GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

case closed

May 30, 2012

Judge dismisses suit against Cobble Hill Success Academy

by Philissa Cramer, at 4:46 pm

Sabrina Tan, a lawyer for Advocates for Justice, describes the firm's suit over Cobble Hill Success Academy at a press conference in February.

A judge has tossed out a parent lawsuit against a charter school set to open in Cobble Hill this fall, even as he agreed that the school could have done more to solicit community feedback.

In March, the parents filed suit against the city and Eva Moskowitz, CEO of the Success Charter Academies network, charging that they circumvented state education laws when they abruptly changed plans for the school late last year. Brooklyn Success Academy 3 — now renamed Cobble Hill Success Academy — was originally approved for either District 13 or District 14, but the city revised its proposal in late October and announced the school would instead move into a District 15 building.

The parents also argued that the charter network had not sufficiently consulted the local community before the school’s charter was approved. Their suit presented the network’s consultation efforts, which included gathering signatures of support and holding a handful of public meetings, as “feeble, bordering on a sham,” according to today’s ruling.

The State Supreme Court justice, Peter Moulton, ruled that the school’s move from District 13 to District 15 had not violated state law. And he rejected the claims that the Success network had not fulfilled the state’s community consultation requirement — a requirement that he said is “weak” because it does not identify who should be consulted, suggest a strategy for soliciting opinion, or bar schools that register fierce opposition from receiving charters.

“Petitioners are correct that Success Academy could have engaged in a more thorough-going canvas of the relevant neighborhoods in Brooklyn to surface concerns and opposition to BSA 3,” Moulton ruled. “However, the statute does not require that charter applicants conduct such an exhaustive survey of support and opposition.”

The decision clears the way for Cobble Hill Success to open this fall. Construction on the Baltic Street building, which currently houses two secondary schools and an elementary school for students with disabilities, has already been underway to prepare the site for the new addition.

The suit was “an unnecessary distraction,” Moskowitz said in a statement. “We’re excited to get back to the important work of providing NYC with a joyful and rigorous learning environment, training our teachers and opening our doors in August.”

A lawsuit against another school in Moskowitz’s network that is set to open this fall in Williamsburg is still open. That suit alleges that the network did not comply with outreach regulations, particularly around recruiting Spanish-speaking families from the neighborhood.

A suit that aimed to block a Success Academy on the Upper West Side last year was dismissed in mid-August after a judge ruled that local parents should have taken their co-location complaints to the state, not the courts.

The judge’s decision in the Cobble Hill suit is below.

Print Print
  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002397245457 Mary Conway-Spiegel

    Unfortunate; legal, but not fair, or ethical.  
    Why do these schools want to be located where they aren’t wanted?  How does this tension affect communities, children?  

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    As far as New York City schools are concerned, “community” is defined, in state law.  “Community School Districts.”  To pretend there’s not even that one definition of community in this context is baloney.

  • guest

    So we can assume that Success Academy is funding the construction on the Baltic St location, especially since the DOE routinely refuses to build new schools or expand existing ones, citing lack of funds. 

  • bee

    It’s truly sickening! It’s time for the politicians and lawmakers to come to their senses; to make laws that protect public schools from the predatory practices enacted by big business/ charters.

  • Kelly

    yes, charters pay for their own improvements of spaces that they use (and those improvements stay if they need to move location at no cost to the co-located school who will then get to use the upgrades in facilities) – but there is a law that states any project over $1k that is done in a co-located charter school, must not only be approved by the DOE but the DOE must provide the same amount of money to the co-located school for use as the principal sees fit… so basically yes – whatever improvements being made ( more than likely redoing of the bathrooms, painting, wiring if needed for the smart boards in each class, new flooring if needed, etc) Baltic is going to get the same amount of funds to be used for anything they need.  As for the non-comunity reach garbage, it’s crap.  There is video up of a community meeting Ms Moskowitz held in the area where she wasn’t even allowed to speak because people were screaming and yelling at her about things the media and the UFT and other opponents of charters have said.  So there wasn’t even a chance for her to explain the school, how it works and to allow for questions to be asked.  You can see that there were many people there waiting patiently to listen and ask about concerns they had, but the few (yet again) destroyed that for the many.  It’s time for people to stop fighting proven successful ways of teaching and spend that energy fighting the DOE and the UFT to provide an amazing education for ALL of this cities children.

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    You’re saying that the judge overlooked a definition of “community” as “community school districts”? Where is this definition? 

  • El Diablo

    Kelly, with all due respect, you seem like a charter school flak. When Eva’s charter schools start abiding by the same laws that all public schools must abide by you might have a leg to stand on here. She is known to cream her crop. She does not pay rent in spaces she TAKES OVER. She is, by all accounts, a disgusting human being who should not be near an educational facility. There are many wonderful charter schools in NYS, none of which are owned by that hussy Moscowitz.

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    Eva Moskowitz is a “hussy”? Who are you, Rush Limbaugh?  Unbelievable. 

  • El Diablo

    The definition of hussy is an impudent or immoral woman. Both of those classifications fit her perfectly. She is in the pocket of big business (immoral) and has shown ZERO respect (impudent) for the parents of the students, and students, she shoves her schools into. Therefore, she is a hussy. I don’t understand your Rush Limbaugh reference. I did not call her a slut. Please don’t distract from the argument at hand. Eva does not run a respectable organization. The fact that she has the support of wealthy people does not make it right.

  • Jim Devor

     Virtually everything written by Kelly above is false.  While the Education Law DOES require matching funds to other schools in the bldg, the statute does not explicitly require that the Charter pay for ANY of the “improvements”, – either for the other schools OR EVEN ITS OWN.  That’s exactly what happened at Upper West Success – the City was put into a hole for approx $3 million AFTER IT HAD ALREADY spent almost $18 million in improvements in the Brandeis HS bldg.

    As to the meeting in question, Kelly again speaks falsely.  I was there and as I said before, I’ve seen worse heckling at Wimbledon tennis matches.  She has it exactly backwards.  When Eva asked the audience who among them would be interested sending their children to her Charter School, less than ten out of the 50-60 people present raised their hands.  It was only after that when Eva Eva decided  she would not continue. She thereby revealed that she had NO interest in going forward in a venue she did not totally control.  Sort of like how her entire racket works.

  • Jim Devor

    According to the judge, the case was barred by the statute of limitations.  He rationalizes this by asserting the “cause of action” accrued when the Regents approved the charter in September, 2011 – i.e., BEFORE ANY PUBLIC DISCLOSURE (never mind any actual determination)  THAT THE CHARTER SCHOOL WOULD BE LOCATED IN DISTRICT 15.  Ironically, had the lawsuit been brought before the PEP vote, then it would have undoubtedly dismissed as premature.  This is nothing less than outright judicial sophistry. 

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    El Diablo:  I’ll take your response at face value and conclude that you actually don’t know the meaning of the word “hussy.”   Everybody misuses words now and then, so there’s no shame in it.  The best way to learn what words mean is to read a lot.  That way you can see how it’s used in various contexts and time periods.  If you’re not a native speaker or otherwise don’t have a great facility with English, be careful with dictionaries or thesauruses.  Consult more than one whenever possible, and be sure to look at alternate meanings to get a fuller sense of the word.  The Oxford English Dictionary is a great etymological resource, but unfortunately it’s not cheap, although it is online these days.

    Anyway, here’s what you need to know about the word “hussy”: (1) it’s derogatory; (2) it’s only used to describe a woman; (3) it’s used to suggest (or assert) that the woman it describes is sexually promiscuous, whether as an amateur or a professional.  Remember these points if you happen upon a dictionary that includes “immoral” or “impudent” among the definitions of “hussy.”  A hussy is immoral because she is unchaste, not because she is dishonest.  A hussy is impudent because she does not exhibit feminine modesty, not because her charter school is co-located with a public school.  (And yes, it’s sexist.) If you take a few minutes to browse through synonyms and related words for “hussy,” you’ll get the idea.

    For all these reasons, hussy isn’t a term that you want to use if your object is to present an argument that people will see as something other than an insult on a message board.  On the other hand, if you were going for the latter effect, I apologize for this distraction, because you nailed it.

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    The judge found that the action accrued on October 4, 2011, when the Regents announced that they had approved the charter, but before the DOE announced the proposal to locate in D15.  Seems to me that the petitioners bit off more than they could chew by seeking to bar the school from opening *anywhere*, rather than just in D15.  That put the focus on the disclosure of the charter approval, rather than the D15 location.  Anyway, the judge (oddly) went on to rule against the petitioners on the merits, so he didn’t need “judicial sophistry” to dismiss the case. 

  • Pogue

     What’s the definition of a blowhard?

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Where I said:  “State law.”

    “* § 2590-c. Composition of community district education councils. 1.
    Each community district shall be governed by a community district
    education council. The community councils shall consist of eleven voting
    members and one non-voting member, as follows:”

    http://law.onecle.com/new-york/education/EDN12590-C_2590-C.html

  • EP

    insidecolocation.tumblr.com

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    Ok, I’m not sure what you’re thinking on this.  That’s not a definition (of “community” or anything else). But I do think the court’s interpretation of “community” in section 2852(7)(b) has the effect of rendering the requirement of “an analysis of the community support for” NYC charter school re-locations meaningless, which is sufficient reason for the court to have read “community support” as “community support in District 15.”

  • Michael M. (parent still)

     Meaningless? What?  The section you reference SPECIFICALLY says “school district.”  NYC is a collection of THIRTY-TWO such districts, in the eyes of state law.

    “Community” school districts have boundaries.  The law respects them as drawn.  Not sure when they were so drawn, but they exist, and are respected, and the law reflects that.  It is the community – in that context – whose feedback the charter should be held to account for having solicited, or failed to have so solicited.

    Getting backing in Community X to install a charter in Community Y is ridiculous, and mocks the letter and intent of the law.

    As to section 2852(7)(b):
    ”
    7. (a) A revision of a charter shall be made only upon the approval of
    the charter entity and the board of regents in accordance with the
    provisions of subdivisions five-a and five-b of this section.

    (b) When a revision of a charter involves the relocation of a charter
    school to a different school district, the proposed new school district
    shall be given at least forty-five days notice of the proposed
    relocation. In addition, the applicant shall provide an analysis of the
    community support for such relocation and of the projected programmatic
    and fiscal impact of the charter school on the proposed new school
    district of location and other public and nonpublic schools in the area.”First, that’s specific to a r-e-l-o-c-a-t-i-o-n. Which implies an existing school. At issue here is a NEW school. Second, where’s the 45 day notice involving the “new school district?”So, the school did not consult, did not consult with the appropriate district.Not sure why you’re so argumentative on this. Lawmakers intended a heckuva lot more local consultation than occurred. The judge quibbled over the “who” and “how,” but that is secondary to the “where”, if the “where” was ELSEWHERE.

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    I’m saying that the judge’s interpretation of the term “community” in the provision at issue to mean anything other than “community school district” has the effect of rendering the provision meaningless. A hornbook rule of contract construction is that if your reading of any provision makes that provision meaningless, then it’s a bad reading. I would think you’d agree with me, or at least like that result, but who knows.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Agreed.

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

9 comments so far today
View all comments »

RSS Feeds

Newsroom posts Community posts All GothamSchools content

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Copyright Notice