 |
| Francesco Portelos |
Please read my prior articles:
Francesco Portelos and His "Victim Complex"
EDITORIAL: Cyberstalker Francesco Portelos and
His Blame Game Must Be Stopped
Re-posted from Parentadvocates.org:
Editorial: Is Francesco Portelos a Danger To New York State Tenure Law?
by Betsy Combier
Yes, Francesco Portelos, in my opinion as well as that of the NYC Department of Education ("NYC DOE), is a disgruntled, harassing bully. The evidence is available on Francesco's own blogs and websites. He is proud of being supposedly hated by the DOE. Why? Because he knows he is a messenger for them of "bad" teachers who need to be charged. Who are these "bad" teachers? Anyone who threatens the lies and misconduct of administrators at the Department.
When a teacher blows the whistle on principal misconduct at their school and has Francesco put the information out on his "Administrators in Need of Improvement"
Since I uncovered that the NYC DOE is using Francesco to go after employees who follow him and his hate campaign, I have been lied about by Francesco Portelos on his websites, called and screamed at by people I don't know and have never met (Francesco gave everyone my cell number, and told everyone it would be ok to call me and give me hell for doing what I never did), and he went to the extreme by lying about my husband to my husband's employer, to get him fired.
Portelos is an excellent hacker, and uses his skills to harm people he doesn't like. He wanted my advocacy to fail, so he accessed the back end of this blog and deleted everything on the right column that now is back. See the information on the right side of this blog. I did not have backup, so I tried to re-create what had been there as best I could.
Francesco then posted a video of a DOE meeting which I discovered under FOIL, (this video was in the deleted material from my blog), put "UFT Solidarity" on the video as the source, and posted his "3020-a Guide" online with the video and a caveat at the end telling everyone never to hire a nonlawyer, meaning me. I have been doing 3020-a hearings for 17 years, have written closing arguments and investigated more than 100 misconduct and incompetency, and have won most of these hearings by doing the background work. I work with attorneys.
For example:
Johnathan Hinesley, one of Francesco's group members, called me up out of the blue last summer and told me that he had been charged with 3020-a , and would like to talk about his charges. We met at the diner in Manhattan near me, and I stayed more than 3 hours answering all of his questions. I never charge a "consultation" fee, but he demanded that he pay for my tuna sandwich. I thanked him.
 |
| Johnathan Hinesley |
Then he asked me to read all his papers, and then edit a rebuttal he had written to Philip Weinberg. I agreed. He then told me to edit his Notice of Claim. I agreed. Suddenly, he paid me $500 for the work I did, and I thanked him.
I called him after the September 20 UFT Solidarity meeting at which Jim Callaghan spoke badly about me, to find out what happened (I wasnt there). He told me my name was not mentioned. Then he started screaming that he would be attending my 3020-a hearings with my clients, and there was nothing I could do to stop him. I told him he would not be mobbing my hearings, the arbitrators and the attorneys I work with dont like mobs. He was furious.
Then Johnathan demanded I give him the $500 back, because I did nothing for him. I asked my lawyer what to do and he said to keep it and ignore Johnathan...adding I should charge for my work.
Today on Linkedin, Francesco told my contacts:
"Ahhh Betsy...how many people have asked for their money back for services you didn't provide? They keep calling us and telling us they have cashed checks for legal advice. That's what this is about. So sad."
Actually, Francesco, how many people? Inquiring minds want to know. Legal advice? I don't give legal advice. I am not a lawyer. Take money without doing a service? Never in my life have I done that, and you know it. I gave this $500 to someone who needed help with paying for paper copying for his case. I give you an A for effort, though.
But think about it. A teacher, paid by public tax money, is given the right to teach children to threaten anyone they don't like, force people to do whatever he says, and lie about you through every website he can get on or set up. I think that Francesco Portelos is a liability for the NYC Department of Education.
Liability: a person or thing whose presence or behavior is likely to cause embarrassment or put one at a disadvantage.
"he has become a political liability"
| synonyms: | hindrance, encumbrance, burden, handicap,nuisance, inconvenience; |
If you are a tenured public educator or anyone who values tenure for teachers in New York State or elsewhere in the United States, you should be alarmed by the outrageous violations of confidentiality and the cyber bullying going on in New York City by Francesco Portelos and his group, called UFT Solidarity.
Francesco used to be an ally in the fight for change in New York City as far as how teachers are being treated. Indeed, I posted many articles about his being charged and found guilty of internet bullying and never admitting he was wrong, thinking that he was a hero and a fighter for all things good.
I was wrong. When Francesco Portelos found out that I do not agree with his vindictive retaliation of anyone who is rumored to be "bad" or who does not agree with him, and he decided to defame my name and my work as a teacher advocate by creating a video lying about how I am a "homophobe", I looked more carefully at the UFT Solidarity brand.
The Francesco Portelos Mob: Who Are They?
Here is what Francesco sent me on May 8, 2014, marked up with yellow highlighting and red ink by him, (I guess):
Francesco Portelos' 3020-a decision (dated May 2014).
I put this decision on my website, in one of the many articles I wrote about Francesco glorifying his work to undermine Linda Hill who seemed at the time to have charged Francesco after he found out she was not handling money correctly. Blowing the whistle on an administrator, or any public employee is complicated. The case decided by the US Supreme Court, Garcetti v Ceballos (see here, here and here). Teachers are public employees and their First Amendment rights were, it seems to me, limited to "a citizen speaking on matters of public concern".
I am not a public employee and not limited by this law. I still am not able to put on the internet lies about someone, and I do not do it. I never write about anyone or any case unless the person violates my rights, defames me or libels/slanders me and/or asks me to post their case or name on any of my 6 blogs and website. I respect confidentiality.
All decisions by arbitrators at 3020-a are available to the public, all you have to do is file a FOIL request to New York State Education Department at foil@nysed.gov. Just name the person or the arbitrator, and, if you have it, the year of the decision.
Looking at Francesco's arbitration decision now, which he sent to me, I am frightened by the implications of the sustained charges (p. 107) and his promotion of activities under the umbrella of UFT Solidarity. There are many similarities, and I fear that Francesco is deliberately putting other teachers in danger to mitigate his punishment of $10,000. He is telling teachers to do exactly what he was charged with.....the group which is most in danger is probationary teachers, who can be fired for no reason. Principals and APs may see your allegiance to Francesco as a sign of disrespect and insubordination, and fire you without any explanation. Watch out!
Here are the sustained charges for which Arbitrator Felice Busto found Francesco guilty, on pp.7-13 of the Opinion and Award :
SPECIFICATION 6:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent disclosed confidential Department information, including, but not limited to, witness statements, on a non-Department website, including, but not limited to, protectportelos.org.
SPECIFICATION 8:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent inappropriately accessed and/or retrieved Department information, including, but not limited to, a Department email account and/or email messages of another Department employee.
SPECIFICATION 9:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent inappropriately accessed a Department email account and/or email messages of another Department employee.
SPECIFICATION 25:
On or about January 28, 2012, Respondent, without consulting, notifying, and/or seeking authorization from Principal Hill or the I.S 49 administration, accessed the school website, www.Dreyfus49.com, as a site administrator and manipulated the settings to revoke the administrative rights and/or privileges of all individuals previously granted such administrative access.
SPECIFICATION 28:
On or about February 2012, Respondent refused to transfer control and/or ownership of the school website, www.Dreyfus49.com, to Principal Hill, I.S. 49, and/or the Department after agreeing to do so at a meeting with Principal Hill and Superintendent Erminia Claudio.
SPECIFICATION 29:
On or about November 2012, Respondent, without consulting, notifying, and/or seeking approval from Principal Hill or the I.S 49 administration, altered the website www.welearnandqrowtoqether.com, which Respondent had created for the school with Principal Hill's approval, to automatically transfer visitors to his alternative website, https://sites.qooqle.com/site/occupywarrenstreet/, which contained derogatory information about I.S. 49, Principal Hill, and/or the Department.
SPECIFICATION 31:
During the 2012-2013 school year, Respondent, without consulting, notifying, and/or seeking approval from Principal Hill and/or the Department, altered the school website, www.Dreyfus49.com, to automatically redirect visitors to his website, protectportelos.org, which chronicled his issues with various groups including Principal Hill, I.S. 49, and the Department.
SPECIFICATION 33:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent recorded a video in a school facility, namely, I.S. 49, of a student during school hours, without permission or authority.
SPECIFICATION 34:
On or about December 12, 2012, Respondent notified I.S. 49 Superintendent Erminia Claudio that he showed the video referenced in Specification 33 to parents, without permission or authority.
SPECIFICATION 36:
On or about and in the month of September 2012, Respondent:
A. Sent an email message to a parent without permission or authority stating, in sum and substance, that the teacher who sent their son to summer school was not certified to teach and that this message identified the teacher and indicated that her teaching certification had expired.
B. Failed to notify and/or confirm with I.S. 49 administration that the teacher referenced above lacked certification prior to contacting the parent.
SPECIFICATION 38:
By committing one, some, or all of the actions described in the above Specifications, Respondent's actions:
A. Had a disruptive and/or negative impact on students, staff, and/or administration at I.S. 49 and the Department.
B. Caused negative publicity, ridicule, and notoriety to I.S. 49 and the Department."
******************************************
Francesco filed an Appeal (Article 75) of the decision, but missed the 10-day rule by one day. The Judge in Richmond County wrote that he would not have overturned Arbitrator Busto, anyway. (read Judge Troia's decision).
The UFT Solidarity brand stands for all of the above, in my opinion. This is frightening.
Look at Specification #36. This seems to be the sustained charge that Francesco Portelos actually went after another teacher, and created a problem for her/him. Does anyone have any confirmation that this charge relates to the fiance of the IS 49 Chapter Leader, Dr. Richard Candia? The allegation rumored to be this specification was that Francesco wanted to retaliate against Dr. Candia for not helping him destroy IS 49 Principal Linda Hill, so Francesco went after Candia's girlfriend.
If anyone has any further information about this specific sustained charge, please send me an email at betsy.combier@gmail.com.
In any case, to wear the brand of UFT Solidarity proudly showing support for someone who would and could be so vindictive as these sustained charges show is, in my opinion, a badge of shame.
It turns out that Francesco is, in my opinion, the most vindictive bully I have ever met, and he uses his internet knowledge to gain followers to his cult, all of whom believe that it is their right under protection of the First Amendment to say anything they want about anyone.
Francesco used to be an ally in the fight for change in New York City as far as how teachers are being treated. Indeed, I posted many articles about his being charged and found guilty of internet bullying and never admitting he was wrong, thinking that he was a hero and a fighter for all things good.
I was wrong. When Francesco Portelos found out that I do not agree with his vindictive retaliation of anyone who is rumored to be "bad" or who does not agree with him, and he decided to defame my name and my work as a teacher advocate by creating a video lying about how I am a "homophobe", I looked more carefully at the UFT Solidarity brand.
The Francesco Portelos Mob: Who Are They?
Here is what Francesco sent me on May 8, 2014, marked up with yellow highlighting and red ink by him, (I guess):
Francesco Portelos' 3020-a decision (dated May 2014).
I put this decision on my website, in one of the many articles I wrote about Francesco glorifying his work to undermine Linda Hill who seemed at the time to have charged Francesco after he found out she was not handling money correctly. Blowing the whistle on an administrator, or any public employee is complicated. The case decided by the US Supreme Court, Garcetti v Ceballos (see here, here and here). Teachers are public employees and their First Amendment rights were, it seems to me, limited to "a citizen speaking on matters of public concern".
I am not a public employee and not limited by this law. I still am not able to put on the internet lies about someone, and I do not do it. I never write about anyone or any case unless the person violates my rights, defames me or libels/slanders me and/or asks me to post their case or name on any of my 6 blogs and website. I respect confidentiality.
All decisions by arbitrators at 3020-a are available to the public, all you have to do is file a FOIL request to New York State Education Department at foil@nysed.gov. Just name the person or the arbitrator, and, if you have it, the year of the decision.
Looking at Francesco's arbitration decision now, which he sent to me, I am frightened by the implications of the sustained charges (p. 107) and his promotion of activities under the umbrella of UFT Solidarity. There are many similarities, and I fear that Francesco is deliberately putting other teachers in danger to mitigate his punishment of $10,000. He is telling teachers to do exactly what he was charged with.....the group which is most in danger is probationary teachers, who can be fired for no reason. Principals and APs may see your allegiance to Francesco as a sign of disrespect and insubordination, and fire you without any explanation. Watch out!
Here are the sustained charges for which Arbitrator Felice Busto found Francesco guilty, on pp.7-13 of the Opinion and Award :
SPECIFICATION 6:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent disclosed confidential Department information, including, but not limited to, witness statements, on a non-Department website, including, but not limited to, protectportelos.org.
SPECIFICATION 8:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent inappropriately accessed and/or retrieved Department information, including, but not limited to, a Department email account and/or email messages of another Department employee.
SPECIFICATION 9:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent inappropriately accessed a Department email account and/or email messages of another Department employee.
SPECIFICATION 25:
On or about January 28, 2012, Respondent, without consulting, notifying, and/or seeking authorization from Principal Hill or the I.S 49 administration, accessed the school website, www.Dreyfus49.com, as a site administrator and manipulated the settings to revoke the administrative rights and/or privileges of all individuals previously granted such administrative access.
SPECIFICATION 28:
On or about February 2012, Respondent refused to transfer control and/or ownership of the school website, www.Dreyfus49.com, to Principal Hill, I.S. 49, and/or the Department after agreeing to do so at a meeting with Principal Hill and Superintendent Erminia Claudio.
SPECIFICATION 29:
On or about November 2012, Respondent, without consulting, notifying, and/or seeking approval from Principal Hill or the I.S 49 administration, altered the website www.welearnandqrowtoqether.com, which Respondent had created for the school with Principal Hill's approval, to automatically transfer visitors to his alternative website, https://sites.qooqle.com/site/occupywarrenstreet/, which contained derogatory information about I.S. 49, Principal Hill, and/or the Department.
SPECIFICATION 31:
During the 2012-2013 school year, Respondent, without consulting, notifying, and/or seeking approval from Principal Hill and/or the Department, altered the school website, www.Dreyfus49.com, to automatically redirect visitors to his website, protectportelos.org, which chronicled his issues with various groups including Principal Hill, I.S. 49, and the Department.
SPECIFICATION 33:
During the 2011-2012 school year, Respondent recorded a video in a school facility, namely, I.S. 49, of a student during school hours, without permission or authority.
SPECIFICATION 34:
On or about December 12, 2012, Respondent notified I.S. 49 Superintendent Erminia Claudio that he showed the video referenced in Specification 33 to parents, without permission or authority.
SPECIFICATION 36:
On or about and in the month of September 2012, Respondent:
A. Sent an email message to a parent without permission or authority stating, in sum and substance, that the teacher who sent their son to summer school was not certified to teach and that this message identified the teacher and indicated that her teaching certification had expired.
B. Failed to notify and/or confirm with I.S. 49 administration that the teacher referenced above lacked certification prior to contacting the parent.
SPECIFICATION 38:
By committing one, some, or all of the actions described in the above Specifications, Respondent's actions:
A. Had a disruptive and/or negative impact on students, staff, and/or administration at I.S. 49 and the Department.
B. Caused negative publicity, ridicule, and notoriety to I.S. 49 and the Department."
******************************************
Francesco filed an Appeal (Article 75) of the decision, but missed the 10-day rule by one day. The Judge in Richmond County wrote that he would not have overturned Arbitrator Busto, anyway. (read Judge Troia's decision).
The UFT Solidarity brand stands for all of the above, in my opinion. This is frightening.
Look at Specification #36. This seems to be the sustained charge that Francesco Portelos actually went after another teacher, and created a problem for her/him. Does anyone have any confirmation that this charge relates to the fiance of the IS 49 Chapter Leader, Dr. Richard Candia? The allegation rumored to be this specification was that Francesco wanted to retaliate against Dr. Candia for not helping him destroy IS 49 Principal Linda Hill, so Francesco went after Candia's girlfriend.
If anyone has any further information about this specific sustained charge, please send me an email at betsy.combier@gmail.com.
In any case, to wear the brand of UFT Solidarity proudly showing support for someone who would and could be so vindictive as these sustained charges show is, in my opinion, a badge of shame.
It turns out that Francesco is, in my opinion, the most vindictive bully I have ever met, and he uses his internet knowledge to gain followers to his cult, all of whom believe that it is their right under protection of the First Amendment to say anything they want about anyone.
On September 20, 2015, at a UFT Solidarity meeting at which I did not attend, Francesco edited a video of a speech made by a former UFT writer (for NY Teacher) Jim Callaghan (pictured at left) to make Jim call me a "homophobe" and make me look like I was a worthless piece of c***, hired only because I filed a FOIL request for the personnel file of the Queens UFT District Representative Rona Freiser. These claims are false, and both Jim and Francesco knew these claims were false. But the 50 people in the room on September 20, 2015 did not know that. Neither did the many listservs and international audience of the video sent out by Francesco with Jim speaking about me.
I asked Francesco to kindly allow me to speak about what Jim said, or he, Francesco, could post on his many internet outlets that what Jim said was not true, but Francesco refused. In fact, he got angry that I asked him, and said that the talk was not about me, so he wasn't going to alter anything, and stay away.
A friend of mine who was in the rubber room which I visited when I worked as a Special Representative at the UFT (2007-2010) posted on her website FidgetyTeach about Jim Callaghan, and suddenly Francesco went after her too. He told her that the reason he attacked me was because I had posted on my blog that Randi Weingarten had changed my life by hiring me to go to the rubber rooms of NYC. Francesco then posted on the listserv my friend started, confidential information about her, in retaliation for supporting me.
Evidently this is the way Francesco keeps people afraid of him. I am not.
The first no that I gave him, was several months ago when he set up a new business, EduFOIL, charging people for his writing Freedom of Information requests. I have filed more than 50 FOIL requests, and when asked by someone how to do it, I just show them my blog, or give them the format I use.
Then a person called me to tell me he paid $29-$50 to get the rating of his principal in 2013-2014, was denied, and then the anonymous people over at EduFOIL told him that he could appeal, for $60.00. But wait a minute!!!! Ratings of principals are no longer available under FOIL, so the person writing under EduFOIL does not know this? But is charging money anyway?
Then, on September 20 came the video saying I was a homophobe, which a person in Francesco's "cabinet" sent me. He is a gay man, and was very upset.
The NY POST wrote an article about his breaking into the confidential records of parents:
Teacher’s tweets threaten kids in tenure suit: parents
By Aaron Short and Carl Campanile July 8, 2014 | 2:53am
I asked Francesco to kindly allow me to speak about what Jim said, or he, Francesco, could post on his many internet outlets that what Jim said was not true, but Francesco refused. In fact, he got angry that I asked him, and said that the talk was not about me, so he wasn't going to alter anything, and stay away.
A friend of mine who was in the rubber room which I visited when I worked as a Special Representative at the UFT (2007-2010) posted on her website FidgetyTeach about Jim Callaghan, and suddenly Francesco went after her too. He told her that the reason he attacked me was because I had posted on my blog that Randi Weingarten had changed my life by hiring me to go to the rubber rooms of NYC. Francesco then posted on the listserv my friend started, confidential information about her, in retaliation for supporting me.
Evidently this is the way Francesco keeps people afraid of him. I am not.
The first no that I gave him, was several months ago when he set up a new business, EduFOIL, charging people for his writing Freedom of Information requests. I have filed more than 50 FOIL requests, and when asked by someone how to do it, I just show them my blog, or give them the format I use.
Then a person called me to tell me he paid $29-$50 to get the rating of his principal in 2013-2014, was denied, and then the anonymous people over at EduFOIL told him that he could appeal, for $60.00. But wait a minute!!!! Ratings of principals are no longer available under FOIL, so the person writing under EduFOIL does not know this? But is charging money anyway?
Then, on September 20 came the video saying I was a homophobe, which a person in Francesco's "cabinet" sent me. He is a gay man, and was very upset.
The NY POST wrote an article about his breaking into the confidential records of parents:
Teacher’s tweets threaten kids in tenure suit: parents
By Aaron Short and Carl Campanile July 8, 2014 | 2:53am
An angry city teacher recently sprung from a rubber room spewed online threats against the children involved in a lawsuit to end tenure in New York state, the kids’ parents claim.
Franceso Portelos, who was allowed to return to teaching even though charges against him were substantiated, darkly tweeted that another teacher should “look away” from helping the kids of Sam Pirozollo and Mona Davids, who claim tenure protects lousy educators.
“U need your protection removed so if you see a disservice to little Franklin P or Eric D u look away,” Portelos said under his twitter handle, Mr. Portelos.
He was discussing Franklin Pirozollo and Eric Davids, who are among students named in the suit.
Mona Davids, a member of the Parents Union, responded on Twitter: “ru encouraging tcher 2 ignore a child in need.” An hour later, Davids tweeted: “We are taking this threat very seriously.”
On Monday night, Davids said, “He’s targeting our children, my son.”
Portelos denied ill intent.
“No. It was a sarcastic tweet to another teacher,” he said Monday night, while joining 60 other teachers and union activists who showed up at a Staten Island Community Education Community Council meeting to protest the anti-tenure lawsuit.
Portelos also discussed the personal details of the student-plaintiffs on his blog site, protectportelos.org.
He posted a link to a New York Times article about another student-plaintiff in the case, Izaiyah Ewers, who is identified as having a mood disorder and acting out. The report also said the youngster’s mom entered homeless shelters to avoid an abusive husband.
“Really unfortunate story, but . . . Teacher’s fault?” Portelos asks.
Despite his whining, Portelos seems to be the epitome of the kind of teacher for whom the Parents Union is pressing the suit.
Even though a a report by Special Schools Investigator Richard Condon’s office substantiated allegations that he tampered with a school website, and posted student information on his personal website, a state arbitrator refused a city DOE request that he be fired.
He was fined $10,000, and some parents at Staten Island’s Dreyfus Intermediate School 49 defended him as a good teacher.
But the city Department of Education placed him in the absent-teacher reserve pool instead of reassigning him to Dreyfus.
Parents against teacher tenure say they're being harassed by educator
Mona Davids and Sam Pirozzolo of the New York City Parents Union say there were targeted by educator Franceso Portelos in an angry Sunday tweet.
by Ben Chapman, NY Daily News
 |
| Sam Pirozzolo |
Two city parents who signed onto a suit to end teacher tenure in New York State say they’re being harassed by an educator who backs the protection.
Mona Davids and Sam Pirozzolo of the New York City Parents Union say they were targeted by teacher Francesco Portelos in a Sunday tweet.
“U need your protection removed so if you see a disservice to little Franklin P or Eric D u look away,” tweeted Portelos, referring to to Davids’ son Eric, 6, and Pirozzolo’s son Franklin, 11. “Teachers need to be protected so they can speak up for any disservice to students,” said Portelos.
*************************
Now we see Francesco trying to shovel himself into the release of confidential information citywide in his new toolbox for teachers and parents, posted recently:
Special Ed Info
Our system is unfortunately plagued with countless Special Education violations. Our neediest students suffer and often times their teachers and paraprofessionals are gagged from speaking up. Although there are avenues to report such violations, history has shown us that none of the methods through 311, the UFT and State Education Department have protected these special ed whistleblowers.
UFT Solidarity is committed to assisting these members and children.
Email spedinfo@uftsolidarity.org and we will work with the administration, the UFT and DOE to remedy the situation while keeping your name a secret.
Steps:
Staff member or parent contact spedinfo@uftsolidarity.org with information on the alleged violation or concern. UFT Solidarity Special Education task force contacts administration on member/parents behalf. Five days are given to remedy the situation.
If situation is not remedied in a week, the UFT, school superintendent, deputy chancellor and 311 are contacted. If the violations are not remedied at this level, the NYS Education Department and media are contacted as well as Special Education advocates.
***We are also there to assist and help with ANY special educaton issue whether you believe it is big or small! If you have a SESIS question or a legal question etc message us!***
Who, Francesco, is giving the legal advice? Victor Jordan?
Frightening. This one person, Francesco Portelos, shows the world why tenure should end.