Change The LAUSD

“At the Los Angeles Unified School District, our goals are...5. School safety”

- LAUSD

Given the vastness of the LAUSD bureaucracy, there is no guarantee that the members of the School Board knew that Granada Hills Charter High School (GHCHS) had been cited for making unauthorized modifications to their District owned campus that threatened student and staff safety. Therefore, I used my three minutes of public comment at the LAUSD  November 14, meeting to make the board members aware of this situation:

"Walker isn't the only parent to raise a complaint about iGranada. At least nine parents have sought the help of the officials at the L.A. Unified School District who oversee and regulate charter schools, saying their children deserve access to Granada's traditional, brick-and-mortar classes, according to emails obtained via public records request and provided to KPCC by local public education activist Carl Petersen (who's long been a thorn in Granada's side).

'They look at themselves as a private school,' Petersen said of Granada. 'We don’t care that we get public money, we're going to do it our way.'"

My testimony at the Senate Education Committee Informational Hearing: Charter School Authorization in CA on October 23, 2017:

At its meeting on November 7, the LAUSD board showed who is boss: the California Charter Schools Association.

Carl J. Petersen reports here on the meeting.

The California Charter School Association (CCSA) paid millions to purchase the LAUSD School Board, but their narrow majority is in danger. Not only is Ref Rodriguez, one of their hand-selected Board members, facing criminal charges related to his campaign, but the charter school chain he founded has accused him of having a conflict of interest while he was their Treasurer. This, in turn, exposed the charter organization’s lax financial controls. All of this has caused a rare sense of unity across the education divide; both the Los Angeles Times and United Teachers Los Angeles have both called for Rodriguez’ resignation.

Having reintroduced the chaos back into the District that has been missing since the departure of Deasy, the charter industry played their next hand by blackmailing the District in an attempt to remove language that the LAUSD requires in each charter. If they did not get their way, 13 charters would move to the county or state where even less oversight is provided. Judging by the line of news trucks lined outside the Boardroom on Beaudry, the media was prepared for the November 7, special Board meeting to be full of drama.

“As a school of CHOICE, you CHOOSE to be here and are expected to productively and respectfully resolve problems. You have options. Clearly, you are either a very satisfied customer who appreciates the roles you have as an employee, union steward, parent, and committee member, or….”

- Johnathan Williams, The Accelerated Schools

Like the “America, love it or leave it” crowd in national politics, charter supporters will venomously attack anyone who dares to criticize the operations of these schools. This was exemplified by Los Angeles County School Board President Alex Johnson who defended the academic failures of one of the Magnolia Charter Schools by accusing me of being “against high-quality education for black and brown students”. The same false claims of racism were also used against former LAUSD Board Member Bennett Kayser, along with attacks based on his medical condition. A parent who is a frequent critic of the Accelerated Charter Schools was told that she should start “looking at the glass, the kids, the School as half full, and appreciating the asset and building on it”. Instead of complaining, she should “see the light and begin to operate with in [sic] it.” Life is much easier if you join the cult.

“Lunch Shelter Area that is structurally unstable. It is an immediate safety hazard and must be fenced off until removed or constructed to the District’s standards and applicable laws.”

- LAUSD Facilities Services Division

Within a period of one year, Granada Hills Charter High School (GHCHS) was issued two Notices to Cure (NTC) and one Notice of Violation by  LAUSD. These directed the charter’s administration to correct financial improprieties, enrollment policies that did not conform with the education code and construction projects that endangered the safety of students. Each specified deadlines that had to be met. While these deadlines have all passed, it does not appear that the corrective actions in any of these cases have been made.

 While the LAUSD School Board was evaluating the performance of the District’s Superintendent, Michelle King, District 5’s Board Member was absent. Instead, Refugio (Ref) Rodriguez was in court answering to charges that included felony conspiracy and perjury. This left his constituents, the victims of Rodriguez’ alleged crimes, unrepresented in the Board’s discussion and any possible action. Clearly, the charges against Rodriguez are more than a distraction, they are an obstacle to his performing the duties required by the full-time job for which he receives $125,000 a year.

“The following alterations are considered to be unsafe and use must stop immediately until corrections are made”

- LAUSD Facilities Services Division

The information within the unsigned letter sent to the “Granada Hills Charter Community” seemed innocuous. Framing the situation as a tenant/landlord dispute, Granada Hills Charter High School (GHCHS) said that during a routine inspection of the campus, the LAUSD’s Facilities Services Division had found “several violations concerning modifications to the campus” that “were not performed in compliance with [their] Sole Occupant Agreement (SOA)” with the District. The school had been given an “April 3, 2017, deadline to remedy or develop an action plan to address [these] concerns” [emphasis mine]. The only mention of the welfare of the students attending the charter was a seemingly random statement that they “always keep the health and safety of our students and staff as [their] primary focus.”

Notably missing from the letter was any indication that it was meant to fulfill a requirement that GHCHS notify parents that a formal Notice of Violation has had been issued by the LAUSD and that this could have resulted in a revocation of their charter. Nor was it mentioned that Executive Director Brian Bauer had been informed that the alterations in question “were a risk to the health and safety of your students, staff, and other individuals.” While it is true that GHCHS had been given 30 days “to deliver to District evidence of [their] compliance with the SOA or a plan to cure and timeline acceptable to District”, they had also been ordered to “immediately stop all use of the facilities identified in Exhibit A...for the health and safety of students staff and other individuals” [emphasis mine]. Finally, GHCHS neglected to inform the community that they were also accused of violating the law by “failing to obtain necessary review and approval of the plans for the identified alterations from the Division of State Architect.”

The following Letter to the Editor was sent yesterday in response to the Los Angeles Times’ article “L.A. school board member Ref Rodriguez faces conflict-of-interest complaint over $285,000 in payments”. Unsurprisingly, it was not published:

As the accusations against LAUSD Board member Ref Rodriguez mount, it is important to note that the charges are not new. In fact, they were meticulously researched by activists including Robert D. Skeels during the 2015 election and delivered to the Los Angeles Times. Failing their responsibility to the voters, the Times not only refused to cover these allegations, their editorial board endorsed Rodriguez. One can only wonder if this lack of coverage has anything to do with the Time’s own conflict of interest - the $800,000 it received from privatizers like Eli Broad to sponsor its education coverage.

According to your article, “PUC’s senior managers said they uncovered the transfers...while responding to questions and requests from The Times”. If the Times had done their job when the actual events were taking place the voters would have had this information when they made their choices at the voting booth.