The 3020-a Arbitration Newswire: Digging Up The Garbage on the Rubber Room

The Rubber Room - West 125th Street

Please read my first post on the Rubber Rooms and 3020-a Arbitration, " Vouchers Paid to Arbitrators" to get a little bit of the background behind the scam of the rubber room process put into place by the New York City Department of Education (NYC DOE)  AND the United Federation of Teachers (UFT). Is this a conspiracy of harm? I believe so.

The Rubber Room - 333 7th Avenue

My blog posts are based upon the idea that the 'rubber rooms' are not rooms, but a process that unfairly, arbitrarily and maliciously targets employees of the New York City DOE for any reason someone in power can think of, and ends up in some kind of career destroying penalty without any accountability for the person who is making the allegations. So, anyone can make allegations about a person and hope that "legal" at the DOE will prove these opinions are true - often without any facts, and terminate the target without holding the person who made the accusations in the first place accountable for any lies. And so it goes.

The rubber room process could never have been set up without a lethal partnership or conspiracy where we see the NYC DOE and the UFT/NYSUT getting along by going along. It's all about politics, money, and control, and how collective bargaining rights can be denied to stakeholders who are forced into paying dues to a union that ignores members' rights to benefit management's pocketbook.

Rubber rooms still exist, although hidden, and the Rubber Room process of charging teachers unfairly continues.

Mayor Bloomberg rented the warehouses in each Borough of NYC (Manhattan and Brooklyn had 2 each) called the rubber rooms starting in or about 2003 (the RR in the basement of 335 Park Place started in 2008). The purpose was to put the prisoners of whim, the DOE employees who were unwanted by a principal for any reason, outside of the school so that the administrators could speak to the students, parents, teachers, counselors, or whomever, freely without the unwanted employee interfering or finding out who was talking to whom. The fix was in.

Rubber Room 335 Park Place, basement

When a principal decides that an employee in the school must go, he/she contacts the Gotcha Squad, who creates the Technical Assistance Conference memos (TAC) gathered from all sources to charge the employee. I filed a Freedom of Information request to get the TAC memos filed by the former chief of the 3020-a termination hearings, Florrie Chapin.

Below is the announcement of the 'new' process to get rid of unwanted education personnel:

"MEMO

_______________________________________________________

To:       Principals

From:   Dan Weisberg, Chief Executive, Labor Policy and Implementation; Michael Best, General Counsel

Date:    November 14, 2007

Re:       Labor Support Unit/Peer Intervention-Plus Program/Teacher Performance Unit

I.              Introduction

This memo provides details on the new supports being made available to principals to help you address already-tenured teachers with performance problems by supporting them to substantially improve the quality of their teaching, or, if this is not successful, by removing them. 

• These supports are being provided centrally without cost to schools.  Principals will not have to find funds within their school budgets in order to access these services, even where they do so repeatedly.

• Principals have full discretion to decide whether to use these supports or not.  While we encourage those of you with struggling tenured teachers to use these resources, as we believe it will relieve some of the burden on you and will provide you with the guidance you need, if you feel you do not need the help, then you are under no obligation to use these services.

• These supports are intended to provide guidance for you and reduce the burden on those principals seeking to obtain improvement from poorly-performing tenured teachers. Or, if such efforts are unsuccessful, these services will help you to effectively navigate the evaluation and discipline process.  The support personnel are not there to critique or evaluate the work of principals, nor are they meant to create additional work for you. 

• While we will likely seek more formal feedback later in the year, we would appreciate any feedback you have on the new supports, positive and especially negative, by e-mail to dweisbe2@schools.nyc.gov.

II.             Labor Support Unit (LSU)

The new Labor Support Unit (LSU) is staffed by experienced school supervisors, most of whom are retired NYC public school principals.  Their mission is to provide the first line of support to principals addressing poorly-performing tenured teachers.  Their primary responsibilities are: to provide guidance and general assistance to principals in developing support programs for ineffective tenured teachers and, where necessary, guidance on technical evaluation and discipline issues; to help organize documentation of performance problems; to conduct additional observations of teachers upon request of the principal; and to coordinate with the Peer Intervention-Plus (PIP+) Program and Teacher Performance Unit, as well as Human Resources and ISC counsel, on your behalf. 

LSU staff will be assigned to individual schools, so you will be able to work with one member of the LSU continuously. The LSU staffer will meet with you initially to obtain background information about the teacher or teachers and to review documentation.  Over the following several weeks, the LSU staffer will follow up with you to recommend an action plan for obtaining significant improvement from the teacher(s).  The LSU staffer will then help you to implement the action and assess its effectiveness.  If the teacher(s) do not show significant improvement, the LSU staffer will work with you to determine whether and at what point to seek disciplinary action against the teacher(s) and will, along with your attorney from the Teacher Performance Unit, guide you through the disciplinary process.

You may access the LSU in two ways: LSU staff will be contacting principals with tenured teachers with one or more unsatisfactory ratings to offer assistance.  Or, you may request assistance from an LSU staffer by completing and submitting this one-page form [LSU Request} and an LSU representative will contact you within five (5) days of receipt of the form requesting assistance.

III.            Peer Intervention-Plus (PIP+) Program

The new Peer Intervention-Plus (PIP+) Program was jointly agreed to by the DOE and UFT as part of the 2006 contract between the parties.  Under this agreement, the DOE and UFT have jointly selected an outside vendor, RMC Research Corporation, a national company with expertise in professional development, to assist with this important initiative. The project manager for the PIP+ is Dr. Sandra Kase, who previously held several senior positions at the DOE and the Board of Education, among them Superintendent of the Chancellor’s District. 

The PIP+ is, pursuant to the agreement between the DOE and UFT, targeted specifically at tenured teachers in danger of receiving disciplinary charges for incompetence.  Principals will have the option of inviting teachers in this category to participate in the program.  (If teachers decline the offer of assistance, this fact is admissible in disciplinary hearings.)  If they accept, RMC will assign an expert classroom teacher to work as a peer intervener with the struggling teacher for a period of approximately three months.  (During this time, school supervisors will be fully free to continue to observe and evaluate the struggling teacher.) 

The Peer Interveners will be neither UFT members nor employees of the DOE.  Their charge will be to develop a plan for improvement for the struggling teacher but also to provide a completely objective written evaluation of the teacher’s competence.  The Peer Interveners will also work with you during the process to get your input on the weaknesses and improvement of the participating teacher.  Because this evaluation will be admissible at disciplinary hearings, in the event the teacher does not improve and the Peer Intervener finds the teacher to be incompetent, this judgment will likely carry a great deal of weight in disciplinary proceedings seeking the teacher’s termination. 

If you are interested in accessing the PIP+, please contact Dr. Elizabeth Arons, at earons@schools.nyc.gov.

IV.           Teacher Performance Unit

The new Teacher Performance Unit (TPU), which is located within the Office of the General Counsel, is comprised of five attorneys who will be responsible for counseling principals on disciplinary issues involving tenured teachers and for handling cases filed under Education Law 3020-a against tenured teachers for incompetence. 

The creation of TPU represents a significant infusion of resources that will ensure we have the capacity to seek the removal of all ineffective tenured teachers who, in spite of receiving the time and support sufficient to allow them to substantially improve, won’t or can’t do so. 

TPU attorneys will also be involved in potential disciplinary cases from an early stage, providing guidance to principals on technical questions and on case preparation.

Principals who wish to seek removal of tenured teachers based on competency should schedule a Technical Assistance Conference (TAC) with TPU, by completing and submitting this form [TPU Request].  A TPU representative will get back to you within five (5) days to schedule the TAC. 

V.            FAQ’s

Q: Should I use these services in lieu of or in addition to services from my HR Partner or ISC Counsel?

A: In addition.  These services are intended to supplement, not supplant, the services being provided by your HR Partner and ISC Counsel.  In fact, all HR Partners are receiving additional training on addressing employees with performance problems, so they should be called on as a resource for these issues, as well as the full range of other HR issues.  Your ISC Counsel also continues to be a primary resource for guidance on labor issues.  However, where you need intensive help with tenured teachers with performance problems, the LSU can provide that help and will work in concert with your HR Partner, your ISC Counsel and the TPU to provide you with comprehensive, solution-based support.

Q: Can I use these resources for employees other than tenured teachers, e.g. Assistant Principals, Guidance Counselors, probationers, administrative employees?

A: Though the focus for these supports is on tenured teachers, and the PIP+ will address only tenured teachers, LSU staff can help you with performance issues involving all school employees, and TPU will be responsible for bringing disciplinary cases for incompetence against all tenured personnel.  However, your HR Partner and ISC Counsel should remain your primary resource for performance issues involving employees other than tenured teachers.

Q:  Can I contact LSU about a tenured teacher who has not yet been U-rated?

A:  Yes, though LSU will be dealing first with cases of teachers with multiple U-ratings and then those with single U-ratings, staff will assist you with all cases of performance issues involving tenured teachers.

Q: Who do I contact if I have a misconduct issue?

A: The Administrative Trials Unit (ATU) will continue to handle misconduct cases against tenured personnel.  You can arrange a Technical Assistance Conference with ATU by submitting this form [ATU Request].  For advice involving misconduct by non-tenured personnel, you should continue to contact your HR Partner and ISC Counsel.

Q: How does the new Peer Intervention-Plus Program relate to the existing Peer Intervention Program?

A; By agreement with the UFT, the new Peer Intervention-Plus Program is to be used for tenured teachers in danger of being charged under 3020-a with incompetence, while the existing Peer Intervention Program is to be used for teachers outside that category who would like assistance. 

Q:  Can I enter the classroom of a teacher participating in the Peer Intervention-Plus Program?

A:  Yes.  Unlike the Peer Intervention Program, there are absolutely no restrictions on your ability to evaluate or observe teachers in the PIP+.

Q: What happens if the Peer Intervener disagrees with my judgment about a struggling teacher?

A: Though charges can still be brought against such a teacher, it will be difficult to obtain termination where an objective third party has found the teacher to be competent."

Also out in November 2007 was the "Performance Management" Guide on How To Get Rid of An Incompetent Teacher" (p. 12), a mainstay of every Principal's diet, and, in 2008, former OLR Director David Brodsky gave a presentation on the Tenure Process and terminating teachers.

David Brodsky

I was hired by Randi Weingarten two months earlier, on or about August 23, 2007, to gather information and help support the people sitting in the RRs, or "temporary re-assignment centers, TRCs" as I called them (to distinguish the actual rubber ROOMS from the rubber room PROCESS I was going to research and write about in my book). Even well-known writers such as Steven Brill got it all wrong.

Randi put me in what she called the "SWAT Team" with Jim Callaghan and Ron Isaac, two reporters for NY TEACHER. Neither Jim nor Ron wanted anything to do with the rubber roomers, saying that they (the people in the RRs) "did not want my help" [Ron's words] and "they are all guilty, so I cant help them" (Jim's words).

Jim Callaghan

I didnt see it that way, I saw innocence until proven guilty and wanted to get all the information on each case so that we, the UFT, could prove the DOE wrong in filing the charges in the first place. I had, when I started at the UFT, no idea that the UFT was not interested in fighting for their members. Maybe I didnt want to see it. But it became clear to me when Mike Mulgrew took Randi's place, and all of a sudden my office on the 16th floor of 52 Broadway was taken (and left empty, by the way), some of my personal belongings went permanently missing (sound familiar?) and I had to meet with people who came to see me, in the cafeteria or the kitchen area. Eric, of Chaz11 finally told Leroy Barr after one of our monthly meetings that he had to give me an office. We finally found a group of empty desks on the other end of the 16th floor, where I moved my stuff and my computer was moved. Then the UFT lost my computer.

Leroy Barr

But they could not fire me, because I was doing my job, which paid me for 14 hours/week,  but I worked 60 hours/week, 46 hours unpaid. Laurie, in her post "If you knew Betsy...." was wrong about that (that I was fired, like Jim Callaghan). I was 'excessed'  when the rubber rooms were closed in July 2010 (see below), and gladly, I might add. Every second I worked at the UFT post-Randi I was hindered by the post-Randi crowd from helping any member. I remember the day that the Principal of 25 Chapel Street came over to me when I entered the room as a UFT Special Representative and told me that he had received a call from UFT Rep. Liz Perez. She had told him to keep an eye on me because I was giving "legal" advice to the TRC members, and they (the UFT) felt that no one should be talking with anyone in the room. He and I had a good laugh about that, but it wasnt funny. My job was to talk with the people who were displaced. It was frowned upon. I needed to move on, and start my own initiative, and I did that.

"Rubber rooms to close June 30

UFT signs historic agreement with city to ‘end fear tactic’ used against members

UFT President Michael Mulgrew (seated, right) and Chancellor Joel Klein sign the agreement while Mayor Michael
Bloomberg and Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott look on..

BY JIM CALLAGHAN | MAY 6, 2010 NEW YORK TEACHER ISSUE

The highlights

LINK

·         The rubber rooms will close at the end of the current school year.

·         As of Sept. 1, UFT-represented pedagogues who are accused of misconduct or incompetence will be:

·         Assigned to their schools to do certain professional or administrative activities listed in the teachers’ collective-bargaining agreement;

Assigned to a DOE administrative office to do administrative work consistent with law; or

Sent home with pay in very limited circumstances.

·         After removing an educator from the classroom, DOE officials will have 10 days to bring incompetence charges and 60 days for charges of misconduct. Any educator not formally charged within that time will be sent back to his or her previous assignment.

·         For those whose investigations result in charges, the hearing process must be completed within 60 days in most cases. An arbitrator would then have 30 days to make a decision. The number of arbitrators who hear such cases will increase from 23 to 39.

·         Some members accused of less serious, non-termination offenses will have a mandated process consisting of three hearing days.

·         For educators currently assigned to rubber rooms, arbitrators will work as mediators in an effort to settle many of the cases in the backlog. The rest will proceed to 3020-a hearings. The 3020-a hearing of anyone charged by Aug. 31, 2010, must be completed by the end of the calendar year. These educators will be given an administrative reassignment at their school or at a DOE office while their case is being heard.

At long last, the controversial Temporary Reassignment Centers, dubbed rubber rooms, will close on June 30 thanks to an intensive effort by the UFT and the city.

At a press conference on April 15, UFT President Michael Mulgrew, Mayor Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein announced an agreement that will see the rooms closed for good.

“The rubber rooms are a symptom of a disciplinary process that has not worked for anyone — not the kids, not the schools, and not the teachers,” Mulgrew said. “This agreement is designed to get teachers out of the rubber rooms and to ensure that they do not have to wait for months or years to have their cases heard. Most importantly, it removes a fear tactic used by management against our members in schools.”

Approximately 550 educators are currently assigned to rubber rooms; about half are under investigation and awaiting charges, while most of the remainder are going through the hearing process. Cases can take months or years to be resolved.

The agreement will clear the backlog by December, speed up the adjudication process and remove the stigma of allegedly bad teachers being removed from their schools and watched over all day by private security guards.

Most members assigned to the Temporary Reassignment Centers reacted positively to the deal, happy to be leaving the notorious rooms, one of which packed 24 people in 600 square feet in a drab Brooklyn basement.

A few were skeptical, given Klein’s track record, that the DOE would adhere to any agreement.

Educators in schools expressed a sense of relief that principals will no longer be able to use the threat of a rubber room. Some believe that principals used the rubber rooms to punish whistleblowers, threaten strong chapter leaders and harass those who claimed they were being mistreated based on their age and race.

Under the agreement, for most teachers who have been accused of misconduct, the DOE will have the ability to remove them from their classrooms and reassign them to administrative duties in schools or DOE offices for a period of 60 days while it investigates the accusations. If charges are not filed after the 60 days, the reassigned educator must be returned to his or her former school duties while the probe continues.

Once charged, for most educators, the 3020-a disciplinary process will now include 10 to 14 hearing days on the charges. Educators accused of less-serious, non-termination offenses will have a mandated process consisting of three hearing days.

“It will be a faster, fairer process,” said Mulgrew.

Despite inaccurate statements to the contrary, the DOE always had the right to give work to reassigned educators. The idea that UFT members enjoyed “sitting around doing nothing all day” was an absurd allegation used to portray the union and its members as protecting featherbedders and deadbeats, union officials said.

Before the Bloomberg-Klein administration, educators accused of misconduct or incompetence were reassigned to district offices to do work."

Of course this is all bulloney, as we now know.

Then the UFT and DOE got into a war over the number of arbitrators who were supposed to be hired to get UFT members out of their employment as quickly as possible (so happy I was not working any longer for the UFT!!!!):

Lawsuit

City Sues UFT for Failure to Assign Rubber Room Arbitrators

City Sues UFT for Failure to Assign Rubber Room Arbitrators

By Kristen Meriwether, Epoch Times | September 27, 2013

LINK
NEW YORK—The city sued the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) on Friday for what it says is a failure of the UFT to uphold its end of an agreement to increase arbitrators. The arbitrators were to expedite the processing of teachers awaiting disciplinary hearings, allowing them to get back to the classroom, or be taken off the payroll.

In 2010, the UFT and the city struck a deal to end Temporary Reassignment Centers, also known as the “rubber room,” which is the place teachers go to await the outcome of disciplinary hearings. The city had taken heat for the rubber rooms after investigations found teachers spent years being paid for doing administrative work.

As part of the agreement, the UFT agreed to increase the number of arbitrators from 23 to 39, a move aimed to expedite the process.

According to the city, the UFT has failed to keep its end of the bargain.

In a complaint to be filed today, the city charges only 19 arbitrators are on the books, well short of the 39 agreed upon. In 2011-2012 there were 24 arbitrators set, however, they were not seated at the same time, according to the complaint.

Arbitrators are appointed only if the UFT and the NY Department of Education can agree on the person. The complaint alleges the UFT and the Department of Education were to meet at least twice a year to select arbitrators, something that has not happened.

“They just keep delaying,” Mayor Michael Blomberg said on his Friday morning radio show. “The backlog keeps getting bigger. And it just prevents having a fair hearing for teachers who should be cleared of any charges, it allows teachers who should not be in front of our kids through incompetence or inappropriate conduct to continue collecting a paycheck.”

In a Sept. 19 letter, Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott said he would agree to 30 arbitrators, the minimum required from the 2010 agreement. However, the UFT failed to agree, according to the complaint.

Epoch Times reached out to the UFT for comment, but the union did not respond by press time.

Lawsuit alleges union is breaking promises in ‘rubber room’ deal

by Geoff Decker, at 4:26 pm, Gotham SchoolsLINK

A “big deal” forged to shutter the city’s infamous rubber rooms more than three years ago is getting dragged down by the city teachers union, the city charges in a lawsuit filed today.

Department of Education lawyers say the United Federation of Teachers has failed to hold up a key part of the agreement, which was struck with joint praise from Mayor Bloomberg and union President Michael Mulgrew in April 2010 to speed up the disciplinary process for teachers whom the city wants to fire. At the time, the city estimated it was spending $30 million a year to pay 550 teachers who were removed from the classroom and who languished — sometimes for years — in reassignment centers known as “rubber rooms” while they awaited a hearing.

A major element of the deal was to increase the pool of mutually acceptable arbitrators — from 23 to 39 — who rule on cases against teachers charged with incompetence or misconduct. But three years after the reforms were scheduled to take place, that number has actually fallen to 19 — while the number of teachers facing trials stands at over 400.

The lawsuit alleges that the UFT has repeatedly balked at approving enough arbitrators to hit the new target. Last month, the union agreed to invite just 14 arbitrators, and the selection process stalled entirely this month.

UFT President Michael Mulgrew has argued that the union cannot agree to the arbitrators whom the city proposes. In a letter to Chancellor Dennnis Walcott earlier this week, Mulgrew said the selection process would be faster “if the DOE would propose more qualified candidates.”

The arbitrator pool has also shrunk because the state does not always pay arbitrators for their work in a timely fashion. The State Education Department, which is responsible for the payments, recently reported a $2 million deficit in the “Tenured Teacher Hearing” fund, which is used to pay arbitrators in disciplinary cases.

A group of arbitrators are suing the state over the payments, including one who’s owed $200,000 in backpay. ”The reason many of the very senior arbitrators [sic] no longer do these cases is the state would not pay us based on the work that we had done,” former arbitrator Arthur Riegel told WNYC.

Perhaps as a result, few people have wanted to take the job when it is offered. Just eight of the 14 arbitrators offered the position in August accepted.

“Many arbitrators are reluctant to work with the DOE,” UFT spokesman Dick Riley said today.

As a result, the speed of the disciplinary process appears to have barely budged since 2010.The department reported in its lawsuit that there are currently more than 400 teachers who require discipline hearings with the 19 arbitrators, and lawyers said they expect another 150 cases in the near future.

The city said it is spending $8 million a year to pay teachers who have been removed from the classroom while they await arbitration.

Riley said the current pool of arbitrators would be “enough” if the department would consider using a less aggressive legal process called mediation. In that process, the teacher and the city first try to reach a settlement at a pretrial hearing to avoid starting arbitration. Union lawyers said that of 55 cases that went through this process this summer, 39 reached settlement without arbitration. In some cases, teachers agreed to resign or retire, while in others teachers accepted suspensions before returning to the classroom, union officials said.

“If the DOE was truly interested in in resolving cases efficiently, it would agree to our proposal to keep this process in place permanently,”  Mulgrew wrote to Walcott this week.

COMING SOON in the 3020-a Arbitration Newswire: The Destruction of Rights and the Permanent Panel; the DOE Prosecutors; and Ian Nikol, a Lawyer Without Ethics.

Spread the word.

Betsy Combier

betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice

Madness at 3020-a: Eric Fuller On Cheryl Smith Massena, Maria Elena Gonzalez Lichten, and 3020-a

Eric Fuller has already posted some interesting Youtube videos and a telephone conversation with Maria Elena Gonzalez Lichten, which I posted on this blog (available here, here, and here). He is, by the way, one of the few teachers who won his probable cause hearing with Martin Scheinman (on November 29, 2010).  He was then brought to 3020-a by the NYC Department of Education and Haydee Rosario terminated him. This is very curious, isnt it? well, there is no way that any tenured employee of any amount of years of service will get off with only a fine or exoneration if he or she does not testify in his or her own behalf, which is what happened here. Eric never said a word in his defense. Why this would seem to be a good idea I dont know, except that people rely on their attorneys perhaps too much. My opinion is, Maria Elena violated professional ethics here when she told Eric not to provide a defense for the allegations cited in his specifications. I have read Arbitrator Rosario's decision, and I must say that it infuriates me that an Attorney would give such advice to his/her client. This is my opinion, and I am not an attorney.

I am also angered by NYSUT Attorneys who force their clients to "irrevocably resign" when the charges are either absurd or bogus. If you are innocent of something yet the Department charges you, for petes sake, assert your innocence loudly, clearly, and often. Take as long as you need to say what you need to say about your charges, and leave nothing for conjecture. Dont forget to be "remorseful" that the Department made up the stuff about you.

Termination was also the decision reached in most of the arbitration cases in the Teachers4action lawsuit when famous scam artist disbarred Attorney Edward Fagan started the case in 2008. I knew Ed since 1998 as the person who stole the escrow account of my good friend Gizella Weisshaus, after she hired him to get her father's property held in Swiss banks. Gizella is the only survivor of her family who all died in Auschwitz during World War II. Ed's strategy was to sue the UFT so that all the NYSUT Attorneys would withdraw from helping the tenured teachers who signed up as plaintiffs. He was hoping to stop all 3020-a hearings. Instead, the Arbitrators went forward without the respondent there, in most cases. Almost every teacher/plaintiff who followed Ed's directive not to speak at the 3020-a in their own defense was fired.

Indeed, some arbitrators were very upset with the strategy of simply not defending him/herself. One arbitrator came to me during a break (I was attending another hearing) and had tears in his eyes. He asked me to please get in touch with the respondent, because he really liked the teacher, and wanted to clear her. He told me that if she did not return to the hearing he would have to proceed anyway, and then terminate her, and he did not want to do this, but he would have no choice. I had a mutual friend of this teacher call her up to tell her to get back to her 3020-a, but Fagan grabbed the telephone out of her hand and said "no way" and hung up. This teacher was terminated.

If any reader has a case brought to 3020-a where the Respondent did not present a case and did not testify in his or her behalf but won the case anyway, please send the case to me at betsy.combier@gmail.com.

Now, Eric has another post.

Coincidentally, I am "the public" at a 3020-a at this time, with Cheryl Smith Massena ("Cheryl") and Maria Elena Gonzalez Lichten ("Maria Elena"),  and they have chosen to retaliate against me for posting this information and, in Smith-Massena's case, the matter concerning Steve Ostrin must embarrass her. They are also lying to Arbitrator Stephen O'Beirne, the arbitrator in this matter. At the hearing Cheryl stated that as "there is a blogger in the room, (she said this as if she was spitting it out, as in hairball) Ms. Betsy Combier, therefore the hearing must be closed to all members of the public when the complainant, a student, comes in to testify." She continued, "this blogger posts names of children on her blog."

OMG, this is a lie, and she knows it. I have never posted the name of a child under the age of 18 that I recall, on my blog. Over the past eight years I have read the transcripts of every hearing that I have attended, and many that I didnt attend, and I could have posted the names of all the children witnesses, but I did not do this. The children that lie under oath are pawns of the adults who harass, force, or otherwise bribe these children to come in. I fault the adults, and names are not important. My goal is to publish a book on all of this and all the adults involved so that the massive repudiation of substantive and procedural due process will stop.

Several years ago "they" - the DOE Gotcha Squad - started accusing me of secretly taping at the 3020-a hearings. Now, arbitrators are reminded that they must "remind" the public never to tape or take pictures. I have never brought a tape recorder with me to 51 Chambers Street. Have I seen employees bring secret tape recorders? Yep, sure have, and I never tell.

O'Beirne, of course, would not want me to defend myself and speak on the record, so Cheryl had her perfect chance to say anything about me that she wanted, and not have me refute it.

I filed a notice of claim against Cheryl and her boss, Theresa Europe and will probably file a legal action. I think that everyone should file a Notice of Claim whenever charged with anything, as the statute gives you a year and 90 days to file a lawsuit should you decide to pursue the matter.
Why didnt I ask Maria Elena to qualify this statement? Five minutes before the opening statement by Cheryl at which she accused me of this "cyber-crime", Maria Elena was outside, telling me and the  three other members of the observing public, her own untruth. She told us that the hearing officer, O'Beirne, would close the hearing to us while the child testified, because there was a Chancellor's Regulation that specifically stated that no members of the public could be present during a child's testimony at 3020-a for privacy reasons. I took out my pad to write down which Regulation this was, and asked Maria Elena, "Which Chancellor's Regulation are you referring to?"
Suddenly, Maria Elena turned towards me and started screaming words to the effect of, "You cannot speak with me, ever! You defame me, everything you write are lies!!!!". I quietly said, "what, exactly, am I lying about?" and Maria Elena screamed "EVERYTHING!!!! Everything is a lie!!! Everything!!!!"
The three other members of the public were stunned, and admonished me for lying on my blog and upsetting Maria Elena. The employee/respondent was inside the hearing room, but she sent me a text message and told me that Maria Elena told her that she did not want to speak with me, ever, so "please dont speak with Maria Elena". We all - Maria Elena, me, and the three other members of the public - went into the hearing room, and thats when Cheryl was able to put on the record her lie about my blog. I would have left and not stayed at the hearing, but the teacher/respondent asked me to stay. I'm very glad I did stay, or I would not have heard the superb, brilliant testimony of the worlds most arrogant fibber,  "confidential investigator" Vincent Di Mare (is this an alias?). More about him in another post, he deserves his own page.

Mecca Santana, OEO Director

Most people who have participated in the 3020-a experience - respondents, observers, witnesses, lawyers, arbitrators - know that something is very wrong with the procedure currently used by the ATU and TPU "Gotcha Squad" (see also here) to force the removal and termination of tenured teachers throughout New York City. And dont forget that the Office of Equal Opportunity, or OEO, is also a "Gotcha Squad" and totally owned and controlled by the New York City Department of Education.

Principals, APs, school staff, students and their parents, come into the 3020-a hearing room, take the oath not to lie, and proceed to do just that. No one seems to care, and no principal to my knowledge has been accused of perjury for lying at 3020-a  (or grievance hearings, where they do not come in at all, but testify by telephone).

But most people, especially children, dont lie very well. All witnesses are nervous when they testify, but if you look at body language, any observer can tell when someone is not telling the truth.  If you study transcripts as I do, the inconsistencies jump out and are very easy to spot.

I remember the misconduct charges filed against a Queens teacher and his accuser was a middle school student with special needs. The student had trouble remembering what the truth was, yet was very proud to be at a hearing where people were listening to him. His story of what happened made no sense whatsoever. The arbitrator exonerated the teacher. A few days after the arbitrator dismissed all the charges brought by the "Gotcha Squad" I was at 51 Chambers Street observing another case, and I thanked him when I saw the arbitrator. He whispered to me that he thought it was the right decision, but he was punished for giving it. He told me that he was admonished by the Department, and then transferred to the TPU, or incompetency cases, where he - and everyone else - does not want to be.

After this case, the Department started asking the arbitrators to rule on closing an open and public hearing to the public when a student witness came in to testify. You see, when someone frames someone else, there are always witnesses that need to lie and lie effectively. The Department is worried that "observers" may see a person lie, and make note of it. Or, as students dont lie very well, they may get flustered when they have people looking at them.

Whatever motive you want to give to the Department lawyers and NYSUT, both no longer will allow an open and public hearing, or, if someone demands it, then they will ask the arbitrator to rule against having any observers in the hearing room while a child testifies, for "privacy". I believe that this new 'policy' denies due process to the employee whose hearing is on for that day

As I watch the people who testify and the Attorneys who manage them at 3020-a I am reminded of the wonderful lines Shakespeare wrote in As You Like It, 1600:
JAQUES:
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
The players are, of course, all those who participate in the 3020-a process - all paid to be on that stage for that show, the case presented for judgment. What needs to be told is the scam going on. Luckily for me and others documenting the process, the Department and NYSUT Attorneys are not careful with their lies and omissions about how this process is "fair and in accordance with due process", which it must be to satisfy the rules for 3020-a as discipline for tenured teachers. It's not.

For instance,last year a Department Attorney interviewed a witness for the case in chief of a tenured teacher, and told the witness words to the effect of "well, you really should leave now, because in incompetency cases it does not matter what you say, no one charged with incompetency wins" and "you could be in alot of  trouble at your school if you insist on testifying for this respondent".

Heres another example: In a case before Arbitrator Josh Javits, the DOE Attorney went to the respondent witness' school principal immediately preceeding the hearing date and told this principal that he needed to give her the entire file of this employee as she would be a witness at a 3020-a for her former colleague at a different school, and did he realize that the witness had received a "U-rating" and shouldn't he consider firing this incompetent teacher?

And then there is the case of the Guidance Counselor who was forced to take PIP+. Guidance Counselors do not write lesson plans, and are not trained in writing lesson plans. The PIP+ observer recommended terminating the employee for not writing lesson plans, and then the NYSUT Attorney would not give the Arbitrator the notebook full of notes, memos, reports, and writing of the hard- working Counselor, who was then terminated for not writing lesson plans. The arbitrator ruled that he, the Guidance Counselor, was incompetent and no amount of remediation could help him. The NYSUT Attorney never mentioned to his client that he could have an open and public hearing. When the Counselor saw me and a friend of his whose hearing was going on at the same time, and his friend told him that I was attending his hearing, the Counselor was very upset, as he was not told that he could have an open and public hearing by his NYSUT Attorney. Other NYSUT Attorneys have been heard telling their clients who ask for an open hearing, "No! You cant have one! The arbitrator will terminate you if you ask for it!"....etc., all lies.

Even though I see each arbitration as a play with actors and actresses playing their parts, it is clear that the NYSUT and Department lawyers do not want an audience at the show. When people know that they are going to violate procedures and/or not do the right thing, they try to hide. This is what is going on, I believe. NYSUT and Department Attorneys talk about cases before they are brought into the arbitration, and I have heard deals made outside of the hearing room that promote a certain settlement and/or evidence omission that the Respondent may not know anything about. The "permanent panel" encourages a chummy relationship which encourages a detrimental environment for a fair hearing. In many cases the same threesome that has been together for 3-5 years (Arbitrator, Department and NYSUT Attorney) creates a sort of collusion that does not serve the respondent well. As we all know, or should know, New York City is the only place in New York State where there is no vote on charges by a school board before a tenured employee is given the charges, and no three member panel is allowed. It is also known that an Attorney may not like his or her client and not want to work on the case at all, so ends up telling the client either "dont call any witnesses" or, "dont testify". The person who does not testify is almost always terminated - look at the Teachers4Action federal lawsuit.

Some players are better than others in acting diplomatic while the hearing is on. Take Cheryl Smith, now using her married name, "Massena" (Cheryl graduated St. Johns University '95C, her hubby Alain Massena in '97C, '00L). Smith is soft-spoken, and I dont remember her raising her voice at a hearing, but she is deadly to fair due process. She knows that I believe this, so every once in a while she gives me a dagger look, as if she would wish serious harm would come to me, soon, and quickly. I'm not bothered at all, and must say I rather enjoy sensing her turmoil at being nice to me while seething inside. Cheryl Smith is picture number 7, above.
I had the experience of watching Ms. Smith frame one of my closest friends, teacher Polo Colon, in 2006 at his 3020-a on bogus charges of incompetency. As it turned out, Polo was given all the TAC memos filed by the Department, as well as the letter from Superintendent James Quail reprimanding Principal Liza Carabello for the wrong-doing that Polo had called SCI to investigate. He was right, but the "kill the messenger" script called for him to be targeted, not Carabello. Carabello got a tiny slap on the wrist and Polo three months without pay.

 Cheryl Smith was, at the time, paired with Arbitrator Howard Edelman. The Edelman-Smith combination was the pair who went after tenured teacher Steven Ostrin in 2009, seven years after Steve was removed from his classroom at Brooklyn Tech and two years after Cheryl Smith and Gotcha Squad Director Theresa Europe sent the smoking gun memo to Eric Nadelstern saying that there was no investigation in Ostrin's case, therefore his - Ostrin's - case was closed.

All the worlds a stage, and all the men and women.....

NYC Erupts in Anger Against Mayor Bloomberg's Privitization of NYC Public Schools

The past seven years of Mayor Bloomberg's reign as Mayor of the City of New York have been designed to lead up to the privitization of NYC public schools with a workforce that marches in step quietly behind any and all policy decisions and with a mandate to disenfranchize parent/teacher/administrator opposition. Although the protests coming from parents, teachers, and yes, even the children who are part of the public school community, slowed down the take-over (and Bloomberg is not happy about that), now Joel Klein is ready to hand his boss the prize: a city full of public school charter corporations bubbling with no-bid contracts and children who have received a sub-standard education and, if a member of a minority or in District 75 schools, are capable of mid- to low level management positions in the businesses run by Bloomberg's corporate allies.



Racial, age, disability, and religious discrimination against people of all ages is rampant; special needs children are not getting their services and are being thrown out of their schools without due process; staff are being terrorized, and the "investigators" supposedly holding up the law are violating public policy by filing false reports on anyone who has been labelled as deficient in any way. It is a fact that every organization at some time has some employee who does something either deliberately or by accident and/or in error, that is illegal, or not approved under policy/law. The integrity of the leadership of the organization can be gleamed by the action taken after the illegal action is discovered. The Bloomberg/Klein regime holds onto power by guaranteeing immunity to everyone who supports the regime's agenda. You cannot prosecute anyone who is protected by the umbrella of immunity. The people to blame are the immunized administrators of the injustice being handed out, not the perpetrator, necessarily. A principal may threaten a teacher to do whatever is necessary to get a student removed from the school, and I blame the principal. (However, not all teachers removed from their classes and placed into a rubber room are innocent). We need to do extensive fact-finding to get to the bottom of who did what to whom, and this is what is not being done right now in New York City, and in the rubberized cities outside of New York, like Washington DC, Rochester, Chicago and Los Angeles. New York City is not the only place where educators have been sitting in rooms awaiting charges that may or may not be true.



Under the Bloomberg/Klein administration, illegal actions and/or improper conduct performed by people who are supposed to establish private corporate power in the NYC public schools are overlooked or treated as a minor event, with a tap on the wrist, if there is any consequence at all. If someone inside the corporate structure is actually hit with media coverage for wrong-doing, then he/she is removed from the position for a short while, and then brought back under a different title (as in the case of Chad Vignola, Tony Alvarado, Bruce Irushalmi, etc.). The most important part of the privitization process is the sustained success of The Coverup. Thus the city-wide disdain for anyone who speaks out or writes on blogs and websites. I've had my share of insults hurled at me by Joel Klein's people, and all of my four children have been attacked at their schools. I would not have continued my work as a reporter of corruption unless I had the support of my daughters despite my near-death in 2006 due to heart failure.

What does Mayor Bloomberg do when a Principal tells his people that a teacher/parent/staff member is asking questions? Below are some of the well-known and documented actions taken in retaliation:

* A child who cannot be controlled is suspended, to teach him/her and his/her parents/guardians a lesson (the suspension process is completely broken, is an example of outrageous racial profiling, and is driven by gestapo-like administrators who dump children into the school-to-prison pipeline);

* a students' grade is changed to failing or just above, to 'tell' the parent/guardian to keep away from the school affairs;

* a SOHO report (online disciplinary report that is part of the OORS, or Online Occurence Reporting System) is written on 'incidents' that never happened, and placed into the student's record - the one that the parent will never see;

* the parent is told to leave the PTA position that he/she has, is removed by force if necessary, or is told that he/she will not be allowed to enter the school building unless escorted by security;

* an allegation will be created, and the SCI or OSI "investigators" will go into the school to ask the Principal what the "fact" is that the Principal wants "proved". Then the "investigators" are given telephone numbers of parents of children who are failing in school or are in trouble, and they "interview" - actually coach - the parents/guardians - in what the case is about, then use this information to make up a story about the person who the Principal wants out of the school;

* a sense of instability and, in many cases, outright terror, is cultivated so that at any minute a person who works inside the public school system feels terrorized, hopefully enough to keep quiet and act like a robot to any directive.

The facts are obvious if you want to see them.

First, Joel Klein is not an educator, and he does not care about education policy, public school curriculum, anything to do with support for excellent public school management designed to encourage high achievement. Klein was hired because he is an Attorney, and he assisted the Clintons in Washington DC when the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky scandals shook the nation. Linda Tripp testified that Klein, who took over for Vincent Foster the day after Foster died, was the person who scared her the most in Washington. Joel Klein was hired to make sure of one thing: the privitization of public schools in New York City would take place, and the coverup would be effectively managed, and the general public fooled. In this effort, Klein was, and remains today, ultimately unsuccessful. But the effort to retaliate against anyone who dares to protest Bloomberg's policies still is constant. Last thursday for example, there was a protest of Bloomberg's policy of closing schools, and the protestors won the right in court to protest in front of Bloomberg's home on 79th street between fifth and madison avenues. Evidently the police took pictures of the protestors. The next step is to find out who each person was, and....tap his/her telephone line? Arrange for the IRS to review all past tax returns? Any and all of the above?

The office of civil rights Attorney Norman Siegel sent an email to NYC listservs enraged at the Bloomberg administration for the NYPD picture-taking:

For Immediate Release:
January 24, 2010
Contact: Norman Siegel at 347-907-0867, Julie Cavanagh at 917-838-6465

Parent, Student, and Teacher Protesters Demand Explanation

Last Thursday afternoon, January 21, on E. 79 St., across from the mayor’s mansion, parents, students and teachers peacefully protested against the Bloomberg Administration’s proposals to force mass closings of public schools and their takeover by charter schools. They were exercising their constitutional right under the First Amendment to publicly demand that these policies that undermine the public school system and deprive their children of an adequate education be stopped.
Meanwhile, a reporter on the scene caught on videotape the actions of police who were taking photographs of the protesters from the roof and inside a private school across the street. In 1985, the federal court ruled that it is illegal and a violation of civil rights for the New York City police to take photos of protesters, unless they have cause to believe that a crime may be committed. The city signed a consent agreement that year, restricting police surveillance according to these rules, called the Handschu Guidelines. In the case of this peaceful protest, there was no such cause. The video is available on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbNRt-5OZ68
The protesters are asking for a full explanation as to why the pictures were taken and how the police plan to use the photos. The protestors also want to know whether any videotaping of them was done. Finally, they are considering filing a complaint with Judge Charles S. Haight Jr., the federal judge who has continuing jurisdiction over the enforcement of the Handschu Guidelines.
Lydia Bellahcene, a parent at PS 15 in Red Hook Brooklyn where the DOE is proposing an extension of a charter school co-location, said, “Mayor Bloomberg and his cohorts can not be allowed to dismantle public education. I am outraged that there was this kind of surveillance at a peaceful protest of mothers and others. We broke no laws, and the NYPD should not be allowed to violate the laws for Mayor Bloomberg’s benefit either. The mayor and the NYPD should get used to these protests, because I and mothers across the city will be doing it again.”
Rachel Ali, student at Maxwell High School, said: “Major Bloomberg has gone too far! He is being undemocratic in his actions as if to say that he is an exception to the rules of this nation. Rules are created to maintain order and he has already broken the law by running for a third term. How much corruption can there be in one city, where the major can destroy the public school system because he thinks his way is better! His illegal surveillances are another example of his mindset. He thinks he can do whatever he wants and that the people of New York will simply accept his actions, but he is wrong. We will stand for what we believe in.”
Lisa Donlan, public school parent and the President of the Community Education Council of District 1 on the Lower East Side, said: “The illegal surveillance of a peaceful group of orderly, organized protesters is yet another example of this administration's autocratic and unreasonable rejection of the voices of parents, students, teachers and taxpaying citizens in this city. Mayoral control has already attenuated our opinions to the point of irrelevance; by treading on our basic First Amendment rights to gather and protest peacefully last week this Mayor has once again shown his true colors: they are NOT red, white and blue.”
Khem Irby, public school parent and education advocate said, “In light of the fact that our Mayor does not have the potter's touch to fix what he has perfectly broken for seven years, I request an immediate halt in these public school closings. The board of education should take the challenge to be more creative with the communities and plant the resources to revitalize those schools. This act is an admission that the job is too hard for him. Breaking the law is not the answer either.”
"This type of intimidation and undemocratic action by the mayor is the very reason why the community believes he is destroying public education. No matter how good the intentions, when one man shuts out the voices of the community, and believes that his beliefs should have special status above all others: whether it concerns first amendment rights, decisions regarding public education, or the legal use of the police force - it is a danger to the very essence of our democratic ideals,” said Seung Ok, teacher at Maxwell Vocational high school in Brooklyn, a school which the administration has slated for closure.
“The intense police force and surveillance of a peaceful group of parent, student, and teacher protesters last Thursday highlights a clear attempt by Mayor Bloomberg’s Administration to silence and intimidate stakeholders in education policy. The hallmark of this Administration has been to deny and disenfranchise the voices of parents in the debates surrounding school policies, such as school closings and charter school invasions. This is a clear intent to dissuade active participation in advocacy efforts on their children’s behalf,” says Julie Cavanagh, teacher PS 15, “We view these actions as a violation of our civil liberties and will continue in our struggle to protect our children’s public education system and our First Amendment rights.”

Additional contacts: Lydia Bellahcene: lillytigre@yahoo.com, 347-463-9809, PTA PS 15- 718-330-9280; Seung Ok: possitivelypessimist@gmail.com, 646-244-4468

People like Joel Klein have only disdain for the general public, especially public school parents, who, to him, are simply not successful enough to pay for private school. Public school parents are failures, and their failure represents stupidity. Their failure to make billions of dollars results in their inability to find out what Klein is really doing, and to write, speak, and/or put information in the 'main' media. Of course, everyone in the 'main' media are bought by the Bloomberg/Klein regime. (See my story on the misinformation of Steve Brill, and Success For Lucienne).



Teacher Hipolito ("Polo") Colon (pictured at right) sued Joel Klein after he, Colon, was threatened with termination at a secret Executive Session of the PEP on September 19, 2006. The PEP is an entity that was made up and it has no official executive or administrative function except to agree with anything Klein wants. All meetings are highly scripted, and Open Meetings Law is not honored. Panel members even violate their own By-Laws - Michael Best, Secretary, never writes minutes, as he is mandated to do (I know, because I filed a FOIL request for these minutes). Anyway, Polo Colon's crime was that he made a list of wrong-doing by his Principal, Liza Carabello, at PS 120 in Brooklyn, and called the Office of Special Investigations to come to the school and talk with him about what she, Ms. Carabello, was doing wrong. The investigators came to the school, but they came to get him, not her. He was removed to the Rubber Room by the Gotcha Squad. NYC BOE Attorney Tae Kim wrote the TAC memos. Later on, Mr. Colon received confirmation that Queens Superintendent James Quail had found that Mr. Colon was right about the allegations against Carabello, and he (Quail) put a letter into her file. She continues her terror at PS 120. (See my article on "The Gotcha Squad").Polo's lawsuit has survived two motions to dismiss by the New York City Law Department, and is currently before New York State Supreme Court Judge Cynthia Kern, the fifth judge on the case. Law Department Attorney Matthew Leighton sent Polo a stipulation that he could see papers relevant to his case only if he stipulated that he would never, never, never, show anyone these documents. Currently, Defendant Klein cannot be deposed, according to Leighton, because he is too high up in the administration, and he is the Attorney for the NYC BOE, and cannot break the Attorney/Client Privilege. Notice that I capitalize "Privilege".

Joel Klein also, I believe, has disdain for the Rule of Law. He has what I call the "arrogance of immunity" about him whenever he appears in public. He is being sued right now in many courts and lawsuits, not only Polo's case. Indeed, he was just sued by the UFT and several others for disobeying the law on reducing class size:

January 6, 2010
City Ignoring Law on Class Sizes, Suit Says
By SHARON OTTERMAN, NY TIMES

Despite receiving hundreds of millions of dollars to reduce class sizes, the city’s Department of Education has ignored state law and allowed classrooms to grow in the last couple of years, the city teachers’ union and other groups said in a lawsuit filed Tuesday.

The dispute stems from a lengthy legal battle that ended in 2006, when the state’s highest court ruled that the state was failing to ensure that New York City and other high-needs districts were providing all children with the opportunity for a sound basic education. The ruling led the state to send the city about $1.5 billion in the last three years, about $750 million of which was earmarked for class-size reductions.

But despite the new money, and a decline in student enrollment citywide, class sizes have increased, according to the lawsuit, filed in State Supreme Court in the Bronx.

“This is a lawsuit about broken promises to the parents and children of New York City,” Michael Mulgrew, the president of the teachers’ union, the United Federation of Teachers, said at a news conference. The lawsuit, which asks the court to order the city to comply with the law, was joined by several groups, including the N.A.A.C.P. and the Hispanic Federation.

Education officials dispute the charges. Average class sizes have increased since 2008, they acknowledge, but that is because of budget cuts, which have hit even as teacher salaries rise. Compounding matters, the amount of money provided by the state under the law, which is supposed to increase each year, was frozen this academic year, meaning that additional teachers could not be hired.

The state, the officials point out, has continued to approve their plans each year and provide the funding, known as Contracts for Excellence money. “The charges are without merit,” said David Cantor, press secretary to the city’s school chancellor, Joel I. Klein.

The ruling permits the money to be divided among six areas, including class-size reduction, middle school or high school restructuring, or full-day prekindergarten programs. Because large class sizes were found to “negatively affect student performance” in city schools, according to the ruling, officials were required to develop and fund a five-year plan to reduce them.

According to that plan, by 2012 the city will reduce class sizes in kindergarten through the third grade classes to an average of fewer than 20 students from 21; in middle grades to 23 students from nearly 26; and in classes of core high school subjects to 24.5 students from 26.6.

Instead, preliminary city data for this year shows that class sizes in the lower grades have an average of 22 students; in the middle grades, 25.8 students; and in the upper grades, 26.8 students.

City officials say that even though at least one-quarter of the Contracts for Excellence money has been allocated to class-size reduction each year, year-to-year gains are not required and only the final target number counts. But the lawsuit asserts that the city has not done enough to ensure that the money earmarked for class-size reduction is being used for that purpose. Part of the problem, the suit charges, is that principals may use the money as they see fit. In addition, the lawsuit asserts that in some cases, the funds have been diverted to counteract budget cuts.

Attached to the lawsuit, for example, is a memo that was sent to principals in May 2008 to provide guidance on reducing class sizes. It does not mandate principals do so; instead it encourages principals to consider the issue in conjunction with other performance metrics. “As you establish your goals for next year and decide how to align resources,” it states, “class size is a key consideration.”

The lawsuit comes as the teachers’ union is negotiating a contract with the city, and it could signal a desire by Mr. Mulgrew, the union president, to confront the mayor after declining to endorse anyone during the election. Among those joining him at the news conference were Scott M. Stringer, the Manhattan borough president, and Bill de Blasio, the new public advocate, who has indicated he intends to challenge City Hall more frequently than did his predecessor, Betsy Gotbaum.

Education officials say that whether the courts will accept the lawsuit is in question. The Contracts for Excellence legislation states that notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the “sole and exclusive remedy” for a violation of the law shall be a petition to the state education commissioner, currently David Steiner, whose decision, it states, “shall be final and unreviewable.”

Joel Klein has no contract. Education Law 2590-h says that he MUST have a contract. When I first filed a Freedom of Information request for his contract in 2005, and received back the letter from former NYC BOE FOIL Attorney Susan Holtzman that he did not have a contract, I thought this was strange, that something so simple could have been 'overlooked'. I knew what the law said, and I knew that Klein did not have a contract and was making $250,000 to be "Chancellor". But without a contract.

In fact, according to Michael Best, the General Counsel for the NYC BOE and Secretary of the Panel For Educational Policy, no one has contracts - not the Principals, Deputy Chancellors, Deputy Mayors, no one inside the NYC BOE administration. Best's point to me was, I guess, was to make it seem that the fact that Joel Klein has no contract was not important.

Well, perhaps it is important.

Second, a bit of background: Mike Bloomberg and Joel Klein expanded a fake curriculum, "fuzzy math", part of The Workshop Model, and deliberately sabotaged anyone really teaching it by not setting up adequate training and professional development courses in how to implement this program.

Then, when teachers were told to teach The Workshop model without adequate training, they were given "U" ratings and thrown out of their positions as incompetent. People without tenure were simply fired, while tenured teachers were sent to a room nicknamed a "rubber room" to await a hearing on their competence/misconduct.

Principals have been given the right to manage their schools any way they want, and this includes setting up a budget, handling personnel issues, admitting and keeping special needs children, and abiding by Title 1 funding, special education, and No Child Left Behind laws and legislation. They can do this Right Thing if they want to.

What we have to do is hold accountable those who corrupt the system, harm people, and use immunity to get away with crimes and misconduct. We need to write about these people and celebrate the alliance of the internet with the awareness that for too many years people elected to publicly-funded positions have promoted policies that do not serve the public interest. We must continue to challenge those who believe they can continue to violate the public trust and ask them to stop and listen to the buzz of millions of people visiting websites, emailing each other, blogging and chatting online about what is going on behind closed doors. We must promise to hold everyone responsible for his/her actions (factually documented and not alleged). I call this process "e-accountability".