“Federal agents raided the offices of a network of Los Angeles charter schools Wednesday as part of an ongoing investigation into allegations of fraud and fiscal mismanagement.”

- Los Angeles Times, 1/25/17

Exempting charters “from many of the regulations that govern traditional schools” was supposed to be a way to remove barriers to innovation. Unfortunately, this also provided a way for unscrupulous operators to profit from education funds. As an example, the principal of El Camino Real Charter High School got caught charging “first-class airfare and luxury hotel rooms” and personal charges on his school credit card was “punished” with a $215k severance payout. Granada Hills Charter High School made unauthorized transfers from its Associated Student Body bank account. The latest example may be the Celerity Educational Group, which was raided today by federal agents.

“We cannot truly have the impact charters were intended to have - to reinvent public education - if we do not close those charters that have demonstrated an inability to meet the challenge of excellence and chronically underperform.”

- California Charter School Association (CCSA)

According to the statistics provided by the CCSA, View Park Middle School (VPMS) appears to be accelerating towards failure. In 2015, the charter’s Similar Students Rank was a mediocre four out of ten. Last year, it dropped to a one out of ten. Included in a “Findings of Fact” dated January 10, 2017, the LAUSD Charter School Division (CSD) noted that, on the 2014-15 SBAC assessment, only 5% of VPMS’ students met or exceeded the performance standards in math. In 2015-2016, this dropped to 3%. In both years, 0% of students with disabilities met or exceeded these standards. These statistics are part of the reason that the CSD found that VPMS “has presented an unsound educational program” and recommended that the LAUSD Board deny its renewal petition. With a 4-3-0 vote, the Board ignored this recommendation and the charter will continue to operate.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”

- George Santayana

It has been more than two years since LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy was forced to resign in disgrace. Unfortunately, the legacy that he has left for the District’s students echoes into the present day. After spending at least $189 million on the “disastrous” MiSiS computer system, there are still reports of problems with its functionality. His $1.3 billion failed iPad program wasted scarce education dollars as the District faces bankruptcy. The culture of bullying that Deasy propagated may end up costing the District $1 billion and the opportunity for outside lawyers to rack up plenty of billable hours.

“Through admissions policies that exclude vulnerable students by erecting various barriers to entry, charter schools have the potential to create a two-tiered system of public education.”

- ACLU and Public Advocates

The LAUSD Charter School Division (CSD) says that “a review of charter school pre- and post-enrollment forms is part of our oversight process”.  It is, therefore, unclear how these regulators missed the fact that both Granada Hills Charter High School (GHCHS) and El Camino Real Charter High School (ECRCHS) have admission requirements that appear to violate LAUSD policy, their respective charters, the California Education Code and federal law. These organizations rely on public funds to operate but appear to be screening out students who should have a right to attend. Some examples of this cherry-picking are as follows:

“Thanks to all the effective voices that made this possible for our youth!”

- Mónica García, 12/14/16

During last week’s LAUSD meeting, the Board suddenly reversed course and abandoned a carefully compromised plan that would have slowly returned the beginning of the school year closer to its traditional Labor Day start. Without a warning to the parents who had been pushing for this change, they rejected the calendar that they told Superintendent Michelle King to craft last September and told her to start over again with the schedule that is already in place. After the vote, Board member García took to Twitter to thank “all the effective voices that made this possible for our youth!”, ignoring the fact that she had effectively silenced all other voices through her parliamentary maneuvers. Those who had celebrated their advocacy for change just a few months ago only found out about the reversal in the next morning’s news reports. Once again parents’ voices had not been heard during the deliberative process of the LAUSD Board.

“Ex-charter school chief gets $215K after resigning in wake of spending controversy”

- Los Angeles Daily News, 11/30/16

The administration at El Camino Real Charter High School (ECRCHS) admits that David Fehte charged “more than $6,000” in personal charges on his school-issued credit card. An investigation by the Los Angeles Daily News found that “over the two years, Fehte charged more than $100,000 to the card”, including “$15,500 at Monty’s” Prime Steaks & Seafood and “first-class airfare and luxury hotel rooms”. The LAUSD Charter School Division found that the school had “no policy for Credit Card use” and issued a Notice to Cure on October 28, 2015. Almost a year later the “CSD still had ongoing concerns regarding the capacity and accountability of the Charter School, the charter organization, and its governing board, to operate ECRCHS effectively and in compliance with applicable laws and the terms of its charter”. The LAUSD Board scheduled a hearing to discuss Notice of Intent to Revoke ECRCHS’ charter.

Disruptive Person Letters (DPL) are issued by principals within the LAUSD when someone interferes with the ability “to maintain a safe campus free of disruption.” There is concern among parents that in addition to protecting against “behavior that poses a danger to staff or students”, these letters are also being used to retaliate against those who question a school’s implementation of policy. For this reason, they are better known as Disruptive Parent Letters. On November 22, 2016, the LAUSD’s Early Childhood and Parent Engagement Committee held a hearing on improving the DPL policy. The following is a copy of my testimony before this committee:

I have heard it stated a couple of times today that these “Disruptive Person Letters” are rare. Truthfully, we have no way of knowing that. I issued a Public Records Act request in August of 2015, and I asked for any email, memo or letter containing the language that is found in these letters. In response, I was told that the District does not capture “specific data on disruptive parent letters.” On September 28, 2015, I was told that “this information is not captured at this time.”

If Mónica García has grown weary of the LAUSD, then why doesn’t she step aside for someone who is willing to serve the students?

In the months leading up to the March 7, 2017, LAUSD election, incumbent Mónica García has made some questionable comments about the children that she is supposed to represent. For example, in March she suggested that students requiring special education services are not “our own kids”, excluding 12.7% of the LAUSD’s population. Then in September she said that “our biggest problem is that most of our kids, all of our kids, can’t read.” If this statement is true, then García has little to show for the ten years that she has spent on the Board. More likely, this represents her disdain for the teachers of the District and their ability to succeed despite the obstacles that she has put in their way.

The LAUSD’s goal of “parent and community engagement” is stated in black and white on the District’s website. Unfortunately, the District’s actions often speak louder than those words. As an example, when the parents of children with severe special education needs lost the first round of a court case against the District, a press release stated that it was “a civil rights victory for our students”, as if these children needed to be protected from their parents. A higher court overruled this decision, but last June Mónica García and the rest of the LAUSD School Board voted to continue the court fight. Sitting across from each other in a courtroom does not count as “engagement.”

On November 16, 2016, the Office of the Independent Monitor held its semi-annual public hearings about the services provided by the LAUSD to students with special education needs. The following is a copy of my testimony before Dr. Rostetter:

When I saw your reaction to Adam’s speech, it gave me something that I haven’t had in a long time at these meetings and that is hope. It showed that you really care about what happens to our children. But Adam shouldn’t be the exception to the rule. Instead, the LAUSD shows hostility towards special education.

Mónica García said in a Board meeting just a few months ago that “I’m not about defunding special ed, I just know that we have a serious issue to how can we serve our own kids.”