Mother Crusader

Trenton Insider And Princeton Charter School Trustee Not In Favor Of Local Control. What A Surprise!!

2012-03-09T13:39:00.001-05:00

An op-ed in today's Asbury Park Press is a pretty typical piece of reformy writing. Paul Josephson comes out of the gate swinging with reformy talking points. Heck, "status quo" is in the title of the piece!

It drones on in much the same fashion, finger wagging at typical reformy targets, teachers' unions and school boards.

Opponents of public charter schools are wasting obscene amounts of our taxpayer funds on lobbyists, lawyers and political advisers to fight public charter schools. Their mission: to preserve the current education establishment and ways of doing business, by preventing parents from creating better and more innovative educational opportunities in their towns with a public charter school.

Teachers’ unions and school boards across the state have scared parents and teachers with the mantra that public charter schools are robbing their districts of revenues. They want taxpayers to believe that public charter schools are to blame for reductions and layoffs. They prefer to vilify charters and avoid responsibility for the real reforms and tough choices we need to make.

Save Our Schools New Jersey, backed by well over 6,000 parents, is the driving force behind the legislation Mr. Josephson is denigrating. But Save Our Schools New Jersey is not anti charter, and Mr. Josephson knows that. In fact, it isn't a secret that Julia Sass Rubin, one of the main spokespersons for Save Our Schools NJ, has a child that attends the same charter as Mr. Josephson's two children, Princeton Charter School.

Save Our Schools NJ, is a grassroots organization led and run by parents - not unions or school boards - and works to ensure that local communities have a say in whether they want a charter.

I have testified before both the Senate and Assembly Education Committees. The only fancy lobbyists I have seen were Carlos Perez of the New Jersey Charter Schools Association, with lobbyists from the National Association of Charter School Authorizers and the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools in tow. They testified against local control and hobnobbed with NJDOE officials in the hallway. They had fancy suits and glossy brochures, and more Walton, Gates and Robertson Foundation money behind them than I could ever imagine seeing in my lifetime.

So, Mr. Josephson, where's the proof to back up your statement that "opponents of public charter schools are wasting "obscene amounts of our taxpayer funds on lobbyists, lawyers and political advisers to fight public charter schools?"

Exactly who is Mr. Josephson anyway, and what game is he playing here? At the bottom of the op-ed it says he is a trustee of the Princeton Charter School. Check out his bio on the schools website.

Paul is Partner-in-Charge of the Regulatory & Government Practice at Hill Wallack LLP in Princeton, and Principal in Government Process Solutions LLC, a Trenton policy and media firm. He litigates for and advises corporations, nonprofits and public entities on administrative and procurement matters, governance, and communications strategies. He previously served the State of New Jersey as Chief Counsel to the Governor, Chief of Authorities, and Director of the Division of Law, overseeing the State's 550 civil attorneys and its 50 independent authorities. He advises numerous Democratic and Republican officeholders and lectures on policy, election and ethics issues. He chairs the New Jersey State Bar Association's Administrative Law Section and is a member of the Citizen's Campaign Legal Task Force, which promotes citizen-led government reforms. (emphasis mine)

Now we're getting somewhere. Not exactly a Trenton outsider. So, let's see, what does Government Process Solutions LLC do?

At Government Process Solutions (GPS), we provide unmatched strategic guidance and services for our clients' most difficult public affairs challenges. Our bipartisan professionals combine over 90 years of experience in government, law and business development to provide unique and creative solutions to any government problem. (emphasis mine)

Well, there you have it. Mr. Josephson is using the op-ed page of the Asbury Park Press to "provide a unique and creative solution" to a "government problem." Namely, that parents in the state of New Jersey are showing how powerful their voice is, and have become a "difficult public affairs challenge." What better way to squelch that voice then to claim that the driving force behind the legislation is actually unions and school boards. Much better targets and easier scapegoats, especially in New Jersey under Chris Christie.

Strange that someone that's a member of the Citizen's Campaign Legal Task Force, which claims "to teach citizens about the legal rights and political skills they need to bring constructive, responsible leadership to the service of our communities and our country" would lash out this way against legislation that is being driven by public outcry.

Parents, not the school boards and the teachers unions, are making it hard for the actual powers that be, namely the Governor, Education Commissioner Chris Cerf and the big money backers of the New Jersey Charter Schools Association, to jam their agenda of more charter schools down the throats of New Jersey parents that support public education.

We're not going away either.

Mr. Josephson purposefully has it backwards. Clearly, this guy is not a novice. He knows his way around the charter school issue, the media, and the Statehouse.

This op-ed is nothing but a smear campaign.

Looks to me like Mr. Josephson is protecting his own status quo. After all, Princeton Charter has been around since 1997; it is one of the oldest charters in the state. Perhaps now that the tide is turning on charters, especially those in the suburbs, he is feeling like he needs to defend his school.

In fact, just recently the Princeton School Board did an analysis and stated they believe they could save $3.15 million if the Princeton Charter school was absorbed into the regular public school system. Gee, I am sure the taxpayers in Princeton are interested in that number.

Could there be any other reason he wants to keep traditional public school parents from asking too many questions? Let's take a quick look at the kids Princeton Charter School is serving.

Looks a lot like they are "cream skimming" off of the traditional public schools, doesn't it? Perhaps the backlash against "boutique charters" in suburbs, which has even Governor Christie and Acting Commissioner Cerf questioning the need for charters in successful districts, has Mr. Josephson a little nervous too?

In his argument against local control Mr. Josephson threw out a huge red herring. He tried desperately to make the argument that because the majority of school boards decided to move their elections to November, thus doing away with the need for voter approval on school budgets if districts stay within a 2% cap, school boards are being hypocritical to support voter referendums on charters.

Here's a bit more detail on the legislation, as well as what the Governor himself had to say about it:

Perhaps the most far-reaching consequence is districts that switch their elections to November are no longer compelled to put their budgets before voters for approval, provided they stay within the 2 percent tax levy cap. Any requests for spending above the cap would be presented to the voters in November.

"I urge school board members and voters in every one of our districts to act as quickly as possible to take hold of these benefits," Christie said when signing the bill. (emphasis mine)

And as Save Our Schools NJ pointed out in their comment to Mr. Josephsons' op-ed:

In most cases, even in towns that have moved their school budget elections in November, the local community would still have a say before a new traditional public school is opened with local tax dollars, most likely through a November ballot question on a bond amount; why shouldn't the public also have a vote on the opening of charter school paid for with local tax dollars? (emphasis mine)

So Mr. Josephson, clearly you are trying to obfuscate the facts here. The tax burden of any new school, charter or traditional public, should be put to the voters. And not having to put the budget up for a vote every year is not a get out of jail free card for districts. If the budget needs to increase more than 2%, or a new school is needed, the budget gets voted on.

I'll make you a deal. You subject your charter school's budget to the will of the people for as many years as the traditional public schools in Princeton have. Spend months and months preparing it, only to have each line item scrutinized, and folks come out just to vote it down because they don't want to pay ANY taxes for public schools let alone MORE taxes! And then deal with a bully of a Governor telling those same taxpayers to vote down your budget and see how you make out.

What's that? No thank you? Well, I can't blame you. The charter status quo is pretty sweet. It must be awfully nice to get public dollars, not have to educate the same population as the rest of the district and not have to deal with public scrutiny to boot.

Pot, meet kettle.

ADDING:

Check out today's piece by the Washington Post's wonderful Valerie Strauss about the failure of parent trigger legislation in Florida.

In the Florida capital today, as the legislature was debating and voting the bill, proponents, who had been dropped off in vans, wore yellow T-shirts with “Parent Power” emblazoned on them, and they handed out fliers calling Florida parent groups “union affiliates” and defenders of the status quo. Those are insults often hurled at those who oppose the “school choice” movement and standardized test-based accountability. (emphasis mine)

Like I said, Mr. Josephson's reformy talking points aren't terribly original. Looks like legislators may finally be catching on.

NJDOE Conducts A Careful And Stringent Approval Process? Now THAT Is Funny!

2012-03-02T16:50:00.000-05:00

I had a bit of an outburst when I read this in today's NJDOE press release:

Under the Christie Administration, the Department has strengthened charter operations by:

Following a careful and stringent three-stage review and approval process for new charter school applicants to evaluate the quality of the proposed educational program, the capacity of the founding team to implement that program, and the need for the proposed school in the community.

How then do they explain that Acting Commissioner Cerf, in the first round of applications he oversaw from start to finish, approved Regis Academy Charter School? The same charter school that has managed to enroll only 37 students since Cerf approved it in September, while a petition urging the Governor and the Acting Commissioner to deny Regis it's final charter has gathered more than 2,000 signatures in 2 weeks. Not to mention that the legislators representing Cherry Hill and Voorhees have come out against Regis and questions abound as to the real reasons for Regis' approval, especially when Regis' application wasn't well rated by reviewers. (Thanks Jazzman!)

Way to conduct a careful and stringent approval process that gauges the "need for the proposed school in the community" guys!

LOL

Regis Academy Districts… Ummm... Un-Expanded?

2012-03-02T14:57:00.003-05:00

The Courier Post ran an article today stating that the NJDOE has denied Regis Academy Charter School's request to expand to districts other than Cherry Hill, Lawnside, Somerdale and Voorhees. As I detailed in my last post, in a January 26th letter Amir Khan asked Deputy Commissioner Andy Smarick for permission to expand to other districts and gave estimated enrollment projections for the original four sending districts, as well as four more.

Susan Bastnagle, Public Information Officer for the Cherry Hill Public Schools, confirmed in the article that just this week the NJDOE sent Cherry Hill a revised enrollment projection based on the numbers Khan proposed in the January 26th letter I received via OPRA.

Bastnagel added that the district is still unsure of how to budget, because it received two more Regis enrollment projections from the DOE this week in addition to the original one of 169. This week’s numbers are 186, based on the district’s own enrollment data for the grades that would be operational at Regis this fall, and the 50 suggested by Khan.

She said Cherry Hill Superintendent Maureen Reusche has asked the DOE which number it plans to use to determine the district’s payments to Regis, which are to begin July 15.

“We await the DOE’s guidance,” Bastnagel said. (emphasis mine)

Really? This is how the NJDOE functions? The week before district budgets are due Cherry Hill gets not one but two enrollment projections and the NJDOE can't tell them which to use? Based on the $1.9M for the original projection of 169 students, the NJDOE is telling Cherry Hill to budget somewhere between $562,100 for 50 kids or $2.1M for 186 kids.

Well, that's helpful.

I have also confirmed with the Superintendent of Lawnside, Dr. Ronn Johnson, that Lawnside also received a revised enrollment projection based on Amir Khan's January 26th letter. This ups Lawnside's total from $54,858 for 4 students to $262,112 for 20 students. In 2010-2011 Lawnside had 283 students. If Khan manages to enroll the 20 students he projects, that's 7% of Lawnside's student population and over 3% of their total budget based on the 2011-2012 projected budget numbers available on the districts website.

This makes it all the more ridiculous when Amir Khan is quoted in the Courier Post saying things like this:

Khan said he would like to open the school to students from other districts to help make the situation more palatable for Cherry Hill and Voorhees.

“It would ease the financial burden on them,” he said.

Especially when just two short months ago, in an op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer titled

Even in Cherry Hill, schools fall short he said this:

The relatively affluent suburban school districts of Cherry Hill and Voorhees have nevertheless argued that because their students perform just fine on state tests, a charter school would be an unnecessary burden on their budgets.

and this:

If 169 students decide to attend Regis next year, it will cost the Cherry Hill district a mere 1 percent of its budget. (emphasis mine)

Huh, doesn't sound like he is really too concerned about "easing the financial burden" on Cherry Hill schools, now does it? In fact, it sounds like he feels entitled to that money somehow, and how dare those "affluent suburban school districts" fight back!

And upping the ante for Lawnside sure isn't considerate of the financial burden on that small district.

So why is Amir Khan asking the NJDOE to pull kids from other districts? Could it have more to do with this?

The Cherry Hill district has learned, through an Open Public Records Act request, that just five of the applicants were from Cherry Hill as of Feb. 15.

FIVE! Cherry Hill is being asked to budget perhaps as much as $2.1M for the 2012-2013 school year when in five months Regis Academy has received applications from FIVE students.

Based on my original OPRA request I also received an email from the Office of Charter Schools to Amir Khan letting him know that the enrollment data he provided was not properly prepared and submitted. The NJDOE requires a district by district breakdown of the enrollment, but Lead Person Christian Barnes only provided all ten districts on one spread sheet. Here is the email:

Office of Charter Schools Email to Khan
I checked with the OPRA custodian yesterday and she said that to date they have not received a response from Regis Academy.

I guess we'll just have to take Amir Khan's word for it when he tells the Courier Post:

Khan said that as of Thursday, there were 65 applications in — just over 50 percent of them from the original four districts.

And don't miss this gem:

Our recruitment numbers are on track. In fact, we’re ahead of the game.

WHAT?!?

Need I remind Amir Khan of the recruitment timeline in his own application? Please see pages 126 and 127:
Regis Enrollement Timeline

So between a press release on October 10th and the initial enrollment submission on February 15th, Regis Academy was supposed to conduct Information Sessions throughout the region, post admission information, make applications available, and conduct three enrollment periods with lotteries if needed.

What happened? How did all those months of work only turn up 37 kids, and most of all, how does this demonstrate that Regis Academy is "on track?" Sounds more like they have crashed into the bleachers...

Notice that after February 15th Regis is supposed to move on to hiring staff, notifying districts of transportation needs and adopting and submitting their budget to the NJDOE by the end of this month. How in the world can they do this based on the enrollment of 37 students?

Even if Amir Khan is being truthful when he states in the Courier Post that he now has "65 applications in — just over 50 percent of them from the original four districts," that still puts him back to about 37 students!

Also notice that June 1st is the final day for late enrollments. If Regis needs 90% enrollment from it's four host districts to get it's final charter, that means they will need to enroll another 188 kids between now and June 1st.

Now here is the $64,000 question. If the NJDOE denied Amir Khan's request to expand Regis' sending districts, why did the NJDOE send out revised enrollment estimates based on Amir Khan's projections in his January 26th letter?

Cherry Hill confirmed in the Courier Post article that they received the revised bill for 50 students, and the Lawnside Superintendent confirmed to me in an email that he received the revised estimate of 20 students on Tuesday!

Now that they have gotten caught with their hand in the cookie jar, the NJDOE is saying, "No, no, no, they can't make any amendments to their application!" But notice how in the letter to Smarick this is EXACTLY what Amir Khan asks to do:

With the expanded definition of a contiguous District in Region of Residence being explored, I am submitting this letter of request asking you to explore the possibilities of the Regis Academy Charter School being able to amend its application to expand our District in Region of Residence. (emphasis mine)

Isn't it funny how my OPRA request didn't turn up a response to Amir Khan's letter from Deputy Commissioner Smarick or any other NJDOE employee? So let's review what has transpired between January 26th and now and see if the NJDOE has been living up to their claim that an application can't be amended.

At the public information session on February 16th Amir Khan told those in attendance that Regis was given permission to expand it's districts. He even bragged that now he could take kids from Hoboken if he wanted!

The letter from the Office of Charter Schools on February 23rd says NOTHING about limiting the districts, just that a district by district breakdown is needed.

The districts of Cherry Hill and Lawnside confirmed that just this week they received revised bills based on the numbers in Amir Khan's letter.

Kind of flies in the face of the NJDOE's claim that they denied Amir Khan's request and that an application can't be amended, doesn't it?

I suppose this is just par for the course. Acting Commissioner Cerf's NJDOE does whatever they want, whenever they want, to whatever district they want, the laws and regulations that govern charter schools be damned! All the while coddling and cajoling unproven charter operators.

Until they get caught.

Which is why I won't be going away any time soon...

How Many Districts Does It Take To Fill A Charter School?

2012-02-29T15:03:00.000-05:00

Amir Khan's Regis Academy was approved in September of 2011. He has had five months to reach out to parents and recruit students from the four sending districts for which he was approved, namely Cherry Hill, Lawnside, Somerdale and Voorhees. At his last public information session (where Khan threatened concerned citizens in attendance with calling the police before the meeting even started), he announced that the NJDOE had given him approval to open enrollment to other districts. I blogged about it an wondered why they had allowed him to open enrollment.

No need to wonder anymore. I filed an OPRA request for the initial enrollment data submitted by Regis Academy. Guess what I found out?

In the five months since gaining approval, Regis has enrolled a whopping 37 kids. That's right, 37. And here is the best part. While the form doesn't say where each individual child is from, the districts they represent are listed. And they aren't limited to the four sending districts. They are also from Williamstown, Deptford, Lindenwold, Berlin, Erial and Camden. In five months, Regis has only managed to enroll 37 kids from 10 districts. Guess those ValPak ads aren't so helpful afterall.

Here is the Preliminary Enrollment form submitted by Lead Person Christian Barnes. Check it out for yourself:

Regis Prelim Enrollment

I also requested any documents related to Regis' request to expand their region of residence. Here's what that request turned up:
Regis Request to Change Region of Residence

There is so much here I don't know where to begin. I think I need a list.

1. On January 26th an email was sent to Deputy Commissioner Smarick from Amir Khan. Note that while the letter was written by Amir Khan, the email was sent from someone working at Khan's church, the Solid Rock Worship Center. Why wasn't the email sent by Khan, the President of the Board of Trustees or Christian Barnes, the Lead Person? This certainly raises questions regarding the separation between Regis Academy and Solid Rock.

2. Amir Khan asked to expand his region of residence to include four (Lindenwold, Clementon, Pennsauken and Camden), possibly five (Berlin) additional districts. Somehow between that request on January 26th and Regis' initial enrollment submission on February 15th he pulled students from three more districts (Williamstown, Deptford, and Erial.)

3. Why aren't the racial demographics included? The charter school regulations state that "the (Acting) Commissioner shall assess the student composition of a charter school and the segregative effect that the loss of the students may have on its district of residence. The assessment shall be based on the enrollment from the initial recruitment period…" How is this assessment to be conducted if this information isn't provided?

3. 23 of the 37 students, or 77%, are in Kindergarten or First Grade. This says to me that very few parents have actually been willing to pull their children out of the public schools in the original four districts.

4. The projected enrollment for Regis' first year is 250 students, 50 in each grade from K-4. Regis only met 15% enrollment in the first 5 months, and had to expand from 4 to 10 districts in order to do so.

Charter proponents are constantly taking about the waiting lists for charter schools as evidence that there is incredible demand for choice. Isn't the reverse therefore also true? If five months of recruitment produces only 37 students from 10 districts, isn't it time for Acting Commissioner Cerf to admit he made a huge mistake in approving Regis Academy in the first place? Haven't the parents of these districts clearly "voted with their feet" by NOT enrolling in this charter?

The NJDOE allowing Regis to expand it's region of residence when next to no demand has been demonstrated in the original four districts makes a mockery of the application process. Why bother having districts respond to applications or appeal approvals if once approved charters can pull from anywhere and everywhere? Cherry Hill has expended resources fighting a projected enrollment of 169 students. Now Amir Khan has scaled that back to 50. I betcha Cherry Hill has not received a revised bill...

Shouldn't the Acting Commissioner let the districts of Cherry Hill, Lawnside, Somerdale and Voorhees out from under Regis' $2.7M price tag?

The almost 2,000 people that signed a petition asking the Governor and Acting Commissioner Cerf to deny Regis their final charter on July 15th certainly think so. I might add that it has taken less than 2 weeks to get almost 2,000 signatures compared to 37 students in five months. Hmmm.

If you agree that Regis should not receive their final charter, please sign and share.

Change.org|Start an Online Petition »

Regis Academy Hires Closed Charter VP, NJDOE Opens Enrollment Beyond Four Districts

2012-02-17T14:30:00.001-05:00

Last night the Regis Academy held an information session that was attended by approximately 32 prospective parents. Some Cherry Hill residents that have been vocal opponents of the charter school also attended the meeting. One that is known to Amir Khan was pulled aside before the meeting and told that if she caused any trouble the cops would be called. Another was asked if she was from the press.

Amir Khan is the president of the Regis Academy Board of Trustees. Is this how he intends to run his Board of Trustee Meetings? With threats of police action for anyone that is not a supporter or has questions about how the Regis Academy is spending public tax dollars?

Leading the meeting was Christian Barnes who was introduced as the Lead Person for Regis Academy. Mr. Barnes was the Vice Principal of the Trenton Community Charter School. He was fired only months before the charter was closed for good for poor performance.

Trenton Community Charter was founded in 1997. In March the DOE placed the school on 90-day probation, saying it had repeatedly failed to meet federal testing standards and needed to implement a turnaround plan.

According to state data, only 38 percent of the school’s elementary students passed the state language test in 2008, and the figure fell to 15 percent the following year.

Nearly half passed the math exam in 2008, but in 2009 the figure fell to 35 percent.

In the application The Regis Academy budget includes a paid position School Leader/Curriculum Director during the start up phase, and then a Vice Principle for Curriculum and Instruction once the charter is up and running. Sounds like Mr. Barnes got himself a new Vice Principal position despite the closure of his last charter.

Vice Principal?

In addition, attendees at last night's meeting reported that Amir Khan informed the audience that "just yesterday" the NJ Department of Education told him that Regis Academy does not have to restrict their enrollment to the four sending districts they were approved for; Voorhees, Somerdale, Lawnside and Cherry Hill. They can now accept kids from anywhere in the state.

Here's what the charter school regulations have to say about what might have happened "just yesterday" to bring about this change.

(k) Prior to the granting of the charter, the Commissioner shall assess the student composition of a charter school and the segregative effect that the loss of the students may have on its district of residence. The assessment shall be based on the enrollment from the initial recruitment period pursuant to N.J.A.C. 6A:11-4.4(a) and (b). The charter school shall submit data for the assessment:

1. In a format prescribed by the Commissioner; and

2. No later than 4:15 P.M. on February 15. (emphasis mine)

In the Regis Application February 15 is listed as the date their "initial enrollment count" is due to the NJDOE.
Timeline for Enrollment

Let's recap, shall we?

Regis had to submit their "enrollment from the initial recruitment period" or "initial enrollment count" to the NJDOE on February 15. On February 16 they held a public information session and told the audience "just yesterday" the NJDOE opened their enrollment to kids from anywhere in the state.

Anybody else thinking that the initial enrollment count wasn't looking too good?

Here's the question I have for Carlos Perez and the NJDOE. What happened to parents "voting with their feet?" If Amir Khan is having trouble filling 250 seats, 50 each in K-4, with students from the four towns he applied for, why has the NJDOE already opened admissions to other districts?

In the end, parents vote with their feet. A charter school that fills up with students is one that was wanted by the community. If parents didn’t want more options, then a charter school wouldn’t survive.

There is more than enough evidence that the Regis Academy is not wanted or needed by the community, and that it has not been proven to be "high-quality and innovative." Yet somehow it "survives."

While the founders of Regis may be "determined" to see their charter open, NJDOE spokesman Justin Barra said something that the opponents of the Regis Academy need to be paying close attention to.

“We will review their progress toward opening, as we do every approved charter school, in the summer before officially approving opening in September 2012,” Barra said.

The approval of Regis' charter DOES NOT mean that it will open in September. In fact check out the Charter School Fact Sheet. Five other charter applications were approved but never granted their final charter. Regis must submit their final paperwork on June 30 to receive their final charter on July 15.

If there is anything I have learned from my experiences battling Tikun Olam, it is that the opponents of the Regis Academy are going to need to remain vigilant, because the NJDOE's Office of Charter Schools gives unproven charter operators every advantage over communities and districts.

Regis appears to be a partnership of an unproven charter school operator and a failed charter school operator, and they STILL seem to have the advantage over the district schools and parents.

Unbelievable.

A Tale of Two Residences (And Offices)

2012-02-14T11:32:00.003-05:00

OK, so no confirmation hearing for Chris Cerf on Thursday. Like Jersey Jazzman, I am a little disappointed. I was getting geared up to testify about the glaring lack of transparency in the NJDOE under Acting Commissioner Cerf, but I guess it will have to wait. I'm sure it will just give me more ammunition if he ever does get a hearing because I'm not going away, and Cerf isn't going to start playing by the rules.

Jersey Jazzman already recapped how Cerf got tripped up, and how Sweeney ultimately pulled the plug:

State Senate President Steve Sweeney (D-3), West Deptford, shut down the Thursday hearing for Acting Education Commissioner Christopher Cerf based largely on discomfort about Cerf’s declared residency status, a source said.

In the same article that revealed Cerf had "two homes," Christie was playing hard ball:

“We have no concern whatsoever about his residency being an issue during consideration of this extremely qualified individual for commissioner of the Department of Education,” said Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak. “We are finally moving forward in spite of the baseless, obstructionist conduct by Sen. Rice in particular — and I’m being very kind in my selection of adjectives in describing Rice’s handling of this nominee.”

Rice’s use of senatorial courtesy is an abuse of the system, the administration believes.

“It’s because they use it for political leverage to try to get something else,” Christie said of the reasons why Rice and Codey have used the practice on the governor’s Essex County nominees.

And the governor is willing to play hardball.

”I know that they’re used to the old game of rolling governors on stuff all the time,” Christie said of the Essex senators. “They’re messing with the wrong guy on this one.” (emphasis mine)

So, what do Christie and Cerf have to say now that the cat's out of the bag?

Christie’s office declined to comment.

Cerf deferred questions about his nominations and residency to his spokesman at the Department of Education, Justin Barra, who did not return calls and emails seeking comment.

Where'd all that bravado and bluster go, guys?

While the hubbub over Cerf's residence may be a mundane example of the kind of deception and bullying Cerf and Christie are capable of to get what they want, it also exemplifies all that is wrong with the way they conduct themselves. Here's what Senator Rice wants before Cerf goes before the Judiciary Committee:

Rice, D-Essex, blocked Cerf’s nomination as education commissioner for 13 months, demanding he testify before the Joint Committee on the Public Schools, which Rice co-chairs.

Rice's request sounds totally straightforward and reasonable, so why won't Cerf do it? I'm sure he doesn't want to answer the tough questions Rice is likely to have for him, which would probably be very similar to Jersey Jazzman's. Here's what Rice had to say about the cancelled hearing.

Rice said the comments about Cerf’s residence were further proof of an “integrity problem” with the acting commissioner.

“I never thought he moved in the first place,” Rice said.

And here's what Cerf had to say about his two homes:

"The facts are that I own a home in Montclair and that I reside there many nights a week. I have also rented a home … in the southern part of the state and I spent several nights a week there. I use it to shorten my commute," Cerf said.

But in Peter Meyer's love-fest profile, in which Cerf was depicted as a grizzled outdoorsman and education reformer that can weather any challenge set before him, an interesting tidbit was revealed.

The drive from Trenton to Newark was the third part of an interview that began in downtown Newark several days earlier, in a large, bare office that looks out over Jersey’s troubled largest city. Cerf uses it as a transit station, a temporary office while on his way to or from meetings in the state’s more populated eastern counties, his home in a northern suburb, or across the Hudson in New York City. I had caught up with him for part two of our interview in his official Trenton office, 50 miles to the south and west, where the state’s education department is headquartered and where he has lively paintings drawn by schoolchildren on the walls.

This is a great twofer. Simultaneously confirming both that Cerf's home is, was and most likely always will be, in a northern suburb, namely Montclair, and also that in addition to his "official" Trenton office he also has an office in Newark. I am not exactly a Trenton insider, and even I have heard that there is a Newark satellite office that Cerf uses when he doesn't need to be in Trenton. So why is the state paying for a satellite office in Newark if Cerf has "shortened his commute" to Trenton by renting a home in Montgomery Township? Perhaps that wasn't the real reason for the "move?"

Days after Michael Winerip submitted questions to NJDOE spokesman Justin Barra for his column revealing the mess we all know as Tikun Olam, we were finally granted a meeting to discuss what we knew. We were told that Cerf couldn't meet with us, because after all, he is "The Decider." Instead we met with Deputy Commissioner Andy Smarick, Chief of Staff David Hespe and Interim Charter School Office Director Amy Ruck, and Barra joined us via conference call from the Newark office.

How much you wanna bet Cerf was in that Newark office listening in on the conference call?

ADDING:

Maybe Christie should have stayed quiet on this one...

Christie, who acknowledged during the news conference that Cerf’s family is maintaining its Montclair residence, said Cerf’s changing of his driver’s license and voter registration should be proof enough for lawmakers.

Except that...

As of 2:30 p.m. Tuesday, no one named Christopher Cerf was registered to vote in Somerset County, according to Diane Miller, a confidential aide in the Somerset County Clerk’s Office. The county’s election board updates its database every day.

It's anyone's guess whether Cerf is resting his head in Montgomery or Montclair tonight, but wherever he is I bet he's not sleeping too well...

No Transparency At NJDOE Or For-Profit White Hat. What Are They Hiding?

2012-02-11T18:09:00.004-05:00

Ten charter schools in Ohio that contract with White Hat Management, aren't too happy. The saga is being covered extensively by StateImpact Ohio.

White Hat has been sued by the governing boards of some of the schools it manages. According to the lawsuit, White Hat collects at least 95 percent of the schools’ tax funding. It also owns everything from computers to student files. The governing authorities of the schools involved in the lawsuit would like to gain access to the materials and equipment and to decide if they want White Hat to continue to operate their schools.

For the 2010-11 school year, no Ohio White Hat school earned higher than the equivalent of a “C” on its state report card. Most were rated “D” or “F.”

And it looks like the lawsuit is heating up. Today the Columbus Dispatch reported that:

Common Pleas Judge John F. Bender gave White Hat until March 6 to provide tax returns, building leases, transactions with its subsidiaries and other information to 10 charter schools that had contracted with the firm for management services.

“Public money must be accounted for,” Bender wrote in a 19-page order.

The judge asked attorneys for both sides to meet with him March 7 to discuss whether White Hat has complied.

For nearly two years, the company has fought against disclosing the information, arguing that it was proprietary. (emphasis mine)

Make sure to read the comment section of the Dispatch article. The people of Ohio clearly see that they are being taken for a ride by this for-profit management company, and that their legislators are allowing it to happen. I have written about Governor Christie's desire to allow for-profits to manage charters in New Jersey. If he has his way, New Jersey will not be far behind Ohio.

Notice how White Hat is claiming they don't have to open their books because the information is "proprietary?"

This reminds me of the NJDOE's refusal to release charter application reviewer comments. I have been denied this information several times (I am expecting the third denial early this week!) The reason for the denial is that the information is "deliberative."

Let's break this down a bit.

In all of our research we have learned a lot about the application review process, both at the state level for charters and at the federal level for grants. (And by we I mean all of the fine folks I have been working with to battle Tikun Olam.) In comparing these processes one thing is very clear. For all the problems with the federal process, it is COMPLETELY transparent. When you file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for a grant application, whether it was approved or denied, you also receive the reviewers scores and comments. This is because the applications are scored, and the highest scorers get the money. It's just that simple.

But the public is not allowed to see reviewer comments on charter applications. Applicants can see them, and the proposed Quest Academy even posted them on their website, but concerned citizens or districts that want to see them to better understand how the NJDOE is making their decisions are denied.

So why can we see the reviewer comments on a federal grant application but we can't see the reviewer comments on a state charter application? Simple.

In New Jersey the decisions are not made based on the reviews. The decisions are left to the Commissioner of Education.

This is why the reviewer comments are considered deliberative. They are not the final deciding factor. New Jersey's charter school law gives Acting Commissioner Cerf the power.

Jersey Jazzman did a great write up on this topic. The only detail he missed was that the reviewer comments on the Regis Academy application were not released in response to an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request. Cherry Hill did OPRA them, but they were denied. The reviewer comments were part of documents released for their appeal of the approval of Regis Academy.

And clearly it is a good thing they appealed, since the reviews clearly show that the application was not scored well by the three reviewers. This is from Cherry Hill Superintendent Dr. Reusche's Assembly Education Committee testimony:

In attempting to determine why this charter was approved, we filed an OPRA request for the application review sheets; the DOE denied our OPRA request, but later released the review sheets to our solicitor as part of the official record on appeal. Here’s what we found: Three reviewers reviewed the application, giving scores of “Meets the Standard,” “Approaches the Standard,” or “Does Not Meet the Standard” in 14 categories. Three reviewers, 14 categories, for a total of 42 indicators. Regis’s application was deemed to meet the standard in just 20 of the 42 possible indicators. That’s a score of 47.6%. Shouldn’t a charter school application be subject to at least the 80% standard that school districts must achieve in the NJQSAC review?

If we could see ALL of the reviews of ALL of the applications that were considered in that round, how many denied applications would we find that scored much higher than Regis? It's hard to imagine that all 56 of the applications that were denied in that round scored lower than 47.6%. So why did Regis get approved?

The Education Law Center and ACLU-NJ sued the NJDOE for the names of the individuals reviewing charter school applications and ultimately the information was released to Senator Gill via an OPRA request. In the last round of approvals the NJDOE released the list of reviewers without any fanfare in their official press release. But apparently the ratings of those reviewers mean very little.

Cerf is "The Decider".

What we really need is for someone with some power to OPRA the reviewer comments for ALL of those applications, and to do it in a very public way. Individuals like me and school districts like Cherry Hill are easy to deny information.

Any takers?

Gov. Christie And His Reformy Friends Are Of Two Minds On Education Spending

2012-02-10T22:47:00.002-05:00

Governor Christie has the NJEA back in his sights, but he seems to be gearing for another budget battle with the Education Law Center too.

Christie added the Education Law Center to his targets Thursday, saying the decades of litigation by the Newark-based law clinic has driven up spending on education while hurting results.

“That statement was so appalling and such a window into their philosophy about public education,” Christie said. “The biggest window was as a defense, he’s using it as a defense that he’s a founding member of the Education Law Center. I would hang my head in shame to say I was a founding member of the Education Law Center. That place has done more to ruin education in New Jersey than any single organization I’ve ever seen.” (emphasis mine)

I'm practically speechless. The ELC is the bad guy? Without them Governor Christie would have gotten away with underfunding some of the poorest urban districts. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in favor of ELC and restored $500,000,000 in education funding.

The Newark-based Education Law Center, which brought the lawsuit against the state, argued that the cuts violated the state's constitutional requirement to provide a "thorough and efficient system of free public schools." In response, the Christie administration said the state doesn't have enough money to spend more on schools and argued that the court should not inject itself into the budget-making process. Conservatives including Christie have fiercely criticized the court's actions over the years, saying justices have mistakenly treated more funding as a cure-all for poor districts' education woes.

"We must acknowledge that money does not equal quality results," Christie said at a Statehouse press conference about an hour and a half after the decision was released.

He once again criticized the court by saying it's wrong for justices to say how the state should spend taxpayer dollars. But he made it clear he wouldn't fight the court order as he suggested during a radio talk show in April.

And then once the funding was restored, the Committee for Our Children's Future, which is headed by three Christie campaign contributors, and includes two of Christie's classmates, Lynn Grone and Bob Teeven, among its officers, ran an ad giving Christie credit for $850,000,000 in new education aid!

Let's review, shall we? If the ELC is being blamed for increasing education spending then they're "hurting results" and "ruining education," but if Governor Christie is being given credit for increasing education spending then he is "moving New Jersey forward."

You got that?

LEAPing to Conclusions; Are Charters Our Only Hope, Or Only Hype?

2012-02-09T17:14:00.000-05:00

I have been stewing about a bunch of stuff since last week's Assembly Education Committee hearing. The local control bill was clearly the most controversial legislation being considered, and as I posted before the hearing, Carlos Perez put out a call to the charter school community to come out in force. LEAP Academy University Charter School in Camden heeded his call and came to the hearing to testify against the legislation. Two seniors, two graduates, (one is now an employee) and one of the founders testified.

First off, the students looked FANTASTIC! They were in crisp, clean uniforms and not a hair was out of place. They looked like they stepped right out of LEAP's glossy full-color brochure (you know, the kind traditional public schools aren't allowed to print but charters can.)

As soon as they were done delivering their testimony, they were whisked out of the hearing room. I was shocked that the students weren't encouraged to stay for the rest of the testimony, or to see the Education Committee vote on the issue. Apparently they weren't pulled out of school to learn more about the legislation they were testifying against or the legislative process in general. They were there solely to deliver ~~Carlos'~~ their message: Vote for this bill, and you will not only kill my charter school, you will kill ALL charter schools. There was also a fair amount of testimony from these students about how horrible the rest of the Camden schools are, much to the dismay of Camden public school parents like MoNeke Ragsdale who testified beside me on behalf of Save Ours Schools NJ.

Apparently, the kids weren't there just to deliver their message to the Assembly Education Committee members, but also to the press. Check out this LEAP Academy Flicker photostream that shows the students posing for photos and being interviewed.

Here's how their Trenton trip was described on the LEAP Facebook page:

Thanks to the LEAP students, alumni and staff who went to Trenton yesterday to speak out against a new bill that could limit the charter school movement.

So, this all got me thinking. What's going on at LEAP, and how does it exemplify why we should all just step aside and let the "charter school movement" sweep across New Jersey whether or not districts want or need them?

LEAP's biggest claim to fame is that 100% of their students graduate and go on to college. This was highlighted several times at the hearing.

So what I want to know is how do they do it, is it done anywhere else in Camden, and can it work for ALL kids?

The Brimm Medical Arts High School, a "magnet school with a comprehensive high school curriculum" comes close to matching the same statistics. They seem to have 1 or 2 kids that chose the military or a job over college though.

So how else are Brimm and LEAP similar? Let's take a look at their IEP, LEP and Free/Reduced Lunch numbers. Let's look at a couple of Camden's traditional public high schools too for comparison.

Notice the difference between LEAP and Brimm and the traditional public schools? While free/reduced lunch numbers are pretty similar (interestingly Brimm has the most Free Lunch kids) there are LOTS more LEP kids and kids with IEPs in the traditional public schools.

Here's what I think is happening. In a magnet high school like Brimm there is an admissions process for students, including an entrance exam, that obviously pulls out only the smartest, most motivated students. Charters like LEAP with a lottery system, attract only the most motivated parents, who must fill out packets of information and sign Parent Partnership Agreements. The children of these parents are therefore more motivated, successful students.

Now let's look at a measure of "success" other than post graduation plans. (by the way, this measure is self reported by the school) Let's look at the HSPA and see if this gives us any additional information.

So it looks like if what you're after is skimming off the most successful students AND producing higher test scores, you'd be better off opening lots of magnets, not lots of charters. I hear you, this is only one case study. Gee, if only Acting Commissioner Cerf would release that charter report we could look at some more data...

This still leaves us with the problem of how best to educate the rest of our kids. Charters like LEAP have not demonstrated that they can serve ALL students, yet they are held up as examples of what is possible if only we would loosen up our laws and allow the unchecked growth of charters. Until they do, why should we allow the proliferation that Carlos Perez, Acting Commissioner Cerf and Governor Christie seem so desperate for?

On the way to the hearing I heard a report on NPR about efforts to raise the dropout age to 18. Michel Martin, host of Tell Me More, interviewed a 19 year old mother that had dropped out at 16 but is back in school. Here is a segment from that report:

MARTIN: Well, let's dig into some of this. Rashida, why don't you tell us, if you wouldn't mind, why you dropped out of school? Was it a sudden decision? Was it kind of a spur-of-the-moment thing or was it something that had been building for a while?

HARRIS: Well, school wasn't really that much important to me. I used to live at with my aunt and my brothers and sisters, we had to take care of ourselves. So, we would go to school probably two or three times a week just to be in school and walk the halls and stuff or we would go up to the school if it was a problem for us getting in fights and stuff like that. But school wasn't really that much important to me. The streets was at the time.

MARTIN: And do you mind if I ask, where's your mom in all this?

HARRIS: My mother's been dead since '96.

MARTIN: So, you lost her really early, I'm sorry.

HARRIS: Yes.

MARTIN: I'm sorry about that. And so, your aunt was taking care of you or you were living with her. She was the adult, but she didn't insist that you go?

HARRIS: Well, at the time back then I was with my aunt in the court systems and both my godmother. When I was with my aunt, she didn't really care if we went to school or not as long as we're out of her house by at least 8:30, she don't care where we was at.

This is one of my main problems with charters. When you show me data from a charter like LEAP, and the demographics look like the rest of Camden, and the kids have the same kinds of issues as Rashida, then we can talk about the benefits of charters versus traditional public schools. You can't compare a school with 0% LEP students to a school with 17%, and you can't compare a school where only 7% of students require an IEP to a school were 34% do.

LEAP has some amazing support services that should be available to ALL students, but will never be funded in all traditional public schools, certainly not by Governor Christie, who is probably gearing up to slash school budgets again for 2013. In addition to an extended learning day and a longer school year, they have an Early Learning Research Academy that begins at birth, a Parent Center, Health Center, Family Support Center and a Center for College Access. If you follow the links you will see that many of these programs are run in conjunction with Rutgers Camden.

But when speaking to the media LEAP doesn't attribute their "success" to the fact that they are educating a different population than the traditional schools, or even to the incredible programs available to their students. They claim their secret sauce is a combination of their Performance Based Compensation Program, i.e. merit pay (click the link, it's their actual teacher evaluation forms!) and giving very few teachers tenure.

Rutgers professor, Chair of the Board of Trustees, and LEAP founder Dr. Gloria Bonilla-Santiago boasts that last year 10 teachers came up for tenure and only one of them got it, because the other 9 "were not good." Is it just me, or does that sound more like LEAP doesn't want to give teachers tenure? They were good enough to teach LEAP students for 3 years, but then when it came time to give them tenure they needed to be "exited out?"

So let's look at how much teachers get paid at LEAP compared with the rest of Camden.

Ouch. That's more than $15,000 less per teacher.

Jersey Jazzman was onto something when he questioned how much teachers get paid at charters. Doesn't look like merit pay is working out for too many LEAP teachers, does it? Let's look at one last chart to see how much experience LEAP teachers have.

One third of the experience of the teachers in the rest of the district, and less than half of the experience of the rest of their colleagues in the State of New Jersey…

This makes me think of the speech Diane Ravitch gave at the NJEA conference. No, I am not a teacher, but I have become enough of a freak about these issues that I trucked it to Atlantic City just to hear her, and boy was it worth it. Look, here we are at her book signing!

She looks great, but I look ridiculous, I can't believe I'm posting this photo...

In that speech she said that the reform movement has two main goals. One is the "deprofessionalization" of teachers. I think Dr. Ravitch would agree that an inexperienced, low paid staff fits her definition.

According to Dr. Ravitch the other goal is privatization.

Soon LEAP will have a new $12.5M facility. Wouldn't you just LOVE to know where that $12.5M is coming from? If Brimm wanted to build a new facility the money would have to come from taxpayers, which would make it a lot harder to get the funding. And get this, LEAP already has two new facilities!

LEAP Academy students are educated in two contemporary-modeled learning centers: a Lower/Elementary school (grades K–6), and an Upper/High school (7–12). A complete renovation was financed to create the Lower school in 1999, while the Upper school was built from the ground up in 2005. (emphasis mine)

So let's review. The only current school development project in Camden is for kids who, according to the school's hype, are already succeeding, and already have not one but "two contemporary-modeled learning centers." But to get some much needed new schools built for the rest of the kids in Camden legislators had to pass the Urban Hope Act while the School Development Authority continues to do nothing. Great.

Again, let's listen to Dr. Ravitch:

I worry about the future of public education. I worry that entrepreneurs now see great opportunities to make money in the public sector and that they will exert their influence to privatize education and turn it over to the free market. I am a great admirer of the free market, but I also believe that our society needs a balance between the free market and the public sector. If public schools are privatized, it induces a consumer mentality among parents and it destroys any sense of community responsibility. It also erodes any sense of civic obligation.

LEAP sure does look like a product for parents and students to consume. They have glossy brochures and videos to sell their program to parents, and they have talking points that resonate with the press and reformers with deep pockets.

But I'm not buying it, and neither should you, because what they don't have is proof that what they're doing will work for ALL of Camden's students. Until they do, I have to respectfully disagree with Carlos Perez and the students, graduates and staff from LEAP Academy that testified last week. We do need local control.

Take Back The Fight! Defend Public Ed With One Phone Call! (Don't Let Big Money Win)

2012-02-01T10:57:00.001-05:00

The following email went out to charter schools and charter school parents from the New Jersey Charter Schools Association.

The State Legislators need to hear from the charter school community. We need your help!

On Thursday, February 2, 2012 the Assembly Education committee will hold a hearing to consider the vote on two charter school bills A- 1877- and A-2147.

A-1877- would require community approval on all charter applications and petitions for expansionsbefore the charter application goes to the Department of Education for review.

A-2147- Would require automatic enrollment of all students in the charter school district.

NJCSA does NOT support A-1877 and A-2147 for the following reasons:

A-1877-

The charter approval process will become a political campaign, diverting scarce resources intended for children to operate and fund a campaign.
It creates an unfunded mandate. Referendums require the expenditure of funds at the county and local level.
Voter referendums will impede the development of innovative schools in urban and suburban communities.
Parents vote with their feet. If parents did not want more options, then a charter school would not open.

A-2147-

This will cause a logistical nightmare for all charter schools.
However, this bill does attempt to address increased accountability and collaboration between school districts and charters. We feel that any change to current charter law should come from the people within the charter community who know it best.

Our recommendation is to OPPOSE A-1877 and A-2147 and amend the current Charter law to provide for more diverse authorizers and more community input throughout the process.

How Can You Help?

We would like to ensure that the people who will be impacted by these proposals be informed about them and be a present voice in the discussion of the future of charter schools in New Jersey. If you are free, please

· Attend the hearing in Trenton on Thursday. It will be held in the State House Annex, Committee room 11, 4th Floor at 2:00 p.m. If you plan to attend, please contact the Community Outreach Manager, Jay Wright atjwright@njcharters.org or call (609) 989-9700 ext. 4416.
· If you can NOT attend the hearing, you can voice your concerns by calling the following committee members and/or your local representative. Tell them you are a “charter school (parent, teacher and/or advocate) and you OPPOSE A-1877”.

Assembly Education Committee Members

-Patrick Diegnan, Jr.
908-757-1677

-Bonnie Watson Coleman
609-292-0500

-Ralph Caputo
973-450-0484

Mila Jasey
-973-762-1886

Angelica Jimenez
-201-223-4247
Troy Singelton
856-461-3997

Connie Wagner
201-576-9199

David Wolfe
732-840-9028

Scott Rumana
973-237-1362

NJCSA believes that the current process under which charter schools are authorized must be improved to allow for more community input and involvement. Stay involved and make a difference for our charter school kids!

Not a big surprise that the NJCSA is asking charter school parents to oppose legislation that would allow communities to decide their own fate. Especially when the current system is working so well to expand charter schools, whether districts and communities want them or not.

But here's the part that gets me. The NJCSA got close to 1M from the Walton Foundation alone in 2010.

I can't easily access where the rest of their money comes from, and they do not list their donors on their website like some other organizations do. But clearly Mr. Perez has access to mad cash to fund his association and their activities (like sending out the above email missives, testifying before the Senate and Assembly against legislation, and supporting charters in lawsuits against the school districts they intend to serve.)

In a press release supporting the PIACS lawsuit Mr Perez stated:

The school districts participate in the evaluation process of charter schools. Their concerns and objections are taken into consideration. If the authorizer approves the application, the school districts have the opportunity to appeal. If, as in this case, they do not appeal, the school districts should not continue to expend public resources to obstruct the school from opening and, by extension, the children who are enrolled in the school from attending.

So let me get this straight. Mr. Perez can use his foundation money any way he sees fit to increase the number of charter schools in the state of New Jersey, even if those charters are approved despite the concerns and objections of the effected districts. Yet NJCSA supported (and funded??) a lawsuit brought by a charter school against districts in an attempt to prevent them from spending relatively few tax dollars to prevent the use of millions of tax dollars to create a charter many parents and residents in the community do not want but can not vote on?

Looks like we are back to Mr. Perez protecting the good citizens of New Jersey from that "tyranny of the majority" he is so concerned about.

Don't let the NJCSA and Carlos Perez get away with this! Let's use their foundation money to spread the word ourselves and show them how democracy really works. Let's take his call list and blast it out to everyone that cares about public schools and ask them to call the Assembly Education Committee in SUPPORT of A-1877 and A-2147.

Are you with me?

Here, I'll make it easy, just cut and paste the following and email it to your friends and post it to your Facebook wall. If you're on Twitter, tweet this post!

CALL TO ACTION! Please call the members of the Assembly Education Committee TODAY and let them know you are a PROUD PUBLIC SCHOOL SUPPORTER and you want them to support the following bills that will be considered and voted on tomorrow, Thursday, February 2nd!

Assembly bill 1877 (bill A3852/S2243 last session), which would require local approval before the establishment of new charter schools, and

Assembly bill 2147 (bills A3356/S3005/S3001 last session), which would increase charter school educational and financial accountability and transparency and address the fact that NJ charter school students do not represent the demographics of their sending districts.

Assembly Education Committee Members

-Patrick Diegnan, Jr.

908-757-1677

-Bonnie Watson Coleman

-Ralph Caputo

Mila Jasey

Angelica Jimenez

Troy Singelton

Connie Wagner

David Wolfe

Scott Rumana

If you only have time to make one call, call Assemblyman Diegnan, the chair of the committee. Tell him you support these bills because LOCAL COMMUNITIES should decide what is right for their students, NOT THE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION AND THE STATE!

ADDING:

Whoa.

Critics worry that requiring public approval will dampen the growth of charter schools. They’re right, but that’s the way it should be if communities don’t want them, and don’t want their tax dollars going toward schools that are free to operate with little public scrutiny over spending decisions and curriculum choices.

To date the state’s charter-school approvals have mostly been clustered where they are needed, in the struggling urban districts. But other “luxury” charters have popped up in some high-performing districts, with the specter of additional ones hanging over public schools all across the state. Meanwhile, state officials continue to ignore any broader community opposition to specific applications.

If state policy cannot properly reflect the stark differences between the urban charters of need and the suburban charters of want, the public needs the power of approval to assure those differences are recognized and respected.

Yeah, what they said...

Can a Man Of God Run a School For The State?

2012-01-30T14:31:00.002-05:00

Jersey Jazzman and I have been using our blogs in the last week or so to raise questions about the Regis Academy that was approved by Acting Commissioner Cerf for Cherry Hill, Voorhees, Lawnside and Somerdale. Jersey Jazzman came up with a great timeline that raises some serious questions as to how and why this application made it through the supposedly tough new application process.

I have some additional questions.

The first question stems from the videos that surfaced of Amir and Aughtney Kahn relishing the defeat of the marriage equality bill and vowing to continue to fight against the bill any time it comes before the legislature. If you haven't seen them yet, you can catch them here and here.

It is important to note that each and every applicant for a charter school, including Amir and Aughtney Khan, must sign a Statement of Assurances when they apply for a charter that says the charter:

(W)ill be open to all students, on a space available basis, and shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, creed, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, mental or physical disability, age, ancestry, athletic performance, special need, proficiency in the English language or a foreign language, or academic achievement.

Is it conceivable that two pastors that feel so strongly that the LGBT community should not have the same rights as the rest of us would be able to admit gay students to their school and treat them equally? Or hire gay teachers? Or make gay parents feel welcome?

And then today I saw on an online petition (go sign it!) on Twitter against the National Heritage Academy which is trying to set up a charter against community wishes in Chapel Hill, NC. This is the charter the Ragin' Grannies were protesting.

The petition includes a quote from self-described evangelical J.C. Huizenga (cousin of billionaire H. Wayne Huizenga)." He is the man behind NHA (and big surprise that there's another billionaire in the mix, huh?)

Asked by the Wall Street Journal whether he would hire a homosexual to teach, Huizenga said, "Personally, I don’t believe a gay teacher is an appropriate teacher for a child."

NHA, which currently lists 71 locations on it's website, has also been in hot water for promoting religious activities and teaching creationism. From a New York Times article in 2000:

National Heritage has been sued by the American Civil Liberties Union in Michigan over what the group says is the company's promotion of religious activities, including prayer sessions for parents, in a charter school there. National Heritage says it provides parents with a meeting room and some have prayed there, but not with the school's sanction. The suit is pending.

And this from a Wall Street Journal article on the topic from 1999:

National Heritage policy is to treat both evolution and the Biblical creation story as theories. Carolyn Thompson, a fifth-grade science teacher at Knapp Charter Academy and an evangelical Christian, says she believes in "creationism and then evolution from that point on" - and teaches it that way in class.

Becky Bullen, a fourth-grade teacher at Knapp, told her students about dinosaurs last year - and learned a lesson herself. Some parents protested that fossil evidence of dinosaurs, which became extinct 65 million years ago, contradicted their Biblical belief that God created the world 6,000 years ago. Since then, Ms. Bullen has dropped the dinosaurs and says, "I basically try to steer clear of any hot issues."

No hotter issue in public education than dinosaurs...

And this is from the same Wall Street Journal article:

Charter schools, which operate independently of local school districts, were intended to create a choice for parents discontented with traditional public schools. Under Michigan law, charter schools get almost as much per capita funding as area public schools - nearly $6,000 in National Heritage's case.

It didn't occur to many people that tuition-burdened parents at religious schools would also welcome an alternative, particularly one featuring small classes, strict discipline and moral education. But today, charters are taking market share from fundamentalist schools, their predecessors as the hottest phenomenon in American education. And charters' smudging of the separation of church and state has stirred up an unlikely combination of opponents: private religious competitors and civil-liberties advocates.

"Charter schools are often a ruse for the kind of schooling that the Supreme Court has said violates the Constitution," says Kary Moss, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, which is suing National Heritage for promoting religion.

About one-tenth of the nation's 400,000-plus charter-school students come from private schools. But at National Heritage, 19.7 percent are private-school transfers. And that doesn't count any of the 17 percent or so of the student body who started at National Heritage in kindergarten, and might otherwise have opted for private school.

The phenomenon goes beyond National Heritage. At Marvin Winans Academy, one of several Detroit charters started by ministers, one-fourth of the students transferred from religious schools. The Rev. Robert J. Coverson, who runs a small Baptist school in Detroit, says he may have to close it because he has lost half of his students to charters.

Now, I understand these articles are from more than 10 years ago, but there is no reason to think these exact same issues aren't occurring here in NJ in 2012. If anything, the example of the Regis Academy is more egregious.

You have two pastors closing their private Christian school to open a publicly funded charter. The charter will be located on the same premises as the pastor's church. Are we to believe that a large portion of the parents that paid to go to Children of Promise will not be the first in line to attend Regis for free?

Not to mention, Children Of Promise was charging $5,400 per child as a private school. But Regis Academy will be allotted 90% of the per pupil funding of the sending districts. Let's do the math. The Cherry Hill district stated they have been billed $9,551 for each student that chooses to attend Regis, based on the preliminary estimates from the NJDOE. That's a nice jump of $4,151 per child in tuition for the Khans, and all they had to do was apply for a charter!

Are we really expected to believe that they can just switch gears from a curriculum that is based on the teaching of bible verses to a secular curriculum with no religious content at all? This is the program description from the website for Children of Promise:

Elementary Education: Bible is taught in a deeper level at these grades. Oral recitation of memory verses is integral at this stage as it will greatly aid in their cognitive and memory recall development. History, geography, health, safety, manners, arithmetic (number recognition to the hundred thousands, metric system, carrying, borrowing, story problems, multiple combinations and estimations) are just a few of the things your child will be learning.

When Khan responded to being awarded the charter by the NJDOE he said:

I thank God that we got approved

And here's a video (that is also backed up if it gets taken down…) of the interior of the school. There's an awful lot of religious stuff that's gotta come down for this to be a public school.

like the music?

Remind me again how this will be a secular school?

Students Take On Cerf. And Win.

2012-01-29T14:24:00.001-05:00

Today Jersey Jazzman pointed out that while ed reformers use students to bolster their weak arguments or show numbers at their protests, many of the kids don't seem to know what school they supposedly want to see closed down or why they are protesting.

In contrast, check out these intrepid high school reporters in Cherry Hill and Highland Park. They are all over this charter thing, and they get it. No high tech wizardry, just good old fashioned student work. This amazing illustration went along with an article on Regis Academy in the Cherry Hill High School East paper, Eastside.

In the same paper there was an Editorial as well:

The detrimental effects of the charter school on Cherry Hill's public school finances and ultimately the success of existing public schools make it completely unwelcoming to most Cherry Hill residents. Although it sounds absurd, the current process surrounding the charter school system application offers Cherry Hill representatives little room to influence the final decision. On November 4, the district filed notice of intent to appeal the State Commissioner of Education's approval of the Regis Academy Charter School, and is asking residents to voice their opinions regarding the charter.

The kid is dead-on.

And speaking of dead-on, Highland Park High School junior Charlotte Finegold has been writing about Tikun Olam in her school paper, the Highland Fling. Not only has she written several articles, she testified before the Assembly Education Committee, spoke at the Highland Park Save Our Schools NJ rally for local control and emailed Acting Commissioner Cerf DIRECTLY about her thoughts on the fourth application! The kid has guts!

Here's a bit from her letter:

My public high school is not failing, nor is it in danger of doing so. Not only are we a good school, but my school district has taken numerous efforts to compromise with the founders of Tikun Olam. The district implemented a Hebrew language program in the high school, even though it could have created a program for a more in-demand language like Mandarin or Hindi. Even when these changes are disregarded, it still remains clear that this charter school has no place in my community.

And then she nails her conclusion:

It is not fair for local taxpayers, Highland Park educators, and students to pay the price for an ill-organized school which lacks a location and support from its sending community and supposed endorsers.

I sincerely hope that the Department of Education sufficiently investigates Tikun Olam’s application and makes the right decision.

What was Cerf's response?

Thank you for your thoughtful letter.

That's it? Really? A student takes the time to write a heartfelt, articulate email, and that's the most the Acting Commissioner of Education can muster? Why not take the time to engage with a student that clearly wants to be a part of the dialogue?

Note to Cerf. The students in districts like Cherry Hill and Highland Park are SO well educated that they can see through all of this charter nonsense. They deserve answers. Real answers.

Students 2. Cerf 0.

Much Ado About Nothing…. If You Consider the Corporate Takeover of Public Education Nothing, Then I Guess You're Right Ms. Waters!

2012-01-27T19:36:00.000-05:00

Below is my comment on the opinion piece posted today on NJ Spotlight by Ms. Laura Waters, President of the Lawrence Township School Board. I have emailed John Mooney numerous times to ask why he continues to give voice to the weak arguments presented by Ms. Waters. I won't bother this time. Instead, I kind of want to thank him for the opportunity to bring everyone together to take her on. It's kind of cool how everyone came together to debunk her opinions. The comments today from so many people were just stellar.

And don't miss Jersey Jazzman's blog response. In classic Jersey Jazzman style it makes you think and laugh at the same time.

Here's my take on it.

Is there any point where a district can do anything other than roll over and allow a charter to set up shop in your opinion, Ms. Waters? Highland Park has been fighting Tikun Olam pre-approval, South Brunswick, Princeton and West Windsor-Plainsboro have been fighting post approval, but prior to the final charter being granted, and East Brunswick is fighting Hatikvah post approval.

At NO POINT in this process is the local district or community allowed access to the NJDOE as they are deciding on a charter that will siphon hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars out of it's budget. Districts are not granted meetings without significant pressure. In our case it took a Town Hall, Occupying the NJDOE and a NY Times article in order to be able to make our case directly to the NJDOE. Without these extraordinary measures the ONLY RECOURSE a district has is to submit written responses. Districts have every right to have these responses drafted by their district council. If a charter is approved against the wishes of a district, they are also entitled to appeal, which is also handled by a lawyer.

Do you not see that these written responses and appeals are the only way districts can make their case to the NJDOE, but when they do they risk lawsuits from charters claiming they are wasting district resources? Not only that, but in the case of PIACS, the New Jersey Charter School Association threw their weight and money behind the suit as well. Oh wait, I mean the Walton Foundation's money that keeps the NJCSA in business. How silly of me.

And by the way, Walton is a major funder of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools whose report you mention in your piece. Oh, and the National Alliance of Charter School Authorizers, too. And all three organizations, all bought and paid for by Walton etal. testify before the Senate Education Committee to push for the legislation that will give even more advantages to charters and even less to districts. Oh, and lets not forget that NACSA is also advising the NJDOE on their application process and paying for the reviewers. And we only know this because of OPRA requests and lawsuits from lawyers and Senators. But, yeah, you're right. Much ado about nothing...

So HELL YEAH. We are fighting back. Get used to it Ms. Waters. We're not going away either. I doubt we have scared the NJDOE and Governor out of the suburbs entirely, and even if we have we will fight them in the urban districts as well if those district don't want more charters.

Ms. Waters, I have asked this of you before and you have failed to answer me. What in the world will you do if a charter application is dropped on the desk of the superintendent in Lawrence Township? Do you honestly think the MAJORITY of parents and residents there would be any happier than those in East Brunswick, Highland Park, or any of the districts facing PIACS? How will you respond to them when they come before your board to ask what you will do to protect the budget they vote on year after year?

Until the day you are in that position Ms. Waters, I can't imagine how you feel so entitled to pass judgement on districts that are faced with not only the loss of funds that charters represent, but have to fight special interests that are connected to both the legislature AND the NJDOE.

I'll try to come back to this post later and add links and stuff, but I am a mom after all. Need to go feed the troops...

Ragin' Grannies v. For Profit Charter Operator

2012-01-27T11:24:00.001-05:00

One of the founders of Speak Up South Jersey (yes, you heard that right, Speak Up Highland Park is branching out…) posted a link to a YouTube video on their Facebook page that, I'm not ashamed to admit, literally brought me to tears:

I say we take the Ragin' Grannies on tour. Their fight in Chapel Hill is in many ways the same as the fight in Cherry Hill. What sets their fight apart however is the inclusion of a for-profit entity, in this case National Heritage Academy, which prides itself on it's "mandatory and extensive" use of testing data to "inform and adjust teaching."

But it's only a matter of time before New Jersey is confronted with a massive for-profit invasion.

As I've detailed previously, Imagine Schools, the nation's largest and perhaps most controversial for-profit charter operator with huge problems in Florida, Washington DC and Indiana just to name a few, has already been behind four applications in New Jersey. Last October the Star Ledger reported:

Among the proposals were some with ties to out-of-state charter school networks, like Imagine Schools, which helped local residents write applications in Jersey City, Newark, Camden, Trenton.

Imagine serves 40,000 students in 72 schools in 12 states, according to its website. "New Jersey is an area that is favorable for (education) alternatives," Samuel Howard, Imagine School’s executive vice president, said.

Christie has said he hoped to attract charter networks to New Jersey, but out-of-state companies face a roundabout process. A local group must first win approval for a charter then, if it wants to outsource the operation, must ask for bids. (emphasis mine)

Meanwhile, in St. Louis Missouri Imagine schools are an unmitigated disaster:

Education Commissioner Chris Nicastro advised Jim French, chairman of the university's education division, to announce "immediately" the closure of the underperforming schools after this school year.

Nicastro's recommendation comes days after French said the university needed more support and direction from the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education as it scrutinizes the charter schools operated by Virginia-based Imagine Schools Inc.

The six schools, which enroll about 3,800 students, fared worse on standardized tests this year than nearly all traditional and charter schools in St. Louis. French said the university is not getting the direction it needs from the education department or from state statutes to ensure the schools are living up to their charters.

Nicastro wrote that it is the sponsor's role, not the state's, to regulate charter schools.

So with Imagine's abysmal track record across the nation, clearly New Jersey should be wary of for-profit operators. And since a university authorized and oversaw Imagine in St. Louis, and then seemed not to know what to do with the ensuing disaster, clearly we should also be careful about who we select as authorizers.

What's that Governor?

Earlier this week in his State of the State speech, Governor Christie urged the legislature to make much needed changes to the state’s charter school law through bill A-4167 introduced last June. Sweeping changes to New Jersey’s charter school laws are needed to remove barriers and roadblocks to the growth of high-quality charter schools. The current laws and rules governing charter schools act as a deterrent to growth instead of fostering expansion. It is time to aggressively encourage some of the nation’s most-respected and successful charter school operators to come to New Jersey while making it possible to implement the same model of innovation and results in other new and existing charter schools. (emphasis mine)

Guess the Governor got tired of that "round about process." So, what is added to, and taken away from, the charter school law in bill A-4167 to make it easier for for-profits to step in?

10. Section 4 of P.L.1995, c.426 (C.18A:36A-4) is amended to read as follows:

4. a. A charter school may be established by:

(1) teaching staff members[, parents with children attending the schools of the district, or a combination of teaching staff members and parents. A charter school may also be established by an institution of higher education or a private entity located within the State in conjunction with teaching staff members and parents of children attending the schools of the district] who either reside or are employed in the State;

(2) community residents who reside in the State;

(3) a public institution of higher education, except that a charter school authorizer which is an institution of higher education shall be prohibited from reviewing and approving a charter application submitted by that same institution of higher education;

(4) a private entity that is either for-profit or not-for-profit;

(5) a charter school that is currently operating in the State; or

(6) a combination of any of the above. (emphasis mine, and for damn good reason, too)

Here's your lesson for the day on how to read a proposed bill, if you don't already know that is. Everything not underlined is the original legislation, and everything underlined is new and what's in [brackets] comes out.

In the original law, an eligible applicant had to either teach in the district they wanted to serve or have kids in the PUBLIC schools of that district. But even with this supposed limited pool of eligible applicants, who were supposed to represent the needs of the community, the charter school movement in New Jersey easily managed to subvert the intent of the law and to override local wishes.

Bill A-4167 will REMOVE the part about being a public school parent or teacher ENTIRELY, and will open the door to everybody and anybody, unless you are the actual authorizer. That sure does make it easier, now doesn't it?

So who is going to do the authorizing? The bill will allow public institutions of higher education in New Jersey to be authorizers.

The fact that the Imagine Schools in St. Louis were authorized by Missouri Baptist University doesn't lend much credence to the fact that adding universities as authorizers will increase accountability. Did you notice that when the Imagine Schools blew up in their face MBU looked to the state and said, "What should we do?"

The bill does however say that the local school board may be an authorizer…

NOW we're getting somewhere. Until districts and/or voters have local control over their schools, I think we can expect many more disasters like Imagine schools in St. Louis.

And with the Christie administration behind legislation that will open the door to non-profits, we NEED local control more than ever. Keep up with Save Our Schools NJ to help fight for legislation that will work for students, not for-profits.

Take it grannies:

Let's say no to charter schools
They don't follow any rules

NHA will rip us off
For-profit at a very high cost

What to do, oh, what to do
Support Carrboro and Public Schools

Great, now I'm crying again...

Demi-Billionaire and Consultant v. Parent Advocate (I Think This Is a New One…)

2012-01-27T02:55:00.000-05:00

In an article today Debra Rubin (she's been busy with all of these Hebrew charter dramas) reported on the fourth denial of Tikun Olam. And in it she dropped a couple of bombshells!

The first was from the Hebrew Charter School Center (HCSC). We'll get to that bombshell in just a moment, but first let me tell you about the HCSC. They describe themselves as "a nonprofit organization created by the Areivim Philanthropic Group in 2009 to help advance the Hebrew language charter school movement."

So what's the Areivim Philanthropic Group you ask and who runs it?

Why, it's run by none other than Michael Steinhardt, who was called a luminary of the hedge fund world by New York Magazine in their 2007 rankings of the hedge fund elite. What's a reform movement without a billionaire backer, right? Although to be fair, Steinhardt is only described as a demi-billionaire by Forbes. Poor guy.

How crazy is it that here in tiny Highland Park we are fighting off the direct impact of the billionaire boys club on public education?

Julie Weiner of the New York Jewish Week reported in February of 2010 that:

The fledgling Hebrew charter school world has two major players right now, although only one — the newly launched Hebrew Charter School Center — is actively seeking to build the movement beyond Florida.

Quietly launched over the past year by the Areivim Philanthropic Group, a Jewish funding partnership established by Birthright Israel co-founder Steinhardt and the late William Davidson (whose estate Areivim is currently suing), the $3.2 million Hebrew Charter School Center is providing seed money and free consulting to aspiring Hebrew charter schools throughout the country.

HCSC gave Tikun Olam a $30,000 start-up grant in 2009. When I reached out to them they would only go on record as saying that they were no longer working with high schools. However, after Michael Winerip's NY Times column about the misrepresentations in the application, the HCSC sent Ms. Rubin an unsolicited statement confirming that the HCSC:

“is not involved with Tikun Olam, we do not support their application, and we share many of the concerns that the Times and others have raised about it.”

Whoa. They really couldn't put any more distance between themselves and Tikun Olam, could they?

Ms. Rubin's second bombshell was a quote from Tikun Olam "consultant" Jeffrey Lischin, who claims that:

founders have been “harassed through misinformation and disingenuous traditional district leaders who love their monopoly.” They are flouting the spirit of the charter school law, he said, which envisions the concept as establishing vehicles for “educational improvement through competition and choice. Sadly that vision is being harmed and most sadly students are being harmed.”

Lischin, an associate of the NJ Charter School Resource Center, said Tikun Olam’s founders are “committed to a multicultural, ethnically diverse, economically diverse secular school.”

He added he would “not address the accusations of misconduct because of legal implications other than to say it is my personal opinion that the founders were slandered.”

Monopoly! Competition! Choice! Man, that's a lot of reformy speak for one quote!!!

Every claim that has been made by our community is backed up with documentation. Enough documentation that the NY Times was able to run with our story. The HCSC, who is not exactly a friend of our cause, seems to be saying they noticed some stuff too and they share the concerns in the NY Times.

Yet Mr. Lishcin, who by they way is not just a random consultant, he's their grant writer, sees fit to state that "it is his personal opinion that the founders were slandered."

That is quite a claim, sir. You got anything to back that up?

Anything I have told reporters regarding Tikun Olam is based on written documentation from individuals and organizations. Nothing has been based on my "personal opinion." I and other members of the Highland Park community like Chris Rodda, did the due diligence that the state and federal governments did not see fit to do.

Apparently, neither did Mr. Lischin.

Charter v. Board of Education, Again

2012-01-27T00:36:00.004-05:00

The New Jersey charter invasion has created such a ruckus because many towns have great schools and the parents of the students that are well served in those schools are willing to go to the mat to protect them.

That said, there will always be a percentage of parents, no matter how good the schools are, that will avail themselves of choice for whatever reason. And when the Governor and Education Commissioner are hot for charters and all too happy to steamroll districts that stand in their way, you end up with these two groups of parents pitted against each other, and the charters and the districts as well.

Great, now what?

What do the parents that don't want to "avail themselves of choice" do when they see their district losing funding to support the niche wants of a select few at the expense of the majority? What do the districts that don't want to lose funds do?

A story in the New Jersey Jewish News yesterday really brings home the pickle districts are in. Debra Rubin reported that Hatikvah International Academy Charter School has filed an OPRA request to make it's host district, East Brunswick, disclose financial documents related to it's opposition to Hatikvah. East Brunswick filed a suit against Hatikvah that claimed they did not have the enrollment required to open their doors. The district lost the last round in the appellate court, but recently decided to bring the case to the New Jersey Supreme Court.

This is reminiscent of the lawsuit Princeton International Academy Charter School lost when they unsuccessfully sued the South Brunswick, Princeton and West Windsor-Plainsboro boards of education, claiming they misused public funds to prevent the opening of the charter. Davy James of the Patch reported that:

In her decision, Judge Beavers found that the three districts have "discretionary authority to perform all acts and do all things, consistent with the law and the rules of the state board, necessary for the lawful and proper conduct, equipment and maintenance of the public schools of the district."

"The discretionary authority includes activities at issue here, which were taken to protect the financial interest of the resident districts," Judge Beavers wrote in her decision.

Hatikvah asked the district to turn over all financial documents surrounding legal action from March 1, 2009.

“We believe that our fellow citizens should be aware of exactly how much this baseless case, which the town is actually subsidizing both sides of, is costing them,” Hatikvah board member Pam Mullin said in a statement given to NJJN. “East Brunswick’s taxpayers have a right to know how their public funds are being used, or in this case, misused.”

Mullin claims that the board has “wasted tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars” in challenging Hatikvah, the state’s first Hebrew-language charter school, on enrollment issues.

In a series of legal salvoes, the board claimed the kindergarten-third grade school did not meet the state-mandated requirements for enrollment when it opened last year.

Here is the part of the article that makes me the saddest, although I have to admit this sadness quickly turns to anger:

“Hatikvah is now in its second successful year in operation and has a waiting list of parents who desire to enroll their children in Hatikvah,” he continued. “Rather than collaborate with Hatikvah officials to advance the best educational interests of East Brunswick children, your client persists in its campaign, however meritless, to close Hatikvah.”

East Brunswick Superintendent Dr. Jo Ann Magistro wrote a letter to Acting Commissioner Cerf for our opposition to Tikun Olam. In it she states that East Brunswick lost 1.2M to Hatikvah and she details the services that had to be cut in her district to make these funds available. It is a striking example of the sacrifices public schools are forced to make.

In order to pay the Hatikvah bill, East Brunswick Public Schools had to cut programs affecting thousands of our public school students; including:

The elementary foreign language program
The Summer Academy for at-risk students
21 extra-curricular clubs
3 sports programs

Got that? To provide language immersion to 108 students in K-3, thousands had to lose programs and services -- most notably, the entire elementary foreign language program! How does this make sense?? And how is the district's advocacy on behalf of ALL of the students in East Brunswick "meritless?"

Hatikvah released a statement on their website that details their reasons for the OPRA request. The title of the statement reads:

Voters deserve to know how much in public money

is being wasted on legal fees for baseless case

Classic.

Voters didn't have a say in wether they wanted public money to go to this charter in the first place, but now that it's been approved against the wishes of the district, the voters "deserve" to know how much money is being wasted. And remember, those same voters that can vote yes or no on the school budget have no say in the charter school's budget. But I digress...

Hatikvah was approved to take students from East Brunswick, but students from Edison, Highland Park and New Brunswick currently attend as well. If Hatikvah is so successful and there is a waiting list, why are they admitting students from other districts? Wouldn't they be able to fill their seats with the East Brunswick kids that are supposedly clamoring to get in to this successful school?

And if they don't have enough interest to fill all of their seats in the only district they listed on their application, how can they claim to be so successful?

East Brunswick, like many New Jersey towns, can not afford full day Kindergarten and only offer half day. Hatikvah offers full day Kindergarten for the select few that can get in, and I am sure many parents are looking for a free full day option and would gladly get on a waiting list to get one of those spots. Here is the Hatikvah "brochure" from their website which touts it's full day Kindergarten.

Did you catch the 11:1 student/teacher ratio with two teacher in every classroom to go along with that full day Kindergarten and dual language partial immersion?

Until New Jersey funds public schools so that ALL students have the benefit of a partial immersion, full day kindergarten program with a 1:11 ratio, how can we provide these services to a few while we take services away from the rest?

East Brunswick has my gratitude for taking on this fight, and I hope the parents and residents of that district rally behind their board and administration as they take this to the Supreme Court of New Jersey. They certainly have my support.

Amir Khan Doesn't Want YOU to Have Local Control!

2012-01-22T11:14:00.000-05:00

Apparently the Khan's have not only been to Trenton to deny the LGBT community the right to marry, they have also made the trip to lobby the state to deny voters the right to control their school budgets and keep out unwanted charters. Like his.

It make perfect sense that he would be against local control.

The way the system is set up works so well for him and the other members of the Black Minister's Council, why wouldn't he defend how the state is running the show!

Check out this YouTube video, PK on 3852. Notice it's PK, not AK. This is coming to you from Pastor Khan, not Amir Khan. He is delivering this message straight to other pastors and the members of their churches. (And don't worry, if it gets taken down I have it backed up…)

Pastor Khan encourages the pastors to come to Trenton and asks their congregants to contact their legislators to make sure that YOU won't have local control over charter schools in your community.

Let your legislators know exactly how you feel, and let them know you are in support of charter schools, and you are not in support, you oppose this bill, you want to keep it in the hands of the state, and not the local township. -- Pastor Khan

And then he prays that those pastors will let their members use their smart phones to call and email their legislators to oppose the bill right in the middle of their sunday sermons!

Now check this one out…

If we have a couple hundred churches and pastors rally behind us, and each one of us as pastors make the phone calls, send out an email, and we get our congregation members to do the same, we can bombard the senators and the speaker with thousands and thousands of phone calls and emails, that will put enough pressure to bring about change. -- Pastor Khan

Now here is my favorite part. Did you catch that when he is talking about local control the decision should be in the hands of the state, not the local township. But when he is talking about school choice, he says:

I believe that school choice should be in the hands of not the politicians or the government or the city, but back in the hands of the parents.

What it REALLY sounds like to me is what Pastor Khan believes is that decisions about public education should be based on whatever is best for HIM and whatever enables HIM to re-open his private school as a charter with public money. And he's not afraid to lobby Trenton for what's best for HIM.

Funny, looks like Khan could lose his tax exempt status if he get's caught doing it:

A church or religious organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation .

Churches and religious organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying . For example, churches may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consid- er public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status.

Uh oh PASTOR Khan.

Let's get back to how Khan got his charter for a minute though.

When the approval of Regis Academy was announced in September of 2011 Jessica Calefati reported:

Amir Khan, the principal founder of Regis Academy Charter School in Cherry Hill, said earning approval was an "honor."

"I thank God that we got approved," said Khan, the senior pastor at Cherry Hill’s Solid Rock Worship Center who also runs a private, Christian school associated with the church. "We applied last year, but our first application was denied."

He really should have thanked Acting Commissioner Chris Cerf. Regis Academy's approval was one of only four that round; the first round COMPLETELY overseen by Cerf. In the press release to announce the decisions it was stated that:

The Department has expanded its strategies for growing the state’s charter sector and increasing the number of high-quality seats available to students. One shift in focus includes expanding efforts to attract high-quality charter applicants.

Which "expanded strategy" allowed for Amir Khan to be considered a "high-quality applicant?"

Guess only Acting Commissioner Cerf and the Governor know for sure. But when Khan is on the dais, and the Governor preposterously claims not to know him, it sure makes you wonder, doesn't it?

Four Strikes and Tikun Olam's Still Not Out?

2012-01-21T16:32:00.000-05:00

The New Jersey Department of Education, according to their timeline, was supposed to release the decisions on the latest round of charter applications on Tuesday, January 17th.

Notice that charter applicants must submit their applications and addenda not just on particular days, but by a specific time. If they fail to meet these deadlines their applications are automatically disqualified.

OK, let's put that aside. The Governor's State of the State speech was understandably postponed due to the unexpected death of Assemblyman Alex DeCroce. It makes sense that when the State of the State got delayed, the announcements did to.

But for 3 days? Why wait until Friday, and why drop it at 4:30 on that Friday unless you are trying to bury the story?

Luckily a couple of committed reporters ran stories about the approvals anyway, and also touched on the denial of Tikun Olam. Jessica Calefati somehow managed to get a comment from lead applicant Sharon Akman. Unfortunately the quote she got was that "of course" Akman will reapply.

Bob Makin of the Home News Tribune did not reach Akman, but did speak to yours truly. Even before I saw Calefati's article and knew Ms. Akman intends to reapply I was careful to point out that the denial was not necessarily the end of the road for Tikun Olam:

"I am thrilled that the hard work and determination of so many people in Highland Park, Edison and New Brunswick has paid off,” Cimarusti said. “It is a tremendous accomplishment that even though the applicants came to the table with a $600,000 federal grant, we were able to make the NJDOE see that this application was not worthy of approval.

"The victory is short-lived, however. This is the fourth denial, and there is no reason to think there won’t be a fifth application, especially since the NJDOE denial does not mean the end of the USDOE grant. Our next task is to meet with the USDOE to make sure they fully understand that the grant was awarded based on false information. If the grant is rescinded, which it should be based on the misrepresentations, I think we may finally see the end of the Tikun Olam application.”

That about sums it up. I am proud of what we have accomplished, but I am realistic about the road ahead.

The good thing is we have the power of the people on our side. The people of Highland Park, Edison and New Brunswick do not want this charter. The community leaders and elected officials in these communities do not want this charter. The school districts are united in their opposition to this charter.

We also have the truth on our side. In an earlier post I detailed the section of the US Code that speaks to the penalties for making false statements to a federal official. The grant application that was submitted to the United States Department of Education by Ms. Akman has already been brought to the attention of the Office of the Inspector General, so there could potentially be very real consequences for Ms. Akman at the federal level.

What I have yet to detail is that there should be penalties at the state level as well. Each and every founder that is part of a New Jersey Charter School Application is required to sign a Founder Statement of Assurances:

Got that?

As a founder, I herby certify UNDER PENALTIES OF PERJURY that the information submitted in this application for a charter for Tikun Olam Hebrew Language Charter High School… is true to the best of my knowledge and belief…

So what does "penalties of perjury" mean, anyway?

1. N.J.S.2C:28-3 is amended to read as follows:
    2C:28-3. Unsworn Falsification to Authorities
    a. Statements "Under Penalty." A person commits a crime of the fourth degree if he makes a written false statement which he does not believe to be true, on or pursuant to a form bearing notice, authorized by law, to the effect that false statements made therein are punishable.
    b. In general. A person commits a disorderly persons offense if, with purpose to mislead a public servant in performing his function, he:
    (1) Makes any written false statement which he does not believe to be true;
    (2) Purposely creates a false impression in a written application for any pecuniary or other benefit, by omitting information necessary to prevent statements therein from being misleading;
    (3) Submits or invites reliance on any writing which he knows to be forged, altered or otherwise lacking in authenticity; or
    (4) Submits or invites reliance on any sample, specimen, map, boundary-mark, or other object which he knows to be false.
    c. Perjury provisions applicable. Subsections c. and d. of section 2C:28-1 and subsection c. of 2C:28-2 apply to the present section.

It's all well and good that Ms. Akman would like to reapply despite the intense media scrutiny her application has received, but how can the New Jersey Department of Education allow Ms. Akman to reapply when it has been plainly shown that she has repeatedly misrepresented information in her applications?

Why have applicants sign this Statement of Assurances if the NJDOE allows them to make false statements, under penalties of perjury, time and time again? Makes it seem like the charter application process is just a free-for-all with little to no accountability, doesn't it?

And if it's not just a free-for-all, how can there be no consequences for Ms. Akman for her past applications?

Of Course

2012-01-20T23:07:00.000-05:00

I got all of 6 hours to enjoy the fourth denial of Tikun Olam. I went out to dinner with my closest co-conspirators, our kids and our husbands to celebrate. And then I came home and read Jessica Calefati's piece in the Ledger:

Noticeably absent from today’s list were proposed charter schools in high performing suburban districts like Highland Park, South Orange-Maplewood and Montclair.

Good so far, keep going...

In recent months, parents, teachers and elected officials in these communities have rallied to block the controversial schools from opening. Christie and Cerf have both said charters are not necessarily needed in the suburbs, and this round of approvals clearly reflects that thinking.

Or it reflects that the suburbs have gained so much momentum in their battle against unwanted charters that the NJDOE was terrified to approved EVEN ONE charter in the suburbs and risk an even greater backlash. But OK, keep going...

Sharon Akman of Highland Park, who has applied four times to open a charter high school focused on Hebrew language instruction, said this latest denial would not end her quest for approval.

Akman said "of course" she would submit a fifth application.

Great. Just great. Total buzz kill.

Wonder how Sharon Akman will clean up her application after Michael Winerip and Chris Rodda have exposed it nationally for the mess that it is?

THIS Is Who Amir Khan Is Governor Christie! Now What?

2012-01-20T22:19:00.001-05:00

This was sent to me by DefeatNJBullies on Twitter. I should be posting about the DENIAL OF TIKUN OLAM right now, but I can't get over this. I have to share it. NOW.

How, HOW can people that feel this way about the rights of fellow human beings be given money BY THE STATE to teach children? How will they treat gay parents, teachers or students?

This alone should be reason NOT to let Regis Academy open. Aughtney is at 2:47 and Amir at 3:03. It's short though, you should watch the whole thing. And then I'm sorry, because it is really, REALLY upsetting. I'm really sorry.

Cherry Hill is projected to lose $1.9 million to Regis Academy, Lawnside $62,565, Somerdale $108,063 and Voorhees $699,048. To the Khans? If they want to preach intolerance at their PRIVATE SCHOOL, there isn't a whole lot I can do about that.

But NOT in a public school. No way.

Amir Khan: It feels great. It feels like, you know, I just finished a wresting match and they just picked my arm up and said, you won. And then he chuckles. HE CHUCKLES.

Shame.

Who is Amir Khan? WHERE is Amir Khan!?!

2012-01-20T07:34:00.004-05:00

At a Town Hall meeting in Voorhees, New Jersey yesterday several vocal Voorhees and Cherry Hill residents challenged Governor Christie about the approval of the Regis Academy Charter School. The Rev. Amir Khan is the lead founder of Regis Academy and also the senior pastor of the Solid Rock Worship Center, which will house the charter.

Regis Academy was approved in September of 2011 as one of only four charters approved in that round of applications. The New Jersey Department of Education said the four approvals were a result of a rigorous review process and they were confident the four schools would offer students a great education on day one of the school year.”

In New Jersey Monthly however, Sara Butrymowicz reported that David Sciarra of the Education Law Center felt the low number of approvals raised “a lot of red flags of what’s really going on behind closed doors at the (New Jersey) Department of Education. Because of the lack of public discourse about it (and) refusal to be open and transparent, the public is left in the dark about what happened here.”

In October, John Mooney of NJ Spotlight wrote a piece titled Church, State and Charter Schools, in which he stated that the Rev. Reginald Jackson helped steer four charter applications from pastors on the Black Ministers Council of New Jersey, of which he is president. One of these applications was for the Regis Academy charter.

And yesterday the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that Khan has said he sits on a committee of African American pastors that he said has met frequently with Christie on the issue of charter schools.

An Asbury Park Press reporter detailed a heated exchange between Governor Christie and one of those four vocal residents, Alan Erlich of Cherry Hill about the Governor’s relationship to Kahn:

But after Erlich charged the charter school’s approval was a favor for a Christie supporter, the governor denied the claim.

“Who are you talking about?” asked Christie, who went on to say he does not know Amir Khan, a pastor who is organizing the school at a church complex in the Ashland area. “I haven’t given one friend a charter school.”

The exchange is already memorialized on YouTube, like so many other clashes between Christie and audience members.

What may make this one particularly interesting is that just after Governor Christie says he doesn’t know who Amir Khan is, the camera pans back, and who is sitting behind Governor Christie on the dais? Amir Khan. Sitting right underneath the “Jersey Comeback” banner. Here is a still:

The woman sitting to Khan’s left is his wife; pastor Aughtney Khan, also a founder of Regis Academy.

The pastors Khan, founders of the Regis Academy Charter School, sitting not just in the audience, but on the dais behind the governor, makes it awfully hard to believe that Regis Academy was not one of only four approvals in September because of pastor Khan’s connections to Rev. Jackson, the Black Minister’s Council and Governor Christie himself. Especially with his repeated pronouncements yesterday that not only does Cherry Hill not need a charter school, he has told Acting Commissioner Cerf that charters should be focused predominately in failing districts. Oh, and let's not forget, he has no say in what charters do and don't get approved? Then why was Regis Academy approved in Cherry Hill?

Looks like in education the Governor's Jersey Comeback will be stronger and better for those with connections to the Governor.

UPDATE: I have confirmed with multiple individuals in attendance at the Town Hall Meeting that Amir Khan was seen behind the curtain that was behind the platform. Governor Christie came out from behind the same curtain. Khan was allegedly behind the curtain for some time, and only came out and took his seat under the Jersey Comeback banner 5 minutes before the Governor.

Gov. Christie: I Am Not a King

2012-01-19T00:14:00.001-05:00

Christie kicked off his first Town Hall in Voorhees, New Jersey today. Interesting choice of towns.

There has been no shortage of outrage in Voorhees and Cherry Hill over the Regis Academy Charter School. Cherry Hill is challenging the approval in court, and I posted earlier about Cherry Hill Superintendent Dr. Reusche's response to bogus claims made by Regis founder Rev. Amir Khan about the achievement gap in Cherry Hill's schools.

Voorhees was also facing an application for the Creative Studies Charter School, which applied in October but was axed in the first round of cuts on December 12th. Folks from Voorhees joined Speak Up Highland Park at our Occupy the DOE event anyway on December 16th.

So it's no big surprise that there were protestors both outside the event and inside as well.

Gov. Christie, who held a town-hall meeting in Voorhees Wednesday to sell his plans for New Jersey for 2012, was bombarded with questions about a charter school opening in Cherry Hill.

Christie said he'd prefer that charter schools open only in struggling school districts rather than compete with high-performing public schools, such as those in Voorhees and Cherry Hill. But he said the law prevents him from barring the Regis Academy from opening.

"I am not a king, despite the fact that I would love to be," Christie said after an outburst from Alan Ehrlach, a Cherry Hill resident. "I have to operate within the law."

Christie urged the four people who spoke up about the Regis Academy to call their legislators and ask them to pass a law that narrows the areas charter schools can operate in. He would sign a law, but he can't make the legislature pass it, he said.

The Regis Academy, which would be located in Cherry Hill and serve kindergarten through eighth-grade students from Cherry Hill, Voorhees, Lawnside, and Somerdale, has already been approved by the state Department of Education.

But has drawn fierce opposition from officials and residents in some of these suburban towns.

"Our schools are extremely successful," Melissa Sable, 44, a teacher who lives in Voorhees. She asked Christie why Christie wasn't doing anything to stop the school from opening and taking taxpayer dollars away from the public schools. Christie again said the law prevents him from restricting where charter schools open.

The movement to take charters beyond their traditional urban setting into the suburbs, where residents expect a quality school system in return for higher property taxes, has turned New Jersey into a battleground.

Cherry Hill has taken the rare step of challenging Regis' charter approval. (emphasis mine)

OK, a few points. This is not a news flash. Christie has said numerous times in the last six months that charters should be primarily in "failing" districts. I blogged about this after WNYC's Nancy Solomon said the suburban charter school battle could be Christie's Waterloo.

And check out this video. At about the 31:30 mark Christie answers a question from an angry Cherry Hill resident who wanted to know why Regis was approved. Christie throws Cerf right under the charter school bus and says that he has told "the educational community" that he thinks charters should be "predominately, if not exclusively" in failing districts. I guess Cerf has been going rouge...

Watch live streaming video from townsquaremedianj at livestream.com

So, what better way to stop the battle than to show up on the battlefield and say, "Hey, I'd love to help you guys out here, but it's not my show! I've tried telling the education community, and they didn't listen. Now YOU need to go tell the legislators. If they write it, I'll pass it, but I'm not the king, remember?"

Perfect plan! No accountability for Cerf or Christie; not only do they get the suburban public school parents to quiet down, they harness their energy and channel it against the urban public school parents. As an added bonus, Christie gets legislation passed that says go ahead and open as many charters as you want, as long as they are in failing districts! Who's gonna complain?

This is some masterful politics. Turn your potential Waterloo into a windfall. Who wants to bet that THIS is why there was no announcement on Tuesday telling the people of New Jersey which charters made the final cut. Christie and Cerf had this up their sleeve all along. First the State of the State, then this perfectly planned Town Hall, then the announcements.

Who wants to bet there are no suburban charters approved in this round?

Christie may be selling it, but don't buy it New Jersey! Don't let Christie and Cerf jam more unaccountable charters into ANY district, suburban OR urban. If you want to contact your legislators, join almost 5,000 others New Jersey residents that want local control over charters and sign this Save Our Schools New Jersey petition instead. It will send an email directly to your Senator and the Senate Education Committee as well.

http://www.change.org/petitions/new-jersey-communities-want-local-control-over-new-charter-schools-2

And until we get that passed, and until Cerf releases the Charter Report with real data letting us know how the charters already open are performing, join me, Jersey Jazzman and Stan Karp and throw your support behind a New Jersey Charter School Moratorium. We need to stick together and not divide our state into those who should get a say in what happens to their public schools and those that shouldn't. Let's fight for public education together.

BTW, guess who was behind Christie on the dais as he claimed that it's the law that prevents him from barring the Regis Academy Charter School from opening? The founder of Regis Academy Charter School, Reverend Amir Khan. Not the Superintendents of any of the successful districts. The founder of the embattled, unproven charter school that is "forging excellence" in ValPac advertisements. Now THAT'S innovative.

So who do you think Christie is really fighting for?

Carlos Perez, Arne Duncan and the Tyranny of the Majority

2012-01-18T18:17:00.000-05:00

Just about any time an article is written in New Jersey about charter schools the reporter goes out to Carlos Perez of the New Jersey Charter Schools Association for the pro-charter party line. His disdain for districts that are fighting back against the charter invasion is palpable.

Check out this press release in response to the PIACS lawsuit against the districts:

The Association supports the parents and children who want to send their children to PIACS,” Perez said. “We don't believe public school districts should be using valuable taxpayer money to fight to keep other children from having high-quality public school options. It's unfair that a start-up charter school is forced to spend its limited resources fighting a public school district instead of using that money to educate children.”

Perez said New Jersey school districts have a long history of imposing long, expensive legal action against charter schools dating back over a decade, from Red Bank and Highland Park.

Uh, WHAT?

Highland Park has done nothing other than respond to FOUR APPLICATIONS submitted by Tikun Olam founders, which have been clearly shown to be filled with misrepresentations. No expensive lawsuits. No expensive legal action. Just responses from our district's attorney and our community, and our community has done it for FREE! We're not dragging anything out, they won't stop re-applying, and the NJDOE won't stop supporting them so we won't stop defending our public schools!

Here's my favorite quote from Mr. Perez that was in my home town paper, the Highland Park Mirror. He is, once again, giving the pro-charter party line on New Jersey's deranged charter law that allows the Commissioner to decide yet forces the districts to pay.

In New Jersey, charter schools are funded by the students’ home school districts, through a formula based on per-pupil budgeting. The 2010-2011 Highland Park Public Schools budget provides $352,208 to two existing charter schools where 23 Highland Park students attend.

The result is that “towns like Highland Park [whose funds] support the schools have no voice in their creation or administration," says Julia Sass Rubin, a member of Save Our Schools NJ, a grassroots organization seeking charter school reform.

New Jersey’s state approved but locally funded charter schools are an oddity, according to Rubin, who says that nationwide 90 percent of charter schools are either locally-approved and locally-funded, or else state-approved and state-funded.

New Jersey Charter Schools Association Carlos Perez said the current charter approval and oversight system provides freedom from a “tyranny of the majority.”

Let me just get this straight, Mr. Perez. Are you referring to that pesky little thing we like to call democracy as A TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY?

Why is Mr. Perez so hell bent on overriding the wishes of the majority of parents in any given school district? NJ Spotlight wrote a, well, Spotlight on Perez when he came to New Jersey via his native Chicago (are you thinking about Arne Duncan, too? You should be…) Perez worked for the Chicago based Illinois Network of Charter Schools from 2005-2010. John Mooney reports that while Perez took Chicago by storm, with the help of Arne Duncan, he had a hard time increasing numbers in the rest of Illinois.

Both with charter laws into their second decade, Illinois has about 96 charter schools, New Jersey 73. But while New Jersey’s are spread throughout the state, all but nine of Illinois’ charter schools are located in Chicago, the product of a restricted law that requires local districts to authorize charters within their borders. Chicago boasted a mayor and a school superintendent -- now U.S Education Secretary Arne Duncan -- who were more inclined, but there was still stiff union opposition that Perez said was tough to overcome. “Virtually every one of the charters was out-performing the district schools,” Perez said. “Still, nobody wanted to believe that charter schools were successful.” (emphasis mine)

Sounds like Perez was a hit in Chicago when Arne Duncan was Superintendent, but got stymied in the rest of Illinois by districts that were allowed to *GASP* decide for themselves if they need or want a charter. This really brings his "tyranny of the majority" quote into focus.

New Jersey has become a bad flashback for Mr. Perez. The pesky, noisy people in Highland Park, Cherry Hill, Teaneck and beyond that don't want to be a notch in his charter belt are a trigger; we're reminding him of the districts in Illinois that weren't buying his snake oil either.

It's no doubt Governor Christie keeps saying that charters should be focused in "failing" districts. It worked in Illinois, why not here? Maybe if we can convince President Obama to send Arne Duncan back to Chicago he will take Carlos Perez with him.

A girl can dream, can't she?

Associations, Alliances and Charters, OH MY! Why I'm for the New Jersey Charter School Moratorium.

2012-01-17T11:16:00.003-05:00

As I sit here at my computer checking for the NJDOE announcement that will reveal Acting Commissioner Chris Cerf's decision on Tikun Olam (last round it wasn't until about 3pm -- what could they be doing?) I am reading articles in today's news about charters in New Jersey.

In the Philadelphia Inquirer James Osborne details the problems with the charter application process and how the involvement of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers really muddies the waters:

The National Association of Charter School Authorizers, a Chicago nonprofit, had offered to fly in 14 consultants to lead Department of Education staff in the next approval round, looking toward overhauling the entire process.

What was particularly enticing was that the association could arrange funding through the Newark Charter School Fund, a nonprofit backed by the same philanthropies that support the association, including the Walton Family Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

"The charter school office wasn't going in the right direction. You had the same people regulating charter schools regulating traditional schools," Cerf said. "I thought [the group] could help us."

The nonprofit, active in 41 states, including Pennsylvania, revised New Jersey's application process, pushing state officials to focus on in-depth reviews over bureaucratic checklists. In September, when the Christie administration announced its next round, the number of approvals was much lower.

But the group has become a lightning rod for parents and others resisting Gov. Christie's push to expand charters; they see a clear conflict of interest. At issue is the association's advocacy arm, which testifies on behalf of the charter industry and promotes legislation that would expand the number of U.S. charter schools.

Results of the latest review of applicants will be announced Tuesday.

"It's like hiring the fox to guard the henhouse," said David Sciarra, executive director of the Education Law Center in Newark, which litigates on behalf of low-income schoolchildren. "What [New Jersey] seems to be doing is bringing foundations and other organizations that support their particular education reform agenda. I've never seen anything like this before."

NJ Spotlight's John Mooney wrote about the charter law itself:

The Christie administration is preparing to announce a new round of charter schools this week, but a big question remains. What is the state going to do about a charter law that even supporters are calling one of the nation's weakest?

The latest criticism came from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, which in its annual report released yesterday placed New Jersey's law 31st out of 42nd overall. It cited the lack of strong accountability measures tied to performance, weak funding, and limited approval and review process.

Charter supporters and critics alike agree that the current law, not to mention the state's capacity to enforce it, has grown increasingly inadequate. Among the variety of bills to strengthen it is one that would increase the number of authorizers that can review, approve, and monitor new charters.

Another that charter supporters don’t particularly like would allow local communities vote on whether a charter can be approved.

Meanwhile, the state Department of Education is expected to announce a new class of charters later this week, drawing from an original applicant pool of more than 40, which is sure to rekindle the debate about the merits of charters in general.

Let's not forget that as I detailed in an earlier post, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, the National Association of Charter School Authorizers and the New Jersey Charter Schools Association are ALL FUNDED by the Walton Foundation. The big money is all coming from the same place with the same message. Squash local control. The guys with the money are in charge, and they can tell us how to run our schools. Even schools like mine that are running just fine, thank you very much.

So, let's look at two statements in these articles. First, the quote from Education Law Center's David Sciarra:

"What [New Jersey] seems to be doing is bringing foundations and other organizations that support their particular education reform agenda. I've never seen anything like this before."

And from John Mooney:

Kind of makes you wonder who's running the show, and what this push for charters is really all about when as a state we are still debating the merits of charters in general.

Jersey Jazzman has not only been calling on Acting Commissioner Cerf to release his long overdue Charter School Report, he has called for a moratorium on charters until it is released.

He is not alone.

Loretta Weinberg called for a moratorium in the wake of the outrage over the $15.4M bill sent to the Teaneck Public Schools for the Garden State Virtual Charter School. That application became so toxic the New Jersey Department of Education had to invent a brand new "first cut" in the process to squelch the uprising against it. That didn't stop Teaneck residents from Occupying the NJDOE four days later. Districts are starting to wise up. They know that charter applications come back time and time again. A denial is not the end of the threat to a district.

This first cut has now been built into the process. The next round of applications will hit the desks of superintendents around the state on April 2, 2012 and the backlash against unwanted charters will begin anew. Applicants (and the public?) will find out on May 1, 2012 if applications will move on to a "full review." No doubt this step is being added in order to put out any other huge fires that may arise. But again, districts are now learning from one another and banding together.

It is also notable that NJDOE seems to be making this up as they go along. Each round of charter applications seem to be subject to a new and different review process. We only know this because the NJDOE was forced to reveal their process after OPRA requests and lawsuits from the ELC, ACLU-NJ and Senator Nia Gill.

Stan Karp of the Education Law Center and all around awesome guy also called for a moratorium in a speech he gave at a recent rally in Maplewood to oppose the Hua Mei Charter School. His reasons are well thought out an sensible:

It’s time for a moratorium on opening all new charters in New Jersey until, as Assemblywoman Mila Jasey has called for, we have an independent assessment of their performance and their impact, and until we have a more democratic process that includes local approval and participation in setting charter school policy.

Until...

LOCAL DISTRICTS get a say in what happens to their schools
We take a look at some real data as to how the charters that are already up and running are doing.
These National and State Associations and Alliances and the big money they represent back off and let the PEOPLE OF NEW JERSEY decide what makes sense in our state
The New Jersey Charter School Program Act of 1995 gets a much needed overhaul which includes the input of groups like the Education Law Center and Save Our Schools NJ, not the aforementioned Associations and Alliances

...I'm with Jersey Jazzman, Senator Weinberg and Stan Karp. I say we end this. Now. It's time for the New Jersey Charter School Moratorium. Say it with me. No new applications on April 2nd.

Reviewer #1 and the Smoking Gun

2012-01-14T16:38:00.000-05:00

On Thursday Tikun Olam lead applicant Sharon Akman was quoted as saying that she did not misrepresent anyone's position.

Yesterday I detailed that even if she is trying to claim former Edison Mayor Jun Choi and Assemblyman Peter Barnes flip-flopped on her, despite the fact that she never bothered to obtain official statements of support from them, how does she explain that Bishop Bootkoski clearly stated St. Mary's would not be available to Tikun Olam three months before she submitted her federal application for a grant?

In his NY Times column Michael Winerip asked how federal oversight could be so lax:

And part of the answer, as Justin Hamilton, an Education Department spokesman, explained in an e-mail, is that federal officials see their oversight role as limited. The department hires private consultants to rate the quality of a charter applicant, but those consultants “cannot use information not included in the grant application,” he said.

And then today I found it. The piece of evidence that ties it all together.

I happened to be looking at the reviewers comments from Tikun Olam's federal application for the grant (yes, this is my idea of fun on a Saturday afternoon…) and I stumbled across this:

Lots of strengths, and NO WEAKNESSES in the applicant's response! Reviewer #1 bought everything that Ms. Akman said in her application hook, line and sinker, even though there was no documentation to back it up, and in fact, it wasn't true. Reviewer #1's narrative confirms that their opinion is based solely on the word of the applicant:

The applicant has also indicated that a proposed facility for the charter school is in a former Catholic school located in a mostly minority, low-income New Brunswick neighborhood. The applicant believes this is a strong statement of the proposed charter school's commitment to ensure that an equal opportunity to attend the school is given to all. (emphasis mine)

And don't miss this part:

The Secretary encourages the applicant to describe how parents and other members of the community will be informed about the charter school, and how the students will be given an equal opportunity to attend the charter school. (emphasis mine)

So let's put these pieces together. The federal grant application asks, on behalf of Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, how students will be given an equal opportunity to attend the charter school. The applicant says that since the school will be in a Catholic school in a low-income minority neighborhood she believes she has this covered. She just leaves out the inconvenient fact that the Bishop has said she can't have the facility. Reviewer #1 therefore gives this section of the application 3 out of 3 points. Perfect score!

There must be something in place to prevent applicants from making false statements like these in order to dupe Secretary of Education into giving them hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, right?

Why yes there is!

Making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) is the common name for the United States federal crime laid out in Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which generally prohibits lying to or concealing (information) from afederal official by oral affirmation, written statement or mere denial. The purpose of the statute is to "punish those who render positive false statements designed to pervert or undermine functions of governmental departments andagencies".^[1]

That doesn't sound too good for Ms. Akman, does it? Wonder if she will stick with her story that she didn't misrepresent anyone, especially since this is what sent Martha Stewart to prison.

Pants on Fire

2012-01-13T14:14:00.000-05:00

Tikun Olam lead applicant Sharon Akman responded to a reporter yesterday for the first time in months. Walt Kane from News Channel 12 did a Kane in Your Corner segment last night as a follow up to Michael Winerip's NY Times Column which detailed the misrepresentations in the application. I guess a guy at your door with a camera and a microphone is more intimidating than a disembodied print journalist sending emails or making calls, even if he is from the NY Times.

While she wouldn't be interviewed on camera, she did speak to him on the phone. When asked about the numerous misrepresentations in her application Akman stated:

"We're not misrepresenting anybody. If they subsequently changed their mind about it, that's a different thing. But we did not misrepresent them."

Really??

And who is the "they" she is talking about?

Former Edison Mayor Jun Choi who on 9/10/11 said:

I am disappointed to learn of the details of the Tikun Olam Charter School application where my name was used in reference to building a diverse student body in the Edison area. While I met with the founders during my time as mayor of Edison and gave them advice as to the charter school application process, I did not make a commitment to support their charter school, nor did I commit to help build a diverse student body for them.

and Assemblyman Peter Barnes who on 8/16/2011 said:

I was recently made aware that the founders of the proposed Tikun Olam Hebrew Language Charter School have claimed in the Charter School Application Addenda dated July 2011, that I will be assisting them in the approval process. I am uncertain as to the reasons the founders are asserting this, as I made no such assurances.

To be clear, the founders of the proposed Tikun Olam School do not have my support despite using my name as a reference on their application.

Funny thing is, there are no statements of support in the application from either of these elected officials stating they EVER supported Tikun Olam. Guess we will just have to take Ms. Akman's word for it...

OK, I hear you, they're politicians. Maybe in a meeting with her in the room they said they would support her and then once the voters and districts started to cry foul they changed their minds. But what about the Bishop?

Most Rev. Paul G. Bootkoski, Bishop of the Diocese of Metuchen, sent a letter to Acting Commissioner Chris Cerf dated 5/24/11 stating:

It has been brought to my attention that the Tikun Olam Hebrew Language Charter High School has stated that the parish of St. Mary of Mt. Virgin Church, New Brunswick, NJ has entered into a leasing agreement to operate a charter school at the facility of St. Mary of Mt. Virgin Church. This is not so. In order to clarify the situation, I wish to state that an agreement has not been entered into by the Tikun Olam Hebrew Laguage Charter High School and St. Mary of Mt. Virgin Church, and will not be approved by the Diocese of Metuchen. (emphasis NOT mine, the word not is actually underlined in the Bishop's letter!!)

Ouch.

Ms. Akman however resubmitted St. Mary's as her facility in both her Federal application for a Charter School Program Grant on 8/24/11 (three months later), and the fourth submission of her application to the New Jersey Department of Education for a charter in 10/15/11 (5 months later.)

When the Bishop found out he wrote another letter to Cerf on 12/14/11:

It has recently been brought to my attention again that the Tikum Olam Hebrew Language Charter High School is applying for a charter for the City of New Brunswick. In May 2011, they claimed to have entered into a leasing agreement to operate the school at the facility of St. Mary of Mt. Virgin Church, New Brunswick, N.J. As I stated in my May 24, 2011 letter to you, no such agreement was approved at that time nor will it be in the future with St. Mary of Mt. Virgin Church or any other Roman Catholic entity in the City of New Brunswick.

Therefore, I wish to restate that such an agreement has not and will not be accepted by the Catholic entities in New Brunswick or the Diocese of Metuchen.

Double ouch.

(Notice how he ups the ante here. Not only will he not agree to lease St. Mary's to Tikun Olam, he will not agree to a lease for any "Roman Catholic entity in the City of New Brunswick.")

Now here is my favorite part. This is where the NJDOE and the Acting Commissioner are culpable.

The Bishop and Assemblyman Barnes sent their letters to Acting Commissioner Chris Cerf, and Jun Choi emailed his statement to me and we submitted it numerous times to the NJDOE as part of our community response materials.

After Ms. Akman's application was denied for the third time on 9/30/11 we filed Open Public Record's Act requests for any and all reviewer comments on the application. Of course, we were denied the reviewer's comments (more on that another day…) We did however receive a form called the New Jersey Charter School Application Evaluation which is given to rejected applicants. Ms. Akman received this Charter School Application Evaluation from the NJDOE on 10/13/11. Nowhere in this document did the NJDOE tell Ms. Akman, "Hey, the Bishop says you can't have St. Mary's, don't resubmit until you have another proposed facility" or "Hey, Assemblyman Barnes and Jun Choi said they don't support your application, find some more people that do."

Not only did Ms. Akman resubmit her application on 10/15/11 with St. Mary's still listed as her site, and with continued claims of support from Jun Choi and Assemblyman Barnes, the NJDOE did not reject her application in the new and improved "first round" in the charter school application process on 12/12/11.

The Kane in Your Corner report stated:

The federal government admits it does not routinely fact-check grant applications for charter schools. The New Jersey Department of Education insists it does, but a spokesman would not discuss Tikun Olam's application with Kane In Your Corner because it is
"ongoing."

Walt Kane also reported that Akman said she was recently "asked to reapply." One can only assume she means by the NJDOE. NJDOE spokesman Justin Barra has said repeatedly in the press that they are taking community feedback into account in their review process.

“In addition to evaluating the quality of the proposed program, we also take into account feedback both from districts and the general public. We take seriously all public comment that we receive in the review process.”

So even if Choi and Barnes DID INDEED change their minds as Ms. Akman claims, and she somehow didn't know that St. Mary's wasn't available to her, why didn't the NJDOE give her the heads up and let her know about the letters from the Bishop, Choi and Barnes? Why are they encouraging her to reapply? Especially when they are taking all public comment so seriously.

Hard to know whose pants to throw the water on first.