GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Well, this explains a lot.

The ban of for-profit companies operating or managing charters in NY is another reform that NYCPA advocated and won.  The law is clear on this.  In the beginning, right at the top of the revised law, 

Section 1, Subsection 1 — THE VERY TOP!!! the law states:

   10  HOWEVER, FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS OR CORPORATE ENTITIES SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE   11  TO  SUBMIT  AN  APPLICATION  TO  ESTABLISH  A CHARTER SCHOOL PURSUANT TO   12  SUBDIVISION NINE-A OF SECTION TWENTY-EIGHT  HUNDRED  FIFTY-TWO  OF  THIS   13  ARTICLE,  OR  OPERATE  OR  MANAGE  A CHARTER SCHOOL FOR A CHARTER ISSUED   14  PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION NINE-A OF SECTION TWENTY-EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY-TWO   15  OF THIS ARTICLE.

I was trying to figure out why charter applicants with for-profit companies on their application would submit their charter applications to the Chancellor because HE IS NO LONGER AN AUTHORIZER then when the DoE finally advised the charter applicants that the Chancellor IS NO LONGER AN AUTHORIZER AND TO APPLY DIRECTLY WITH SED, less than a week before the applications were due; I thought hmmm those charter applicants now will apply to SUNY CSI instead because SUNY CSI has 12 charters left under the old cap which allows for-profit companies.

Well, now reading that it was the Chancellor, who is NO LONGER AN AUTHORIZER, that brought Arrow Academy (for-profit, less than 1 year old) company to NYC to make money in the charter management business.  I should have known better it’s not just that but he’s going to use them to challenge the new law that bans for-profit companies.

Well, for those charter applicants dumb enough to be used as puppets by the Chancellor and not smart enough to simply apply for one of SUNY CSI’s twelve left over charters – Here’s your notice from NYCPA.

Please be advised that this is our Notice of Intent to sue if you are granted a charter in violation of the revised law we won.  Your blatant disregard of the law to make and take money from our children will not be allowed without a fight in court.

Another day, another law that Joel Klein is trying to evade; what else is new?

Notice of Intent to sue? Maybe it would be better to finally put up a board of directors page on NYCPA’s slick, corporate website. And discuss the funding sources for the group, and talk about Carl Icahn’s role. 

So for some history:

http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2009/10/ps-15-teacher-calls-on-moaning-mona.html

Lastly, feast your eyes on this little bit of demagoguery where Davids plays the race card, making sure the audience knows that when teachers at PS 15 in Red Hook go home they don’t “go across the street to Red Hook projects.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1R_b4VOnI4

Yay Mona indeed.

Kristine: this is an obvious ruse to get around the law banning for-profit operations from managing charter schools. Don’t you think that it might be a good idea for DOE and the charter school industry to respect the law for a change, rather than defy it?

Kristine appears correct here. According to Mona Davids quotation of the law, so long as a for-profit company doesn’t operate or manage the charter school it should still be able to provide services to the school. We don’t have a problem with traditional schools paying for-profit companies for services such as curriculum development and teacher training, not to mention textbooks, copy paper, PE equipment, food, etc.

Ultimately it is the board of trustees that is responsible for the school, so I don’t understand why people are opposed to having the board pay a management company to run its school as long as it gets good results. Also, these for-profit management companies often have the start-up capital to afford a building, so the charter schools they manage don’t have to share space in public school buildings. It seems very short-sighted to have eliminated them from running schools, especially when there’s no evidence that their schools are run any less effectively than other charter schools or district schools.

Wow! Samuel, That was an interesting “Mona Moment” on YouTube. Thanks for sharing. When I read Mona’s comments I became puzzled in her thinking process. She advocates for charters, which were founded in the 1990′s on the premise of less regulation, choice, more autonomy, efficiency of dollars and the mantra “more learning for less expense” with community governance options through parents or citizenry at the school level versus the district level.

This was a significant change in the state laws of the past in the way education was regulated and we still see groups fretting over it.

Now she calls people dumb and issues intent to sue threats in another Mona Moment when organizations want to get involved in serving youths’ needs within the law, in the same manner that charters were established by using Per Pupil Revenue because they will or claim they will be able to help improve student learning (not just selling a company widget, mind you) for no more money, and maybe less than we are currently spending.

I guess anyone can claim to be President of something, but I recommend you know what your something is before you claim to lead it and use name calling and threats on the innovation concepts that helped trailblaze your existence. We can expect more from leaders than this type of behavior.

i know why you teachers is scarred of chartered schools… its cuz they gonna make you work longer hours, more days, hold you accountability, and they don’t like winny cry babies.

@Chris

The UFT doesn’t pay me anything or fund NYCPA.

Do you think the UFT would be willing to help fund NYCPA?  Are there any other organizations that you think would fund NYCPA and support our efforts?  Please let me know.  Any recommendations for potential funders would be greatly appreciated.  

@Mona Davids
Since you are dedicated to transparency in the charter schools movement, please tell us–
1) Identities of your Board of Trustees. How many are charter school parents? Were they elected? If so, by whom? If not, how were they selected?
2) Sources of your funding. You claim your funding comes from parents. I’m sure the readers of this blog would be interested in hearing about how your seed money from Carl Ichan and Co. fits in with your newly found populism. Will you disclose the amount? 
3) What changed between your visit to CEC15, in support of PAVE academy and now? Your defense of the PAVE school leader, scion of the Tiger foundation, is a second link between NYCPA and the hedge fund industry. Were you dropped by them? Does this relate to your recent alignment with the Haimson/UFT crowd? You might have these bloggers convinced, but you don’t have any fans in Red Hook.

Everyone is missing the point the chancellor has been doing what ever he wants for 8 years. He is not going to stop now because he knows the specialty of loopholes and grey areas in the law he is an antitrust lawyer. He will do as he pleases and say challenge me if you have the resources.

SED rejected all four for-profit charter apps today. One year old, Arrow Academy, invited to NYC and promoted by Klein to test the revised charter law was rejected.

The ban on for-profits is in effect!