer on WNYC

I just got off the phone after appearing on Brian Lehrer show (one of my must listens every day) on WNYC defending local school boards and attacking mayoral control. Brian seemed surprised to have 3 teachers on the line to support local school boards, given the narrow and biased debate. They picked me to rep the group.

Here's the embed code for the 33 minute segment -- I'm 23+ minutes in:

Brian Lehrer

I tried to make as many points as I could based on recent blogs by Patrick Sullivan, Leonie Haimson and James Eterno -- all links are in my post, Did UFT Boycott DeB Mayoral Control Rally? Patrick Sullivan: What Would Be The Impact of End of Mayoral Control

Here are some quick points I made:

• Local control was only pre-k to 8. High schools were never decentralized.
• My district had corruption and patronage and I and others consistently opposed that but we had a monthly forum in the neighborhood where parents, teachers and community members could make their points, in addition to having school board elections to challenge their control.
• There is much greater corruption under mayoral control - as we've seen over the past 15 years -- add up the money lost in the districts and compare.
• The 1996 law put curbs on the districts -- more accountability.
• We could control the machine politics with more oversight.

When Brian asked me about how charters would deal with that I pointed out why isn't their buying of politicians more corrupt than what ever local school boards did?

Charters in no way want local control because most communities don't want charters. Ben Max of Gotham Gazette, who was on with Brian disagreed with me and said some neighborhoods want charters.

I disagree -- if we had local school boards, the people who supposedly want charters would be involved in controlling the public schools and would have the ability to make the kinds of changes they want.

Charters have used mayoral control as their main instrument. Since de Blasio is not in their pocket, they are unhappy, though from what I've seen he has given them almost everything they want.

Later I got this tweet from Ben Max:

Ben Max @TweetBenMax	Jun 21
@NormScott1 @BrianLehrer good talking with you earlier, Norm. interesting points. isn't this charter point negated by the state, though?

I replied:

Norm Scott   @NormScott1 Jun 21 @BrianLehrer charters fear local bds.@BrianLehrer Parents that supposedly want charters would control public schools and negate charter or run them.

 charters fear local bds.@BrianLehrer Parents that supposedly want charters would control public schools and negate charter or run them.

Some parents will want to be involved in local school board. I can also see highly funded charter school supporters running in some crucial districts and charterizing the entire district, though I believe they don't want everyone -- so maybe select the juicy stuff for themselves. So there could be a downside to this too.

Julius Caesar in Central Park: Willie S. Says, “Assassination Doesn’t Work”

I shared my travails in getting tickets to Shakespeare in the Park's production of Julius Caesar (The Hunt for Tiks to Julius Caesar, NAACP Debate on Charter Moratorium, Puerto Rico FMPR Teachers. Here is my in depth review, which I sent in to The Wave.


Julius Caesar in Central Park: Willie S. Says, “Assassination Doesn’t Work”
By Norm Scott

“Democracy—Not Donald Trump—Dies Brutally in ‘Julius Caesar,’ Just as Shakespeare Intended” proclaimed The Daily Beast, referring to the recent and controversial production in Central Park which closed a short run on June 17. Also pointed out was this important point: “The production’s detractors had not realized that a Caesar, dressed as Barack Obama, had also been killed in a production five years ago. Caesar is a figure of power, and different productions in different eras configure him as the leader-figure of that moment.” Where wuz u who doth be outraged this time? Ahhh, the relevance of Shakespeare over 400 years after he wrote the play.

I studied the play in the 10th grade at Thomas Jefferson HS in Brooklyn. Our teacher, Miss Port, took us to see the movie starring Marlon Brando as Marc Antony. The movie wowed me, especially Brando’s funeral oration (“I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.”)

I spent half a day last Thursday racing around the city in an attempt to get tickets to the Public Theater’s Shakespeare in the Park production. Chances were slim, as I found out when I arrived at the senior citizen line at 8:15 AM, where there were already about 70 people in front of me and was told by others on line near me, “No chance. You have to be at least by that tree to have a shot.” It turned out that even that tree was too far away. The Public Theater crew informed us of the bad news around 10 AM, that at most 40 people would get tickets. But there would be a last chance lottery at the Public Theater at noon, so I headed over there, only to find a very long line. But they took everyone who got there before noon and with hundreds of people packed in waiting breathlessly for the 20 or so numbers to be called, mine came up. Yes, you may rub me for luck the next time you see me.

Now let’s get down to business over the production’s use of a Trump-like figure as Caesar with a model-like wife with an Eastern European accent. Maybe this was a bit too obvious, as people would have gotten the point anyway, but it was sure a hell of a lot of fun to watch the caricatures – until the assassination, that is.

Was the production glorifying the assassination of Caesar/Trump? Though modernized (there’s a no toga zone), it stays true to Shakespeare’s point: that engaging in an act of assassination leads to much worse outcomes than the ills the conspirators thought they were solving – and in fact this has proven true throughout history. Shakespeare wrote the play in 1599 just as decades of reign by an aging Queen Elizabeth were coming to an end, with rumors swirling of conspiracies to remove her from the throne, even by dint of assassination. Shakespeare couldn’t get a contemporary play past the censors, so he resorted to using history to make his points, even though he plays his hand cagily, seeking to avoid being drawn and quartered by the authorities, by refusing to come down on the side of rebellion, no matter how bad the rulers were, because the outcome would be so much worse.

As a man, Caesar had little in common with Trump. Caesar was an accomplished general, politician and a brilliant writer, and also had an affair with Cleopatra, things Trump may try to claim – just don’t tell him Cleopatra is no longer with us. They do have in common a high degree of vanity, elements of narcissism and certainly an authoritarian bent and a willingness to twist facts.

This production, and Shakespeare, do not make Caesar/Trump a hero and engage in some spoofing of their egos. But the conspirators who claim they need to kill Caesar to save Rome don’t come off much better. Cassius, of lean and hungry look, though passionate, is manipulating and vicious. Caesar favorite Brutus, who comes off as naïve but necessary for the plot to succeed, is recruited to the cause and when he puts the final dagger into Caesar as he comes staggering to Brutus, whom he looked at as a son, the famous line, “the unkindest cut of all” is appropriate as Caesar falls to his death. This was possibly the most consequential assassination in history as the direct outcome was 400 years of the Roman Empire.

Shakespeare mocks “the people” who shift from anti-Caesar to pro Caesar based on who spoke to them last – in this case, Brutus’ fatal decision to let Marc Antony have the last word. And oh what words they were, especially since “he” was played brilliantly by a woman (House of Card’s Elizabeth Marvel). No, Shakespeare does not seem to be a fan of democracy.

The production pits the defenders of Caesar as a police state. They are led by Marc Antony and Octavian, Caesar’s nephew and adopted son, who is portrayed as a snot-nosed, cold-blooded and arrogant kid. Take a look at the recent video of Jared Kushner and there is an eerie resemblance.

Supporters of the plotters wear “resist” arm bands and shout “this is what democracy looks like” and “the people united will never be defeated,” the latter as the police state kills them all, thus defeating the people united and ending up with the real final cut of all – the end of the Roman Republic and Octavian, who defeats his rivals and establishes the Roman Empire with himself as the Emperor Augustus. The closing vision of future emperor Octavian staring at the audience cold-faced (Kushner again) over a stage loaded with the dead bodies of the resisters, makes the message clear: democracy is no better off when people resort to assassination of a leader, no matter how dangerous and unpopular (though I would question that when it came to Hitler and maybe a few other monsters.)

Though I am a fierce opponent of Donald Trump (and the Republican agenda) I classify attempts to impeach Trump based on flimsy evidence as political assassination that would lead to worse things, just as the ridiculous Republican impeachment of Bill Clinton led us to George Bush and the catastrophes visited upon us as a result of his presidency – and yes, you Obama bashers, the Bush years were worse and the Trump years will escalate things in the direction of the ultimate demise of whatever democracy we think we have, with a widening income gap that will open the populace to demagoguery - from the left and the right.

Norm resists, mostly requests to do chores from his wife, every day at ednotesonline.com

Did UFT Boycott DeB Mayoral Control Rally? Patrick Sullivan: What Would Be The Impact of End of Mayoral Control

Greater representation and agency for the members of the communities that rely on public education can only make it better, not worse. The mayor should stop trying to sow fear among public school parents and students.   He should back the Assembly leadership that's willing to let the law expire rather than knuckle under to demands to hand over the people's schools to the privately controlled boards of the charter world.... Patrick Sullivan

Norm's comments:
While the elites cry about an disaster the end of mayoral control would be, stakeholders and people on the ground are screaming for it to end. With Republicans trying to hold mayoral control hostage in exchange for more giveaways to charters, the neo-liberal bleating hearts keep supporting a major instrument of ed deform- the removal of controls at the local level by giving all the power to the mayors who can then deal - from the bottom. At today's pro-mayoral control rally Farina joined in the fray -- yes, that Farina who ran district 15 under the old system -- and wasn't de Blasio on that local school board?

Now the UFT is taking a more nuanced position than in the past --- calling for more controls on the mayor -- without abandoning the idea - which would lead to local school boards, which the UFT finds abhorent.

Funny, but it seems they did not attend today's pro-mayoral control rally, which included other unions. 

Other bloggers have been out there on the issue and (as usual) we tail far behind but also have the advantage of being able to link to them.

James Eterno at the ICE blog asks the eternal question: WHY WOULD ANYONE BE AFRAID TO LET MAYORAL CONTROL EXPIRE?

Leonie Haimson at

NYC Public School Parents

Arne Duncan still arguing for mayoral control -- when the trend is in the opposite direction 
 
Below, Patrick Sullivan at the NYCEdNews Blog lays out the consequences of going back to pre-Bloomberg times, something both Dems and Republicans will not let happen -- look for them to blink before it happens because none of them want to bring back the mess for politicians of local school boards, which many of us old hands really do miss even when they were local patronage mills --- but even with low turnout they still offered a space for community involvement and believe me whatever money went into the local corruption, it pales in comparison to the large-scale games played with the mayor in control.

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Mayoral Control Expiration -- What it Really Means

The state law dictating the governance of NYC schools expires on June 30th.  In the State Senate, Republicans and a rogue gang of Democrats calling themselves the Independent Democratic Conference (IDC) are refusing to consider renewal until the Assembly agrees to create more charter schools in NYC.  In the political battle over privatization of our public schools, some have claimed the expiration of mayoral control will be catastrophic and put our kids at risk.

Ignore the fear mongering coming from many quarters, especially the mayor, on what the expiration of mayoral control means.

Here's what it really means:

Fewer mayoral appointees on central board

The central school board will go from thirteen members to seven.  This board was labeled "The Panel for Educational Policy" by Mike Bloomberg instead of "the Board of Education" but it's the same entity in the law, "the city board".  Each borough president will continue to appoint one member.  What changes is the mayor now gets only two appointees instead of eight.

In the current system the mayor selects the chancellor.  When the law reverts, the board has this power.  We already have a chancellor so the new board will likely just reaffirm her position.  There are few decisions made in the summer.  The big stuff happen later -- budgets are considered in the spring. The board will have to meet to approve contracts.

True, the new board composition allows less influence for the mayor and more for the borough presidents but keep in mind our current borough presidents -- Gale Brewer, Ruben Diaz Jr, James Oddo, Eric Adams and Melinda Katz -- are probably the most serious and level-headed set the city has ever seen.   In other words, there will be no chaos.

Less corruption

Proponents of mayoral control are warning of a dramatic increase in corruption.  What they ignore is the large scale corruption that has transpired under mayoral control.  The concentration of power in the mayor's appointees and corresponding decline in scrutiny of contracting has permitted corruption scandals far exceeding anything seen in "the bad old days".   For example, here's a trio of multi-million dollar scandals:  Future Technology Associates, Custom Computer Specialists and Champion Learning.  The balanced board will promote tighter scrutiny of spending and likely produce a reduction in this type of large-scale fraud.

Local school board elections

At some point the local school boards in each of the city's 32 districts will need to be elected.  Greater representation and agency for the members of the communities that rely on public education can only make it better, not worse.

The mayor should stop trying to sow fear among public school parents and students.   He should back the Assembly leadership that's willing to let the law expire rather than knuckle under to demands to hand over the people's schools to the privately controlled boards of the charter world.

- Patrick Sullivan
Manhattan Member NYC Board of Education (Panel for Educational Policy) 2007-2013

City Days: The Hunt for Tiks to Julius Caesar, NAACP Debate on Charter Moratorium, Puerto Rico FMPR Teachers

I've got a story to tell about my quest for tickets to Julius Caesar in Central Park --but you have to wade through my day by day account of last week - skip ahead when you get bored.

My passions right now are local/union/national politics and sports and gardening.

I've been dealing with some health issues due to an infection and having to take IV antibiotics and spending most of the week days over the past two weeks in the city, coming home to Rockaway for the weekends. (I may dump Ed Notes on Mike Schirtzer sooner than he thinks.) It's so much easier in the city than in Rockaway. A year ago I had one doctor. Now I have 5, all of whom I can walk to in the city.

Last Monday, June 12, I came into the city taking the ferry from Rockaway to Wall St and then changing (free transfer if you ask on the ferry) to the East River ferry that makes 5 stops in Brooklyn and Long Island City before getting to my stop at East 34 St. All for $2.75, the cheapest boat ride you can get and something tourists and non-Rockaway residents are discovering. So it took about 2 hours door to door, but who's in a hurry?

I met a guy on the ferry who came down from upstate just for the ride back and forth to Rockaway. He told me he was a chief investigator for SCI and worked for Stancik and Condon and worked the Board of Ed beat for 20 years and in fact was in on the raid of my district 14 offices after $7 million disappeared. I mentioned how no one went to jail on that caper (due to more than a little political influence by the Hassidic community of Williamsburg). I didn't catch his answer -- must have missed it due to traffic noise. Seemed like a nice guy but just hearing SCI gave me the woolies -- but one interesting factoid - he trashed OSI.

When I spend time in the city I am energized. Monday I had to wait all evening for a delivery of some meds so it was a wasted night -- but it was hot out so I spend the evening watching the Mets and then the Yankee games, with some cable TV politics interspersed.

Tuesday I headed over to Bryant Park in the afternoon to do some reading but ended up seeing a mini-opera. That night I went to see Carol Burris challenge two charter slugs at an NAACP sponsored debate at the NYC Bar Association. I had considered going to a movie instead but was glad I went. Carol, as usual, was excellent. The Politico ed reporter, Eliza Shapiro who was moderating, was pretty bad and often clueless. The charter slugs were shameless. I need to write this up in a separate post.

Wednesday, I spent the early part of the day checking out the scene at Shakespeare in the Park before signing up as a member of the Museum of Natural History and the NY Historical Society before heading over  to the Delegate Assembly and then to the Dark Horse for the MORE session with the amazing FMPR teachers from Puerto Rico, (see Arthur - Homophobes Yes, ATRs and FMPR No and James - who brought up the MORE ATR reso), followed by the MORE event for the Puerto Rico teachers from the FMPR, which attracted almost 50 people. The story told by the 3 teachers from PR, a few of whom we've met before, is an astounding one of battle by a militant union and betrayal. There were so many lessons, this needs a separate post.

Thursday was spent in a hunt for tiks for Julius Caesar at Shakespeare in the Park, which I describe below. My wife came into town to join me. Friday we headed back to Rockaway for the weekend.

I'm actually feeling pretty chipper, even more so in the city than in Rockaway. Being car-less, I have to walk and take public transportation. I walked over 5 miles a few days last week. When I get back to Rockaway I laze around like a slug.

But I want to talk about Thursday's hunt for Julius Caesar tickets, which was the hottest ticked in town. [See links below to interesting articles on the production.]

On Wednesday (June 14) I wanted to scout out the scene so I took the subway up to E. 86th street and walked cross Central Park to check out the situation at the Delacorte Theater and what time I would have to be there on Thursday to get tickets. The guy I spoke to looked at me and said -- for the senior line, maybe around 9 AM. The other line, earlier, like 7AM. So I figured I'd get to the senior line around 8:15.

When I joined the line on Thursday, my fellow line mates informed me we had no chance to get in -- she pointed to a tree and said no one past there gets in. But I got to meet a whole bunch of interesting people, including a retired teacher who taught in District 27 - we knew a lot of people. At 9:45, a rep came over and said there was no chance - some people began arriving at 5:30AM). He said they give out to the first 40 or so people which is 80 tickets. (He said the regular non-senior line had 500 people and only about 250 would get tiks -- the first person on line arrived about 1:30AM.) Some refused to give up and leave. I was reluctant but what was the point? I did talk to him and he suggested other options - they hold lotteries in all the boroughs - he said the Bronx was a good shot -- but also that if you get your name in the lottery before noon at the Public Theater at Lafayette Street -- of course there would be a lot more people there than in the Bronx.

So I headed over to the Public and got on a very long line at 11:15 but it moved fast. So many people kept pouring in. At noon they closed the lottery and started drawing for tickets. My wife was about to leave Rockaway and head for the half price ticket line so we could see some show that night and laughed when I told her to wait for the drawing.

The lobby was packed with hundreds of people and it looked like they were going to draw about 20 names.




The first raffle was 2 digits away from mine. Others got close to. They must have been close to 20 when BINGO -- my number came up -- one of my few lucky days - and we also won the lottery for Hamilton -- I guess politically tinged plays are my lucky charm.

I had read James Shapiro's book on the year 1599 when Shakespeare wrote Julius Caesar and put it in context of the political events in England when an aging Queen Elizabeth was rumored in danger of a coup. I also saw the 4 plays (shortened to an hour each) at Irondale last year, so I was familiar with the political context of the play. Basically Shakespeare was condemning political violence -- look what you will end up with -- and this production makes exactly that point and does not promote the assassination of Trump.

I will write up my impressions of the play, which I loved, in another post.

Before I bore you with details of my upcoming week in the city, here are a few links

• Review: Can Trump Survive in Caesar's Palace? - The New York Times

• Protesters Outside ‘Julius Caesar’ in Central Park, and Laughs Inside

• [Director] Oskar Eustis on Trump, 'Julius Caesar' - The New York Times

A the guy stood outside yelling the entire play and continued to protest and shout Kill Chuck Schumer as we left -- people yelled back at him about an American production of “Julius Caesar,” in 2012 in Minneapolis, which depicted Caesar as President Barack Obama. He was surrounded by cops protecting him -- hmmm, wasn't he threatening a US Senator?

Upcoming week

I've got a busy upcoming week planned. I'm going in early by ferry on Monday morning with some Rockaway friends - a nurse is coming at 3PM to change my dressing and draw blood. Monday night I'm going to see the original King Kong in Bryant Park.

Tuesday I have a doctor appointment where I'm hoping for some good news. That night is Leonie Haimson's Skinny Awards dinner -- which by the way, we were informed last night that due to the restaurant's sudden closing, has been moved: here is her message:

Miraculously, I found a lovely Egyptian restaurant in Greenwich Village which the owner generously offered to me for the event.  Here are the details:

Casa La Femme, 140 Charles St.,  New York 10014
Map here: https://goo.gl/maps/NiQiePw2vLS2

Wednesday my wife is coming in and we're seeing Sweat at the matinee. It is also the day of the summer solstice - and international Yoga day - I actually registered for a 1PM hot yoga class in Times Square but will have to miss that.

Thursday my wife's cousin is coming into town bearing tickets to the Yankee game that night. We're going to hang out at the WFAN celebration at Grand Central Station. He may come with me to stop by at the MORE 5PM party at the Dark Horse, before we head up to the stadium.

Friday I'm coming home to Rockaway -- rehearsals for this summer's production of "The Producers" where I play the judge --

Someone suggested I should be sitting in the Here Comes the Judge seats for the Yankee game.

The Democratic Party: Left, Right and Center

My School Scope WAVE column didn't make deadline for last week but here it is anyway.

The Democratic Party: Left, Right and Center

By Norm Scott

Recent articles in journals and the mainstream press (https://tinyurl.com/y6v5we34) have been addressing the splits between a chunk of the Democratic Party base and the leadership of the party. For those optimistic about making headway against the agendas of the Republicans and Trump – if someone can figure out exactly what the president’s (gag) agenda really is --- these are dangerous warning signs of  even more internal conflict to come.

The wings of the party have been simplified by terming them as the Bernie and Clinton wings. Even if Hillary and Bill are not around, their wing of practical centrists – do what you have to do, say what you have to say – to win elections – seemed to be discredited by the Trump victory. But, “No”, they argue. “We really did win since we got more votes (as Gore did in 2000), Russia hacked and Comey did his damage and if we eliminate these factors we are back in the saddle.”

Well, not exactly. Without all the other stuff, the Dems still have very little power in the states, which are overwhelmingly controlled by Republicans, who can use their power at the state level to gerrymander all over the place while also engaging in voter suppression. Astoundingly, even the conservative leaning Supreme Court has been smacking down the North Carolina laws, though I’m sure the North Carolina legislature will work them out to their advantage in time for the next election round.

So something must not be registering when so many people have deserted the party by voting for Trump or not voting at all or voting third party. The Bernie wing – the resisters – are not as practical as the Clinton wing (only challenge where you have a chance to win, don’t be too left, etc.) They want to fight on the beaches and anywhere else where there can be a battle. Their theory is that even if you know you will lose in a very red state or district, being in contention with a progressive platform will win some people over, whereas not being there at all, leaves the field to one ideology.

A recent battle in Wyoming where a Trumpy won, although by a much lower margin than expected, brought this battle to the fore. The Democratic National Committee(DNC) refused to fund what they viewed as a lost cost, while the Bernie wing tried to make up for it with enthusiasm. “What was accomplished,” ask the practical wing? To my mind, the Bernies were able to cut into the red state dominance and this is a long war. Mainstream Democrats are always looking for short term victories. What they are doing now is identifying the fuzzy red state districts where they feel they have a shot, not engage in hand to hand combat everywhere. That is going on in the battle in the Atlanta suburbs, where a centrist Democrat (or what used to be the now extinct moderate Republican) is running on a moderate platform – basically Obama light. No single payer health care on his agenda.

And that seems to be the defining issue between the Bernie and Hillary wings. How bold can you dare to be?

Last weekend a whole batch of people I know headed to Chicago for the THE PEOPLE’S SUMMIT: BUILDING THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION, where the Bernie wing of the party – potentially the basis of a new party. Think of what Emmanual Macron did in France. In one year he created an entirely new party and undermined the traditional right and left. But he did it from the center – he might be viewed as being in the Clinton/Obama wing and in fact Obama has a bromance with him.

On the other hand, in the recent election in England, the Labor Party, led by the far left Jeremy Corbyn who some say make Bernie look like a centrist, made a massive comeback when it was predicted they would be headed for oblivion.

My sentiment is with the Bernie people and believe his message resonated with a lot of people, including many who ended up voting for Trump. What is missing from the Democrats, no matter what wing you are in, are a deep bench of dynamic potential candidates, though word is that is beginning to happen at the grassroots level.

This is why my favorite two hobbies are sports and politics and I spend my days listening to either WFAN or NPR. Any chance Aaron Judge would run on the Democratic ticket?

Norm indulges his fantasies at ednotesonline.org

Hang With MORE and Puerto Rico Teacher Union Leaders After Today's UFT Delegate Assembly

There's a lot of skulduggery around the relationship between the AFT/UFT and the FMPR, which was once the major teacher union in Puerto Rico. The FMPR pulled out of the AFT and then was sued by the AFT, which lost the suit. That's the skinny. I had been working on a comprehensive blog to explain it all but got distracted over the past 10 days, so that will have to wait. But looking forward to hanging out tonight with the leaders of the FMPR.
Norm (I'm starting to sign some of my stuff since some readers think my name is ed notes.)

FMPR Panel for tonight - following DA

Dark Horse Pub

17 Murray St - downtown NYC

Down the block from City Hall

6pm meet and mingle

6:30 discussion

Our Federacion de Maestros de Puerto Rico panel:

Mercedes Martinez the President of FMPR, is a ESL teacher with a bachelor's degree in general arts from the Social Sciences Faculty and a bachelor's in ESL. she has 39 graduate credits in ESL. A teacher in the DOE since 2007 and immediately joined the FMPR. Participated in all the strikes, protests and activities in our union. Mercedes created a bond and organized parents throughout the years in defense of public education, fighting against school closures. She mobilized teachers, against labor injustices committed by the DOE and has prevailed through many struggles.

Edwin Morales, Vice President of FMPR, has a a bachelors degree in Economy from the University of Puerto Rico and is currently finishing his master's degree. He joined the DOE in 2009 as a Math teacher, and the FMPR the same year. He was the representative from our Area II, which includes 7 cities in our country. He has led fights against school closures in San Lorenzo and prevailed. Edwin has been involved in all of our struggles in defense of public education. He led the boycott with other teachers in his school against standardized testing where 65% of the total of the students participated in the opt out movement.

Ana Guzman is the current Secretary-Treasurer of the FMPR. She has a bachelor's degree in sociology, and a master's degree in ESL. She joined the DOE in 2002 and the FMPR in 2004. She has occupied different rank and file positions in our union, as secretary of the Local Union of Carolina. Ana participated actively in all of our strikes, protests, and activities and has led a massive boycott of the standardized tests in her High School, for two years, where the participation of the students in all subjects evaluated has been under 45%. This has been possible due to her work with parents and students, explaining to them why we oppose to such tests.

Moderated by Mike Schirtzer- Social Studies teacher and UFT delegate from Goldstein HS in Brooklyn. He has been in MORE since it's founding, elected to the first steering committee, and organized the struggle to protect our immigrant youth in front of Chancellor Farina. He also led the fight against the last contract ; holding forums, organizing protests, and writing widely circulated articles. Mike helped form the high school committee of MORE which resulted in winning the high school division of the UFT. MORE/New Action now has 7 seats on the UFT Executive Board, with Mike being one of the elected representatives.

NY Post Red Scare Alert: McCarthy-like Attack on MORE Teacher; MORE Responds

Francesca Gomes with best friend

TIME Magazine (who did not write about Francesca) pointed mainly to bankers and financial experts for the meltdown in their complete list of “25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis”.... MORE responds to NY Post attack on left, In Defense of Francesca Gomes, Bankers Should Be Slammed!

the Post has at least one reporter at all times on the "embarrassing teacher stories" beat. They regularly call OSI to find out about the latest cases that are under investigation - it's part of their long term campaign to demonize public employees. However, since the election, there definitely has been a shift towards attacking left wing teachers politically--- comment on MORE Listserve

"Leftist teacher’s homework assignment slams bankers" blared the headline in an article written by NY Post reporter Melissa

Klein, who showed up with two NY Post interns at the home of NYC teacher and founding MORE member, Francesca Gomes, on  Saturday morning to engage in a spurious piece of reporting. Francesca Gomes has been politically active on the left for decades and has never hid it.

When asked to leave one of the witch hunters refused to leave the private property. Now I support the rights of reporters, considering myself one, to get a story. But illegitimate and inconsequential stories like this one? Melissa whines:

When confronted at her Brooklyn home, Gomes slammed the door in a reporter’s face.

Really? Francesca, you didn't invite them in for tea? By the way, there were 3 people who came to her home, not one. Like Francesca had to be "confronted" over her "crime".

The story opens with: Blame the bankers!
Wait -- why not go all the way and say it in red:

Blame the bankers!

Melissa Klein adds the pitchfork:

A left-leaning humanities teacher at a Brooklyn middle school handed out a homework assignment this month in which students had to fill in the following sentence:

Wait Melissa, you forgot to add this:

Here is the so-called offending question Francesca asked:

“Banks are often run by ————— people who look for ways to hurt the most financially vulnerable people in the country.”

Oh let me count the ways banks hurt the most financially vulnerable people. In the Post/Trumpian world, that makes them heroes for screwing the little people. My answer would be SHITHEADS? What is yours?

I mean, were bankers responsible for the 2008 crash? Duhhhhh!

The witch hunt continues:

Gomes has been outspoken on lefty causes and is part of the United Federation of Teacher’s Social Justice Caucus. She is also a member of Socialist Alternative, the group that pushed for the election of a socialist candidate to Seattle’s city council in 2013.
Gomes leans further left than even Mayor de Blasio, and blasted him on social media in April for a comment he made at a Staten Island forum when asked about a “gag order” on teachers disparaging state tests.

Oh Melissa, don't you know that the Socialist Alternative candidate was actually elected to the city council and led the way to the $15 minimum wage that started the trend around the nation?
I mean, people actually voted for and elected a member of Francesca's leftist group. Is that what scares the hell out of the NY Post?

Shades of the red scare witch hunts of the 50s when teachers were fired for their political views. And by the way, UFT founder Al Shanker said it was right to fire those teachers.

I wonder how Melissa Klein would feel if I showed up with my Ed Notes press credentials at her door, alone with a photographer, to ask her  questions about how this story came about? Feel free to slam the door in my face Melissa. Or invite me in for tea.

Gomes leans further left than even Mayor de Blasio, and blasted him on social media in April for a comment he made at a Staten Island forum when asked about a “gag order” on teachers disparaging state tests. The mayor said, “Think of what it would lead to if teachers openly criticized every education policy they disagreed with,” the Staten Island Advance reported.

OMG: Fracnesca is to the left of the hated de Blasio, Can that be possible? And imagine the NY Post slamming Francesca for standing up to her nominal boss who tried to suppress free speech, the same guy the Post slams on every issue they can find. The Post apparently supports the de Blasio gag orders on teachers --

Maybe if Melissa had the same guts as Francesca she would stand up to her idiot bosses at the Post instead of becoming a hit woman for their biased politics.

Here is the link to the NY Post story.

James Eterno has some commentary:

MORE DEFENDS FRANCESCA GOMES

And here is the MORE fabulous defense of Francesca, written by a MORE member who is an experienced social studies high school teacher in NYC who points out that the question Francesca asked is the same one asked by many of our leading politicians and editorial writers and even many reporters.
 

morecaucusnyc

In Defense of Francesca Gomes, Bankers Should Be Slammed! - Were banks to blame for the Great Recession? Should middle school students be required to identify words like nefarious or reprehensible? 

MORE’s Francesca Gomes seems to think so and, last week, the New York Post noticed.
 

Francesca assigned students a handout with a word bank (a technique, by the way,  that is just good teaching practice). One portion read “Banks are often run by ————— people who look for ways to hurt the most financially vulnerable people in the country.” It seem like the choices remaining were “nefarious” and “reprehensible”.

We suppose that would lead students to conclude that the banks’’ actions were “nefarious” and “reprehensible”. But we also suppose that the banks’ actions in 2008 were, well nefarious and even reprehensible.

Senator Bernie Sanders seem to think the same thing saying once that “greed, recklessness and illegal behavior on Wall Street”. Former US attorney Preet Bharara agrees. In 2015, the Post reported Bharara’s position that criminal activity on Wall Street caused 2008 meltdown. (They did so in an article they published entitled “Criminal activity’ on Wall Street caused 2008 meltdown: Preet”).

It’s probably important to note that the Post themselves never once blamed Wall Street for the financial meltdown that cost millions of people their jobs and their homes and kicked millions more out of America’s middle class forever. That alone may explain part of the reason for not feeling comfortable with a teacher assignment that associated the banks with nefarious acts.

But TIME Magazine (who did not write about Francesca) pointed mainly to bankers and financial experts for the meltdown in their complete list of “25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis”. We here love the Post, but we’ll take Time’s economic evaluations over the Post, most days of the week.

Other folks who blamed banks for the meltdown include John McCain and Barack Obama, the latter saying in 2009 that Americans had been “tricked into signing these subprime loans by lenders who were trying to make a quick profit. And the reason these loans were so readily available was that Wall Street saw big profits to be made.”, while the former declaring in 2008 that, “In my administration, we’re going to hold people on Wall Street responsible. And we’re going to enact and enforce reforms to make sure that these outrages never happen in the first place.”

Here’s what the bipartisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) had to say on the matter:

“There was an explosion in risky subprime lending and securitization, an unsustainable rise in housing prices, widespread reports of egregious and predatory lending practices, dramatic increases in household mortgage debt, and exponential growth in financial firms’ trading activities, unregulated derivatives, and short-term “repo” lending markets, among many other red flags.”

So, yeah. We’re pretty sure that blaming the banks isn’t anything controversial.

But let’s face facts for a moment ok? Francesca wasn’t featured for having her students provide answers along a premise that everyone in America (besides the Post) seems to accept. She was featured because her political opinions are to the left of what the NY Post has deemed acceptable. She’s a leftist. A lefty. An alternative social something or other and, well, just left. For that reason, and that reason only, the Post decided to attack her.   

Now we’re proud to know that Francesca accepts all students in her classroom and we’re grateful to learn that she challenges those students with rigorous vocabulary. But we don’t much care about her political points of view outside of the work place and we don’t think you should either.

Why? Well, because as long as the law is being followed, the things a teacher does outside the school door is private. Teachers, especially ethical teachers like Francesca who challenge their students on a daily basis, deserves that privacy when they leave the schoolhouse.

As a good teacher, Francesca knows that it’s only ethical for her to avoid speaking about those viewpoints when she’s at work and in front of her students. We should probably remind you that she has not been accused of acting in an unethical manner in any way. The question on the assignment is clearly based on facts, not politics. 

We think teachers should teach facts. We also think they should enjoy their privacy after work.

Shino Tanikawa: Mayor's Diversity Plan is Meek

Shino, who we featured in a video I shot of her District 2 Diversity Committee meeting last month - here are our 2 posts on it

• Shino Tanikawa Video: NYC Community Education Coun...
• Shino Tanikawa: Controlled Choice: Community Educa...

the direct link to the video is: https://vimeo.com/217590199

- is back in Sunday's Daily News with an article about the de Blasio diversity plan

We’re ready for real diversity: Given the depths of school segregation and the value of mixing, de Blasio's plan is too timid

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ready-real-diversity-article-1.3235329

Mayor de Blasio has released a new plan that would ever so cautiously nudge our city’s schools, which today are heavily segregated by race and class, toward more diversity. It’s far too meek a strategy for my taste. Here’s why.

Ever since my daughters, now 22 and 14, were toddlers, I told them it was more important to be nice than smart. First and foremost, my husband and I wanted our girls to be compassionate citizens with empathy for people, particularly those who are not like them.

I recognized my own affluence and its potential impact on my children’s upbringing. I wanted to do my best not to raise them into entitled Manhattanites, but to become clear-eyed about their own privilege.

I also wanted my daughters, who are mixed race, to recognize and embrace their Japanese heritage, and not be ashamed of it as I was in my 20s (a rather stereotypical Asian response to a white-dominant society). For this to happen, I knew they needed to be in a racially diverse environment where they were not the only ones who are “different.”

I knew that public schools are where my children could meet and befriend people who are not like them; there aren’t many other places like that, even in a city known as a melting pot. So I sought out schools with diverse student bodies, and that’s what I got — though in this city, where kids tend to cluster by background, it wasn’t easy to find.

Mixing works. Both my daughters learned a great deal from attending elementary schools where classes had two grades or students with and without disabilities learning together.
What they learned does not show up in their test scores. Rather, they have the ability to see strengths in all people, particularly the ones society might label “difficult.” And they have humility about their status in this society.

By the time my younger daughter started the middle school application process in 2012, I was consciously looking for schools with racial diversity.

My spreadsheet of schools (yes, I am one of those moms) had columns for racial demographics. She was offered a seat at a middle school with a student body that is representative of the whole district racially and socioeconomically, as well as in proportions of English Language Learners and Students with Disabilities.

The school also had a diverse faculty. Her eighth-grade academic teachers were all women of color (a magical year that was!). Being a parent in this middle school deepened my awareness and understanding of racial issues as well as my own racial identity as a woman of color.

I am enormously proud and grateful that both my daughters are now deeply compassionate people; sometimes it is a little too much. While my husband and I take some credit because of our dinner-table conversations, I must give bigger credit to the public schools they have attended. I was fortunate to have found schools that had many different types of students in a system that has been labeled one of the most segregated in the nation.

I know not everyone wants what I want. We, as a family, are privileged to live in Manhattan’s District 2. We have enough money to afford us the luxury of not worrying about standardized test scores and whether their children will go to college. Other parents, understandably, struggle with these concerns daily.

But this is all the more reason I have to make sure our daughters understand their responsibilities as citizens in a democratic society. We want them to become agents of change in whatever form that might take. After all, what can be more important than to nurture a future generation that can begin to heal our nation that is so deeply divided?

Many parents I know are distraught by escalating tensions and animosity in our country, including overt racism that is surging. We feel angry, sad, frightened and powerless.

There is something we can all do to help, and that is to have our children come to know one another from early on so that they grow up embracing and respecting people of all backgrounds. Giving our children opportunities to learn together in the same classrooms, taught by diverse teachers and with culturally relevant curriculum, is the best way to dismantle racism.

All that explains why, to me, the city’s “Equity and Excellence for All: Diversity in New York City Public Schools” plan, released last week, left me lukewarm. While it is a welcome acknowledgment that diversity is important, the plan will not lead to structural changes or produce many more genuinely integrated schools. It will only scratch the surface.

The time is ripe for a larger, bolder first step. Many of us parents are ready.

Tanikawa is a public school parent and Chair of the Diversity Committee of the Community Education Council District 2.

D-Day and More on Woodrow Wilson and Race - Norm in The WAVE

Published June 9, 2017
D-Day and More on Woodrow Wilson and Race
By Norm Scott

June 6, 2017
I am watching all the stories on the 73rd anniversary of D-Day, the allied invasion of Normandy. We got married – the invasion of Norman --- on the 27th anniversary, so D-Day has a double meaning.

Allied casualties were at least 10,000, with 4,414 confirmed dead, according to Wikipedia. One of the myths about D-Day was that it was an American invasion when in fact it was Britain which took the lead, even though the supreme commander was Dwight Eisenhower. But everyone recognizes it was our entrance in the war, dragged kicking and screaming out of an isolationist-minded America, that played the ultimate difference.

Western Europe was pretty much under the control of Germany for four years, from May 1940 through June 6, 1944. That’s a long time in warfare. The allies, theoretically could have put a priority on the invasion earlier but first invaded North Africa and then Italy at Anzio where they had to fight up the boot of Italy. The Anzio invasion is not generally considered well-planned or a success.

The Soviet Union had made a deal with Hitler in August 1939, which secured Hitler’s eastern front and allowed him to conquer the west, until Hitler attacked Russia in June 1941. Stalin turned into our ally, though not trusted by many. The Soviets suffered initial devastation. One week into the German invasion, 150,000 Soviet soldiers were either dead or wounded. By October 1941, two months before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor which brought us into the war, three million Soviet soldiers were prisoners of war. And then came the winter in Russia, which stopped Napoleon 150 years before. And bogged down the German army.

The turning point of the war is viewed by many historians as not D-Day but the Battle of Stalingrad, which raged from the winter of 1942 through February 1943. Wikipedia: “It is often regarded as one of the single largest (nearly 2.2 million personnel) and bloodiest (1.7–2 million wounded, killed or captured) battles in the history of warfare. German forces never regained the initiative in the East and withdrew a vast military force from the West to replace their losses.” Then the Soviets began to push the Germans back, which further caused Hitler to weaken the western front. Stalinists often claim that it was the Soviet sacrifices that made Normandy possible. They also argue that the allies on the west should have made the invasion of Europe a higher priority than North Africa or Italy and that would have relieved the pressure on the eastern front and ended the war sooner. There are also claims that some people in the west were perfectly happy to see Stalin and Hitler wipe each other out. Fear of Stalin and his intentions – see the Cold War -- may have played a role in the decision making, but these controversies are what make history so much fun.

Speaking of controversies, Sharon Rutman was back last week with a critique of my comments on the racism of President Woodrow Wilson, excusing it with “America in 1916 was a very different country. Segregation and institutionalized racism were deeply entrenched in every segment of American life long before …Wilson moved into the White House.” I would say that segregation and institutionalized racism are still entrenched. Take a look at the tale of two cities in Rockaway.

In fact in 1912 when Wilson was elected, one major are where segregation had been balanced was in the federal bureaucracy, which in the fifty years since the Civil War had come to be seen as (then) model of integration in this country.

What Sharon misses was the major crime of racism committed by Wilson, who was an avowed racist: ordering the segregation of the federal bureaucracy, destroying the careers of thousands of accomplished black civil servants, a situation which lasted through the Civil Rights era of the 1960s. Wilson sent a signal, similar to our current president, that racism was OK. (The movie “Hidden Figures” shows Wilson’s racist legacy.)

Sharon also doesn’t seem familiar with the full facts surrounding WWI and the role a Wilson initiated PR campaign distorted facts to pull the American public into the war. One of the reasons the Lusitania blew up with such force and sank so quickly was that it was loaded with arms and Germany had warned people that these munitions ships were a legitimate target. I urge Sharon to take a look at the magnificent PBS documentary, The Great War, now streaming at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/great-war.

Sharon also seems hung up on how Wilson couldn’t have been a racist since he appointed a Jew to the Supreme Court. I hate to inform Sharon, but we Jews are not black and the discrimination faced by Jews and Blacks have been a very different experience. Jews have a long history of discrimination in this country, as have so many other ethnic groups – the Irish and Italians, the Asians, etc. But Jews have not been enslaved since Matzoth was discovered.

I believe that once we get into identity politics – my group’s discrimination was worse than yours, we enter a danger zone, which often leads to the dismissal of what others face. The challenge I always issue to people on the race issue is this: You and a black friend walk into a store. Which one of you is more likely to be followed, challenged, etc?

Norm blogs at ednotesonline.org

Exploring UFT Strategy - Janus, ATRs: Happy to See Dissenters Depart?

It looks like the UFT's strategy if there is an adverse Supreme Court ruling might not be to mobilize members to ensure that everyone wants to stay in the union, but rather it could be to kiss the governor's ring while going to the State Legislature to pass some kind of state law that works around the Supreme Court.... James Eterno, ICE blog

So, we joined our blogger crew in reporting on Monday night's (June 5) UFT Executive Board meeting (UFT: Union UnProud, as Ex Bd says NYET to Votes on ATRs), which was so revealing. There were times I laughed out loud at some of the stuff I was hearing. Arthur had a similar reaction:

.....how could so many people get up in public and say so many stupid things?
I sat for much of the evening shaking my head, literally, as I furiously tried to record the statements of the Unity faithful. One in particular shocked me, claiming that he spoke to two ATR teachers who were really excited about the buyout prospect. As someone who regularly speaks to ATR teachers face to face, on social media, via unsolicited email, on the phone and elsewhere, I found that impossible to swallow. It's inherently frustrating to be an ATR, being a teacher yet not a teacher, and I saw little or no understanding of that from Unity.

Who was that one who shocked Arthur? Why none other than Stuart Kaplan, who I used to get mad at but now am happy he gives us some laughable material.

Many of us have tied the ATR story with the upcoming Janus case, which we assume will turn us into a right to work state where people do not have to pay dues to the union.*

I don't have to go into detail on the drama behind the ATR agreement negotiated by the leadership and the DOE. Chaz lays it out at Chaz's School Daze:

Our Disconnected Union Leadership Tries To Justify The New ATR Agreement. -

James Eterno at the ICE (the caucus) blog asks the question of the day in this blog post:  UFT DOES NOT SEEM OVERLY CONCERNED ABOUT LOSING MANDATORY DUES CHECKOFF

Why is the UFT so shamelessly arrogant in the face of possibly losing mandatory dues for members or non members when the Supreme Court will more than likely rule mandatory union dues in the public sector for non-union members are unconstitutional (Janus v AFSCME)? One would think the union leaders would be on their best behavior as thousands of members could vote with their feet to leave the UFT after the Supreme Court makes their decision. That would cost the UFT millions of dollars.

While I believe the UFT leadership will do what James said they will, I also never had any doubt the UFT leadership would refuse to modify its behavior by catering to the members and is in fact perfectly happy to let what they consider "the losers, dissidents, gripers, etc" leave the union, as their being gone would solidify their control even further.

I can see some of the Unity slime slither, seething at even our little sliver of holding 7 Ex Bd seats (out of 100) where a portion of the membership (the high schools), by a slim margin, for the first time since 2004, rejected their leadership and voted opposition -- and this year we saw the impact even a small group can make. You know, if we weren't there, they could start the meeting at 6PM and end it at 6:15 and go home.

If the expected 20-30% leave the union, assume they might have been anti-Unity. They would rather run a smaller union than risk any chance of diluting their power.

Some of my own colleagues in the opposition, despite their level of political sophistication, actually seemed to believe there might be a change in leadership behavior. They argue we have to approach things with the idea of the union we would like to see but that can leave the Unity leadership off the hook.

James made his comment after reading about Mulgrew's revealing statement at the EB meeting as revealed by NYC Educator's reporting (Excecutive Board Takeaway--Being Unity Means Never Having to Say You're Sorry)

Mulgrew said something very interesting Monday night.. He seemed to suggest that there was some workaround to the Janus decision that would come around next year being negotiated statewide. That might explain why there's all the cozying up to Cuomo and a potential endorsement. But then he said both the country and state would be right to work next year, so it was kind of a mixed message.

The anti-union Mike Antonucci (what would he do if he and crew accomplish their goals and teacher unions disappear?), at Intercepts (not the left version) talked about the coming post-Janus war:
Is Janus the End of the Battle or the Start of a Guerrilla War?

What is the most fun for me is to watch Unity Caucus apparatchiks in operation try to justify every act of the leadership. Sometimes I have to laugh out loud. I'll let Arthur, who has learned a lot in his year on the EB, summarize the reactions when MORE puts up a reso:

LeRoy Barr gets up to speak against it, and everyone in Unity understands they are to vote against it. Schoor knew we would debate it because that's what they planned. They somehow put out the bat signal, texting or emailing a bunch of people to get up and oppose our motion.

What continually shocked me was the sheer volume of people who had nothing to say but got up and said it anyway. Though they got up one after the other and defended the agreement, we hadn't even criticized it. All we asked was that rank and file, or at least Exec. Board and DA, get a vote on this. We pointed out that ATRs had no say in this. Oddly, almost every Unity speaker ignored our argument altogether. They got up in rapid succession and claimed this argument was made in good faith. Yet no one had claimed otherwise. They said this gave ATR teachers an option. Yet no one had said it didn't. When you argue against something your opponent did not actually say, that's known as a strawman. It's a logical fallacy. 

A mind focused on defending the status quo at any cost is less than productive, and I have met many such people who are employed full time by the UF of T. Instead of looking forward for members, they focus on glorifying leadership. I'm surprised there aren't ten-foot statues of Michael Mulgrew in front of Queens UFT. 

* Who Ya Gonna Call?
On paying dues, remember that retirees do not have to remain in the union but most choose to do so. But many feel they are getting some service -- free courses, etc -- and the UFT does cater to retirees - of course.

Also -- a lot less people will leave than some people who hate Unity assume. While the UFT may not offer some people the service they think they should be getting, some will view it as a form of insurance - just in case. In theory, the UFT is supposed to supply the same service but if you are not paying for a special rep, well, you might just not get that call back.

UFT: Union UnProud, as Ex Bd says NYET to Votes on ATRs

It could have been so simple for the leadership to support the MORE resolution - see below - or even parts of it ---- but NOOOOOO! As Mike Schirtzer said in his excellent motivating speech, if we had a reso saying the sky was blue, Unity would vote against it and say the sky is green. (Stuart Kaplan would ask for an explanation on what is a sky. --- semi-inside joke.)

Arthur Goldstein began the festivities with this question, as reported on his blog:

Arthur Goldstein--MORE--Given the near certainty of impending US Supreme Court decisions it seems a good idea for our union to expand, rather than abridge fundamental democracy.
In 2011, there was an ATR agreement voted on by the Executive Board and the DA. In 2014, there was an ATR agreement that was part of the UFT Contract, and of course we voted on that too. This year, we have an ATR agreement that was not voted on by the DA, or any rank and file, let alone ATRs. Clearly there is precedent for us to vote on ATR agreements. Why was that precedent not followed this year?

Howie Schoor sang the no-bla-di, no-bla-day song in response:
Schoor—No obligation for us to have a vote on ATR agreements. I see there is a resolution and we can debate that.

And so they did debate.

MORE's Schirtzer gave them every chance on the ATR agreement (THE ATR AGREEMENT NEGOTIATED IN SECRET) to make it appear the UFT has even a sliver of democracy in a passionate speech on a reso calling for the UFT leadership to hold votes in the Ex Bd and the Delegate Assembly.

All they had to do was say "Yes" to a vote at the EB and at next week's DA, both dominated by Unity Caucus -- and they would have the veneer of democracy. But not even that,

Keep in mind this quote from Mulgrew, who spent 8 minutes at the meeting:

By next year we will be right to work state and nation. 

He should have added -- but we won't do anything to make our members feel there is a reasonable process for people to particpate.

Mike pleaded the case, not on the merits or demerits of the ATR agreement, but on the issue of how a union, under the gun of Janus and a soon to exodus thousands of members, should operate to try show these people there are reasons to save the union. Go consult the ATRs and respond to inquiries before heading into what could be a stressful summer, at borough meetings.

Arthur took some good notes on Mike's speech:

Unions are under attack Public schools under attack. We have to involve members. As a union and exec. board we have responsibility to follow democratic process. We the UFT need to consult with people whose lives will be affected. 

Amy Arundel, who I usually respect, came up with a la-di-da -- "we hold borough info sessions in September" -- a nice "screw you" to people who have anxiety over the coming agreement. She announced that UFT offices would be available for individual ATRs to come in. The leadership seems to fear holding any gathering where ATRS might congregate and start trashing the UFT leaders.

James Eterno, blogging from home as Mike sent him reports, had the instant ICE report on the essence of Mike's speech practically before he gave it.

This may be a good deal and it isn't really about the deal, it is about having something that impacts ATR's being voted on by the people impacted. ATRs need to be consulted.Democratic process is crucial to saving our union.

My feeling is that in the future, Leroy Barr or anyone in Unity, should speak against any MORE reso before they see it.

As I saw Stuart Kaplan and other Unities head to the mics to oppose the MORE reso, I whispered to Arthur -- you are about to get a gold mine of dumb and dumber comments to fill your blog. Arthur's notes has the essence of what they all said, but let's give Kaplan, sometimes known as the village idiot -- TVI -- some space:

Stuart Kaplan—Spoke to two ATRs today. Were excited about opportunity to decide. Is an opportunity. We deserve to give ATRs that opportunity. No one would deny ATR the decision. Many demonized in media. We don’t negotiate for some. We negotiate for all.

I leave it to you to try to make sense of it.

New Action's Jonathan Halabi, who didn't support the reso, gave some praise to the leadership's intentions:

Jonathan Halabi—New Action—Wants to recognize positive comments. I know that we as union stay in contact with ATRs. There is no assumption of anything but good faith. I believe agreement is good, but I haven’t seen it.

I don't give them credit for good intentions. Mulgrew pretty much said it -- the UFT and the DOE want the ATR issue to go away -- and the only way is to go back to a time where if you are excessed you get placed into an available slot, even if someone has to get bumped. The UFT was a partner in creating ATRs in the 2005 contract - and they should be reminded of that at every opportunity.

And Priscilla Castro—had her proud Unity moment as she spoke for the first time this year: calls question.

Gregg Lundahl, who is a designated and dedicated Unity "call the question" geek, seemed crushed as the meeting adjourned. But the UFT needs to diversify the crew that calls the question. Think of the many creative ways to say "call the question" to cut off debate.             
Arthur has last night's UFT Executive Board funny pages in full:

NYC Educator  

• UFT Executive Board June 5th--Homophobes Yes, ATRs No

James Eterno's report:

• EXECUTIVE BOARD REPORT

The RESO:

Whereas the UFT Constitution states in ARTICLE V EXECUTIVE BOARD-SECTION 6.  that "The Executive Board shall direct the affairs of this organization"

Whereas ARTICE VII DELEGATE ASSEMBLY- SECTION 6 states "The Delegate Assembly shall have the power to legislate all matters"  and has repeatedly been referred to as "the highest decision making body of our union" by President Michael Mulgrew

Whereas UFT members under the title "ATR" do not have a chapter of their own, nor a chapter leader or delegate 

Whereas an agreement regarding  the status of ATRs was bargained and signed by representatives from the UFT and City of New York without the formation of a committee to do so, nor a vote by this executive board or the DA

Resolved that there will be meetings in the five  boroughs for ATRS to discuss and vote on any agreement regarding their status

Be it further resolved that the UFT DA and Executive Board will discuss and vote on any agreement in accordance with the UFT Constitution  and consistent with our union's democratic process