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

For Educators, Public School Parents, and Public Workers, Cuomo and Astorino Are No Choice - Norm in The Wave

I just submitted this for Friday (Oct. 31) publication but may have missed deadline.


School Scope
For Educators, Public School Parents, and Public Workers, Cuomo and Astorino Are No Choice

By Norm Scott

Go Green. That’s my vote is for Howie Hawkins for Governor and Brian Jones for Lt. Governor. And anyone who is a public worker or union member should join me. Both the Republican and Democratic Parties have abandoned the working people of this nation and in this state, a major cause of the growing inequality that will lead to disastrous consequences rivaling The Great Depression. A consumer economy cannot be maintained by the 1% of the 1%. It is time for a 3rd party.

I wasn’t going to write this week about the election but Cuomo’s dastardly attack on public schools, teachers and the union on the eve of the election just went to far. Parent activist Leonie Haimson commented: Cuomo redoubles his intention to expand charters, break up the “one of the only remaining public monopolies” of the public school system (really? What about police, fire and other govt. services?), develop more “rigorous” evaluations for teachers. He also condescendingly claims that parental opposition to the flawed Common Core standards, curriculum and exams was because teachers got “ the parents upset last year about this entire Common Core agenda.”

I find it interesting that my colleagues on other public unions seem perfectly fine with attacks on the teachers and see no threat to themselves. Imagine if competitive “charter”-like options were offered to people who wanted options on the services of police, sanitation and fire.

The UFT’s behind the scenes support for Cuomo for their so-called little stool at the table is pathetic. The right-wing Astorino is no option. My UFT caucus, MORE, has endorsed Hawkins/Jones (who is a founding member of MORE). I’m going Green and urge all public workers and people who support them to join me.

Oh, and Happy Halloween. If you see a guy painted Green, it will be me.

Norm will be blogging in costume at ednotesonline.com.

Bryant High School Staff Continue Opposition to Vicious Principal Namita Dworka

A couple of MOREistas stopped by what was advertized as a Tony Avella led rally. That didn't exactly happen. With the reign of terror by Dwarka the turnout is certainly affected. There are plans for monthly events. Here is a report from a MORE chapter leader who was joined by a MORE steering committee member.

We stopped by the Bryant event -- there were about 15 people there, maybe another 10 more if you count the students who were just kind of hanging out talking to former teachers. There was no rally and Tony Avella was not there. The crowd was current and former Bryant staff. MORE was well received and we have a small base in the school - some staff voted for us in the past and we had a few of their teachers at our contract event last spring.

From what I could gather this was organized by Bryant staff-  they are going to try and organize more of these including one next month. I told them I would try to get staff members from my school and other MORE folks out next time and they all agreed a day other than Monday would be better so people could come.

By all reports the principal in the school is terrible- lots of complaints about harassment and mismanagement from the staff. Last year there was a rally I stopped by organized by students that had 200 or so kids protesting. (See Ed Notes: http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2014/06/message-to-uft-leaders-wheres-change-of.html).

I have been to Bryant rallies in the past- for example the one three years ago when they tried to close it- and the school has a certain history of militancy and conflict with the DOE and this principal in particular. 

I couldn't make it over there due to a previous engagement with the family for a steak at Peter Lugers. Leftovers for lunch today.

The Farina Follies: OSI Charges Substantiated Against Former Principal Arisleyda Urena, Most Recently Director of School Quality

Urena and Joel Klein

Due to the fact that Ms. Urena failed to maintain itemized receipts and records as mandated by the DFO Standard Operating procedure, this investigator was unable to account for over $11,000 in purchases that Ms. Urena made from Apple, Inc. Regardless of the school funds used, Ms. Urena acknowledged using school funds to purchase items that were intended to be used for educational purposes. It is clear that Ms. Urena did not use these items for any educational purpose. Rather, Ms. Urena chose to give the items to individual students as gifts, creating a condition in which other students at X365 were denied access to the same technological resources.

The allegations that Ms. Urena misappropriated school funds, by purchasing items that had no educational purpose, is therefore substantiated.

The allegation that Ms. Urena engaged in employee misconduct by giving DOE property to students as gifts is

substantiated.

Ms. Urena's poor record-keeping interfered with this investigation. In addition, the DF030 requires that detailed receipts be maintained for at least 6 years after any purchase is made with school funds. The allegation that Ms. Urena failed to adhere to the DFO Standard Operating Procedure is therefore substantiated.

Urena was promoted despite her record. When we examine the record of new superintendents appointed by Farina we will find further horror stories.

Details of the Arisleyda Urena ISO investigation below the break.

Department of Education

armon f.inna C/'m1cnllor

Courunayc Jackson­ Cbasc

General Counsel

Christopher J. Dalton

IA Director

Norris W. Knowles

Associate Director

OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVES'TIGATIONS INVESTIGATIVE  REPORT

DATE:            July 14, 2014

TO:                 Christopher Dalton, IA Director FROM:           Investigator Katherine Higginbotham

SUBJECT:         Arisleyda Urena, Director of School Quality, 1 File #733406 Office of School Quality

OSI Case #13-09422X