Principal From Hell Strikes Again: Howard Kwait, John Bowne High School

Howard Kwait

I know a teacher undergoing his "trial" (3020-a) right now, whom I believe was falsely accused by the principal, Howard Kwait. When this teacher was removed from his school and criminalized like so many other innocent victims of the Bloomberg-Klein-Black-Walcott regime, where was the outrage?

Principal Kwait made a huge error in allowing an arrest of the daughter of a diplomat from India, but he also made the false claims process of the Gotcha Squad an international issue. Krittika Biswas was accused of sending obscene emails to her teacher. Of course there was no real "investigator" on hand to ask what the facts in the case really were before arresting her, happens every day to an unsuspecting teacher. Now, the improper and scandalous violation of rights is international. Perhaps something will change? Richard Condon and his riot police may be investigated? It's certainly  time for that to occur.

Why cant the press expose principals who terrorize New York City public school teachers?

Round-Up: The Strange Case of Krittika Biswas
Wall Street Journal
LINK

India’s media erupted with indignation today over the case of Krittika Biswas, the daughter of an Indian diplomat serving at the Indian Consulate General in Manhattan, who claims she was wrongfully arrested after being falsely accused of sending obscene emails to her school teacher, according to reports.

The 18-year-old was reportedly kept in custody for more than 24 hours on Feb. 8 and also was sent for more than a month to a special suspension program by her school despite being cleared by investigators. She filed a notice of claim May 6 saying that she is suing New York City, among others, for $1.5 million.

Ms. Biswas had reportedly tried to claim diplomatic immunity. But a U.S. State Department spokesman, Mark Toner, was quoted by NDTV as saying that the immunity does not extend to family members of diplomats.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. embassy in New Delhi said in an emailed statement: “We are aware of press reporting regarding filing of a lawsuit by the daughter of an Indian consular officer. However we have no comment on this ongoing litigation.”

The Deccan Herald reported that Krittika felt ill-treated in custody, saying: “Krittika alleged that she was not allowed to use the bathroom for a long-time”. It added some other unsavory details, “that she couldn’t drink water from a water fountain because it had another person’s vomit, and although it was really cold, she could not use the blanket because it was really dirty.”

In addition to the lawsuit, the girl’s lawyer also suggested that the City’s mayor, Michael R. Bloomberg, give her a key to the freedom of the city. But Mr. Bloomberg seemed unlikely to grant the request, according to The New York Post (which, like The Wall Street Journal, is owned by News Corp.)

Ms. Biswas is gaining some support for her plight on Facebook. A group called “’Krittika Biswas’-Price of Every Tear Will Be Paid” was set up this morning. The group as of Thursday afternoon had 86 “likes.” But it remains to be seen what broader ramifications her case may have. “We don’t know if such strange kind of events will really have an impact on India-U.S. relations,” said one Indian official.

Indian diplomat's daughter claims she was falsely arrested for obscene emails

By YOAV GONEN, NY POST, May 24, 2011
LINK

An Indian diplomat’s daughter who claims she was falsely arrested and suspended for sending obscene emails to teachers at her Queens high school is suing the city for a whopping $1.5 million – and even a key to the city, her lawyer said today.

In a notice of claim filed on May 6, John Bowne HS senior Krittika Biswas, daughter of the vice counsel at the Consulate General of India in Manhattan, Debashish Biswas, said her claims of diplomatic immunity were ignored when she was cuffed and locked up for more than 24 hours on Feb. 8 after a shoddy probe by administrators into the emails.

Even after the Queens DA dropped the charges and expunged her arrest from the record, school officials booted the 18-year-old girl to an offsite suspension center for more than a month, according to the claim.

It was only after principal Howard Kwait found the real perpetrator that Biswas was allowed back into school.

“The basis for this targeted inquiry was as criminally malicious as it was reckless,” Biswas’s lawyer Ravi Batra said during a news conference.

In addition to unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, Batra curiously suggested that Mayor Bloomberg could perhaps give “a key to the City to Krittika Biswas as a token of heartfelt sorrow for the unbecoming pain inflicted upon her.”

Batra also claims that officers failed to read Biswas Miranda rights and "continued to inquire about her computer usage."

The Joel Klein-Wireless Generation-No-Bid Contract-New Deal

Now we can all see how this works:

Joel Klein

Joel Klein ("JK") is brought to New York City by Mayor Mike Bloomberg to be the Attorney-in-fact, "Chancellor-in-name-only", and then JK proceeds to deny all rights to all groups protesting what he says and does, as required. Then, when too many people get angered by Joel's gruff manner (Bloomberg wants only smooth operators, because it is by sugar-coating the "I despise you and I'm going to hurt you" procedure that things get done quickly) he suddenly - and without any search for qualified candidates -  appoints a person who is being let go from her publishing house for incompetence (Cathie Black) because he can, then realizes

Robbie Newman, Denise and Dennis Walcott

his mistake and appoints as "Chancellor-in-name-only" smooth operator Dennis Walcott. Meanwhile, JK is allowed to pursue business prospects that reek of conflicts of interest  over at the NY Daily News, where he, JK, is revered as the guru who changed the face of public education in America (see below, where John Merrow - whose boss is the same as JK's, is, in my opinion, delusional):
Love or loathe him, Joel Klein is the person most responsible for shaping U.S. schools today
BY JOHN MERROW, DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER, Sunday, June 05, 2011

Who is America's most influential educator? Some would probably name Arne Duncan, the U.S. Secretary of Education and cynics might suggest Bill Gates, because of his foundation's heavy involvement in education policy, or a teachers' union leader like Randi Weingarten.

In this parlor game, other names would emerge: Oprah Winfrey, anyone? Other competitors for the title would be Big Bird and friends on Sesame Street and Wendy Kopp, the founder of Teach for America. Millions of young children learn from the former and by now hundreds of thousands of students have been - and are being - taught by Teach for America corps members.

But the evidence suggests that our most influential educator is a lawyer who only very briefly taught in public school and never had the formal credentials to lead a public school system. Even now, as he earns megabucks working for a media giant, his influence is felt across the nation - in New Jersey, Baltimore, Chicago, New Haven, Conn., New Orleans and elsewhere.

This man is a believer in public education - which, he says, transformed his life. His father had to quit high school and he grew up in public housing. He credits his teachers in Queens for giving him "a worldview and a sense of opportunity and purpose."
 
That's why, when in 2002 Mayor Michael Bloomberg asked him to run the city's schools, Joel Klein turned his back on his million-dollar law practice and budding career as a media executive at Bertelsmann, Inc. to become New York City's schools chancellor.

Much has been made of Klein's influence on the city's public schools over his nearly nine years as chancellor. Most of the words have been kind and deservedly so. After all, he took on a huge and hidebound system and began whacking away on day one, pausing only occasionally to catch a breath.

Combative by nature, Klein could bristle rather easily. Always well prepared, Klein dazzled with numbers and, when the numbers didn't support his case, he found other ways to attack.

His critics - and there are many - discount the academic achievements Klein boasted about, particularly after the flabby nature of state tests was exposed and scores were recalibrated, leading to significantly lower gains for many public schools on his watch. They say he was obsessed with test scores and didn't pay enough attention to genuine learning. He maintains that he was the first to raise doubts about the tests.
 
One critic, the anti-testing group FairTest, accuses Mr. Klein of leading New York and the country in "dangerous directions." In a statement, it charges that he "promoted the overuse and misuse of standardized tests to judge students, control curriculum and instruction and rate schools, teachers and principals - even though the tests are inadequate for all these purposes. In doing so, he undermined teaching and learning even while claiming to improve them." It adds that Klein - and by extension his protgs - are "part and parcel of a larger trend, exemplified most by No Child Left Behind, that reduces schooling to test prep."

A more comprehensive critique comes from Weingarten, who clashed with Klein when she led the United Federation of Teachers in New York City and who has continued the arguments now that she is president of the national union, the American Federation of Teachers. In response to my question, she offered this analysis:

"Joel had a great opportunity when he became chancellor. He is bright, he had the mayor's trust and he had the power. He had an infusion of new funding from the equity lawsuit, the city's growing revenues and a new teachers' contract that lengthened the school day and significantly increased teacher pay, including new teachers."

But, Weingarten concludes, he failed to take advantage. "He led through divisiveness and as a result, we lost the opportunity to make this school system an example of sustained and growing student achievement for all to emulate. He disregarded the public schools that were working, preferring instead to focus on charters. He dismantled programs that worked, like the Chancellor's District and apropos of that rather than using the flexibility embedded in the DOE-UFT contract, he often ridiculed it, even after he negotiated its terms. When his actions did not produce results, he re-organized and pointed fingers, blaming teachers and their union."

However, even his critics ought to give Klein credit for longevity, tenacity and some genuine improvements. The bureaucracy has been streamlined, graduation rates are up and thousands of adolescents are now attending high schools where they are more than just a number. On his watch, the New York schools opened about 125 small high schools, in the process shutting down dozens of "dropout factories," scary huge places where most students were poorly served. Because he encouraged charter schools, thousands of kids, mostly poor and minority children, are now better served.

But what distinguishes Klein from other reformers - a point far too rarely forgotten when observers are assessing his legacy - is his influence beyond the system he ran.

His geographical influence is vast:

School superintendents in Chicago (Jean-Claude Brizard), Baltimore (Andres Alonso), Newark (Cami Anderson), Montgomery County, Md. (Joshua Starr). South Orange, N.J. (Brian Osborne), Christina, Del. (Marcia Lyles) and New Haven (Garth Harries).

Then there's the State Superintendent in New Jersey, Chris Cerf; and the Superintendent of Louisiana's "Recovery School District" in New Orleans, John White, who is rumored to be in line to become that state's superintendent.

It doesn't end there. Two other leaders were nurtured by Klein, although neither reported to him directly. One is the current New York City chancellor, former Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott, whom Klein often refers to jokingly as "my other wife." The other is Michelle Rhee, the controversial former chancellor of the schools in Washington, D.C. She is unstinting in her praise.

"Like many of the new superintendents across the country now, I got my position as chancellor of the Washington D.C. Schools in large part because of Joel Klein," she wrote in an email. "His best piece of advice to me was, 'Lead from the front, don't get mired in the middle.' His intolerance and impatience for low expectations and low academic achievement of kids put the fire into a lot of us and certainly helped to keep me motivated."

Although Rhee has moved on to found a national organization, Students First, her policies apparently remain in place and Walcott has changed little since taking over in New York City.

So are these men and women disciples who wear "What Would Joel Do?" buttons on their lapels? Not likely, because he says he looked for "people who were tough-minded, independent and would tell me what they think (not what they think I want to hear)." Regarding discipleship, Klein wrote in an email, "I hope they ask WWJD but in the end make up their own mind. After all, they're accountable."

In at least two districts, Baltimore and New Haven, the leaders have moved away from Klein's antagonistic posture toward unions. Both have forged new relationships and, coincidence or not, are showing improvement in student performance and graduation rates.

Still, even as the personal stamps are inevitable, Klein's powerful imprint is unquestionable.

As for Klein, he has not left education entirely. He's now working on education technology projects for the News Corporation - with an ambitious plan to modernize, among other things, the delivery of lessons to students and assessment data to teachers and administrators. That could be a sweet spot given that his new boss, Rupert Murdoch, recently derided public schools as "Victorian" and inappropriate for today's world.
**************************************

It's all baloney, except the part that says that JK denied all rights to all people in New York City. The education take-over is the result of $millions spent on marketing policies and concepts that have never been successful. The partners he always had (the Clintons) and the new allies bought for him while "Chancellor-not" (by "allies" I mean everyone who has, or wants to do work with Bloomberg) now are rallying behind him as the guru of a New Deal (see below). NYSUT, the legal arm of the UFT here in NYC, pretends to object. When will JK and Bloomberg be throwing NYSUT and the UFT another bone?

NYSUT blasts no-bid contract to company headed by Joel Klein
NYSUT Media Relations - June 9, 2011
LINK

ALBANY, N.Y. June 9, 2011 - New York State United Teachers today expressed outrage at a Daily News report that the state Education Department appears ready to award a $27 million no-bid contract to a company headed by former New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein and owned by News Corp., publisher of the New York Post.

“When a deal smells as bad as this one, you have to ask: Is the push to use standardized test scores to evaluate teachers really about improving teaching and student achievement? Or, is it about finding ways for Wall Street and big corporations to cash in on Race to the Top?” asked NYSUT President Richard C. Iannuzzi.

Iannuzzi said NYSUT would ask the state comptroller to reject the contract, and the state attorney general’s office to investigate any conflicts of interest in the awarding of the Race to the Top contract, less than a month after the Board of Regents rushed through new regulations that allow school districts to potentially double the weight of standardized tests in teacher evaluations.

NYSUT Vice President Maria Neira questioned why the state Education Department tried to quietly award the contract to the Wireless Generation/Klein/News Corp. enterprise. “The Regents chancellor and state Education Department leaders demand ever-increasing transparency and accountability from teachers, but pay lip service to transparency and accountability when it comes to awarding lucrative contracts to their friends and political allies,” she said.

The Daily News reported today that Wireless Generation, a company purchased for $360 million by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. in November 2010, was in line to receive the no-bid contract. Wireless Generation has developed software to track student test scores and is one of Murdoch’s first forays into for-profit education technology. In a speech in Paris last Month, Murdoch said Wireless Generation could be a gateway to a $500 billion education technology market, according to The Wall Street Journal.

NYSUT, the state’s largest union, represents more than 600,000 teachers, school-related professionals, academic and professional faculty in higher education, professionals in education and health care and retirees. NYSUT is affiliated with the American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association and the AFL-CIO.

NYC Council President Christine Quinn Makes a False Plea For Ed Funds

Christine Quinn

Christine Quinn voted for Mayor Bloomberg's third term, over the protests of her constituents. She obviously, in my opinion, thinks that the slight nudge in the direction of reducing the budget of the DOE will pacify the New York City public school parents who have been, for 9 years, fully informed by my co-contributors to my website Parentadvocates.org and blog NYC Rubber Room Reporter as well as the other excellent blogs such as Chaz's School Daze, NYC Educator and JD 2718, into believing that she is defending our children and teachers. We are not fooled.

If Quinn was a true advocate for the children, parents and teachers of NYC, she would blast Mayor Boomberg for his 8 years of attacks on tenured teachers without researching whether or not all the tenured teachers who are now fired deserved this fate while spending millions of dollars to the Gotcha Squad, attorneys, and arbitrators to produce false claims about innocent people; would blast Bloomberg and Klein, Black and Walcott for violating Public Services Law, Civil Rights and due process of children, parents and everyone else in order to control the factory formerly known as the New York City public school system.

There is money in NYC to keep every teacher in his/her job. Do away with the people at Tweed, execpt for 5 people: An accountant, a Federal program compliance officer, a special education director, a Records Access Director, and an elected Chancellor WITH a contract who can be fired if he/she doesnt do the job.
Why do our teachers have to be the fall guys for the Deutsche Bank scandal, the CityTime scandal, the special education and medicare fraud, etc? We are angry and we are not going to take it anymore.

Ms. Quinn, you lost our vote years ago.

Betsy Combier, Editor

June 1, 2011, 1:18 pm
Quinn Proposes $75 Million in Education Budget Cuts
By FERNANDA SANTOS
LINK

City Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn on Wednesday proposed roughly $75 million in cuts to the Department of Education’s budget to help avert the elimination of 6,100 teachers through layoffs and attrition for the school year that begins in the fall.

It was Ms. Quinn’s first specific pronouncement on education spending since Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg proposed balancing the city’s budget by reducing the number of teachers the city employs, and it sends a clear signal that there are still big differences between the City Council and City Hall over how to bridge the city’s multibillion-dollar budget gap.

Ms. Quinn plan includes cuts to technology and transportation spending, and to the Education Department’s public-information and legal staff. In addition, it recommends reducing the number of people assigned to the Office of Family Information and Action, which has been the target of much criticism because of its flaws in running the elections for parent representatives in citywide councils that play a role in decisions like school rezoning, construction and budgets.

"We’re not just saying, ‘No,’ ” Ms. Quinn said in an interview. “We’re saying, ‘No to layoffs and here are our suggestions.’ ”

Ms. Quinn’s office distributed a statement with her suggested cuts just as Schools Chancellor Dennis M. Walcott had begun his testimony at a City Council hearing on department’s general expenses, where he offered a staunch defense of the spending decisions it has made and once again affirmed the need for teacher layoffs.

Ms. Quinn acknowledged that $75 million is only a fraction of what is needed to avoid the cuts to the city’s teaching staff, but, she said, “that’s a step in the right direction.” She said the Council would continue to scrutinize the budgets of other city agencies to come up with additional savings, but she did not ultimately make the promise that many parents and teachers had been hoping she would make: to pass a budget that would not include teacher layoffs.

“I’m going to do everything in my power” to avoid the layoffs, Ms. Quinn said. “I’m going to fight as hard as I can.”

Here are Ms. Quinn’s proposed cuts:

The Department of Education spends $8 million every year in teacher recruitment. She proposed canceling the effort and spending half of that to train existing teachers on licensed specialties, like special education. Savings = $4 million.

Cutting three positions at the department’s press office. Savings = $280,000.

Eliminating 10 positions at the Office of Family Information and Action. Savings = $940,000.

Merging the Office of Family Information and Action with the Office of Public Affairs, which would enable the elimination of two additional positions. Savings = $375,000.

Reorganizing school-support staff by realigning responsibilities among the schools’ 60 network teams, which employ 12 to 14 people apiece, and reducing the number school superintendents, who make an average of $200,000 a year, by 10. Savings = $2 million.

Reducing what Ms. Quinn characterized as an overestimation of the projected growth in expenses in areas like special education, contract payments and prekindergarten, which would free up $35 million in the next fiscal year.

Scheduling a 1 percent cut to the pupil-transportation budget. Savings = $7.5 million.

Reducing legal-service contracts and possibly the number of workers in the Education Department’s legal office, which employs 133 people. Savings = $3 million.

Enacting a more modest increase in technology spending — 30 percent over the current amount, instead of 76 percent, as the department has proposed — and cutting technology contracts to fiscal 2010 levels. Savings = $13.2 million.

Use more in-house training to reduce the cost of hiring professional-development contractors. Savings = $9 million.

A Department of Education official rebutted some of Ms. Quinn’s suggestions, noting that school district superintendents are mandated by law. the official acknowledged that the department employs perhaps five high-school superintendents over the legal requirement; Ms. Quinn is proposing to cut 10 superintendents.

The official, who requested anonymity so as to speak candidly about Ms. Quinn’s proposal, pointed out that the press office eliminated two positions two weeks ago, and that some people on its staff are not assigned to media relations. One employee, for example, staffs Panel for Educational Policy meetings, among other duties. As for her proposed cuts to projected spending, the official said it comes with great risk because the department could run out of money in the middle of the year to finance a certain expense.
the complete coverage prepared for Friday’s print editions.


How the Council Members Voted [Chart and Map]

Judith Hederman, NYC DOE Director of Financial Operations, Resigns Under Investigation

Education Dept. official who oversaw $43M contract resigns amid corruption investigation
Juan Gonzalez - News, Friday, May 13th 2011, 4:00 AM
LINK

A Department of Education executive who supervised a major computer consulting firm that is under investigation for possible corruption has suddenly resigned.

Judith Hederman, the $168,000-a-year executive director of the DOE's division of financial operations, submitted her resignation on May 4, DOE officials confirmed.

That was the day the Daily News reported that Richard Condon, the schools' special commissioner of investigation, had filed court papers saying a "high-level" executive at the DOE with "oversight" over the $43 million contract of Florida-based Future Technology Associates, had a "personal relationship" with one of the owners of FTA.

FTA, which has not been charged with wrongdoing, is under investigation for "potential corruption and conflict of interest," the court papers say.

An affidavit submitted by Condon's deputy, Gerald Conroy, as part of a court dispute over the agency's subpoena power, did not identify the DOE official. A source at the DOE has since confirmed it was Hederman.

The affidavit said the unnamed official, who was interviewed under oath on April 14, initially denied having a personal relationship with either of FTA's owners, Tamer Sevintuna or Jonathan Krohe.

Four days after that interview, the official's lawyer called Condon's office and retracted the original denial of a personal relationship.

Hederman worked at the DOE since 1995. For nearly two years, until last November, she supervised the FTA contract.

She did not respond to phone calls and email requests in the past week for comments. Sevintuna and Krohe have repeatedly declined to respond to questions.

For more than a year, Condon's office has been probing a web of companies that Sevintuna and Krohe secretly controlled and utilized as subcontractors for themselves, including two that supplied consultants in Turkey and India to service the DOE computer system remotely.

FTA's contract bars the company from subcontracting or using outside consultants, and officials say the firm never told them about the practice.

Some of the Turkish workers, The News has found, were paid as little as $3,370 a month by a separate firm Sevintuna and Krohe owned in Turkey, yet FTA billed the DOE $22,400 a month for the labor of those workers. At least six were still on the DOE payroll as recently as March.

Nearly two years ago, The News began asking DOE officials about the unusual aspects of the agency's contract with FTA.

For example, the firm has never had any established offices, even though it has supplied as many as 80 consultants at a time to the DOE and has received close to $100 million from the school system over the past decade.

FTA headquarters in Jacksonville, Fla., is a mailbox in a UPS store. So is a second address in Brooklyn.

Another FTA subcontractor, MERA consulting, which received $14 million from the DOE contract, was wholly owned by Krohe. MERA's main address was another mailbox in the same Florida UPS store.

Only weeks after Condon's investigators began asking questions about MERA, Krohe dissolved the company.

Much of this appears to have happened while Hederman was supervising the contract. Hederman is gone, but the probe continues.

jgonzalez@nydailynews.com

Below is the information available on Google:
Cortera Company Profile For:

MERA CONSULTING
7037 COMMONWEALTH AVE, STE 9
JACKSONVILLE, FL 32220-2833
view map

COMPANY DETAILS
Location Type: Single Location
Ownership: Private
Have fresher information?
Update now
CURRENT NEWS
There is currently no press for this company.

COMPANY OVERVIEW
MERA CONSULTING in JACKSONVILLE, FL.

Pay for each of the FTA employees is equal to that of Schools Chancellor Joel… Computer geeks at Future Technology Associates earn more than Joel Klein does
BY JUAN GONZALEZ - NEWS
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
LINK

Taxpayers shelled out an average of $250,000 last year for each of 63 computer consultants a little-known Florida-based firm supplied to the Department of Education.

That's more than $15.7 million of our money going to Future Technology Associates, which landed a DOE contract in 2005 - the same year the company was founded. The company's job is to integrate the school system's financial accounting system with other city agencies.

That contract began at $2.5 million a year. Since then, it has been repeatedly extended - mushrooming to $15.7 million in fiscal year 2009

Story from The New York Post:

Schools $candal gal quits

by SUSAN EDELMAN and YOAV GONEN, May 13, 2011

The Department of Education's chief of financial operations has quit amid a probe into her relationship with a contractor under investigation for overbilling, sources told The Post.

Judith Hederman, executive director of the Division of Financial Operations, was making $168,000 a year when she abruptly resigned last week, according to education officials.

The Office of the Special Commissioner of Investigation confirmed that it is investigating Hederman, 42, but declined to provide further details.

Court records show that the commissioner has been engaged in a lengthy probe of Future Technology Associates, a computer consulting firm that Hederman had overseen and shared offices with since as early as 2005.

FTA has a three-year, $43.2 million contract to integrate the DOE's payroll and finance system with that of the rest of the city's agencies.

Documents show the probe of the firm involves "allegations of corruption, conflicts of interest, unethical conduct or other misconduct."

That includes accusations that FTA has been hiring its workers through multiple contracts so that the "hourly fee for the consultant's services was marked up before being passed on to the DOE."

However, the breadth of the probe was so wide that a Manhattan Supreme Court judge granted a petition by the co-owners of FTA, Tamer Sevintuna and Jonathan Krohe, to quash a subpoena requiring them to appear before probers.

City officials are still challenging that determination.

Hederman's husband, also is a highly paid DOE accountant, when reached by phone said his wife had no comment.

She joined the DOE in April 1992 as an accountant and was a payroll administrator when FTA landed its first contract in 2005.

She was also listed as the contract manager when the firm signed its latest three-year deal.

A lawyer for Sevintuna declined comment, and Krohe's lawyer was unavailable.

The allegations against FTA echo recent charges filed against another DOE contractor, Willard (Ross) Lanham, who allegedly bilked the city of $3.6 million by using layers of subcontractors to jack up costs.

Additional reporting by Andy Campbell and Dareh Gregorian

susan.edelman@nypost.com

The XEROX Machine Incident at The Gotcha Squad

The picture above is a copy machine. This particular copier is located in the left corner of The Gotcha Squad's sixth floor waiting room, right behind the receptionist where people arriving for grievances or 3020a arbitration sign in. Today, May 10, 2011, about eight people were sitting in this room in addition to me and the respondent of the case in which I am assisting the private lawyer as his paralegal, when an incident involving this very machine occurred that is too good not to pass on.

The backstory is, as I have written previously, since 2003 how I have sat in on public hearings of tenured teachers when asked by the respondent tenured employee to do so, and I have observed the lawyers, witnesses, arbitrators, and guests. No one has ever paid me to be there, so my mountains of material written about the 3020-a process in New York City is my material and mine alone.

I have helped teachers calm down - teachers should be in the classroom and not on trial - and helped investigate Principals, Assistant Principals, and any other administrator as to what they are doing in their schools - for example, complying with federal special education laws, financial recordkeeping, harassment, etc. Someone has to do it and hold these people accountable for their actions. I do that. I look at their collaborators too (non-administrators who help the bad guys/gals) .

The personnel of the New York City Department of Education Administrative Trials Unit and TPU hate me for my diligence in appearing 2-4 times per week, and staying all day until the last word has been said. Almost all NYSUT Attorneys no longer speak with me even to say hello, because of my research into cases they have lost. In fact, when I worked for the UFT part-time, (I no longer work for the UFT) Leroy Barr, Ellie Engler and Gary Sprung told me to stop attending hearings at 51 Chambers Street because "this was bad for them". As I had a clause in my agreement to continue doing whatever I had done in the past in my own time, I gently told the UFT that as the members were being tortured at the 3020-a, someone had to be there to protect the members' due process rights, so I just kept going whenever asked. The issue that I will be addressing in the future is the possible collusion of the UFT and NYSUT with The Gotcha Squad at 3020-a hearings. But for now, I have my trusty disposable pen (at TD Bank, they are free!), and I like pads that have graph paper instead of lines. Why, I dont know. And no, Theresa (Europe), I never have brought a tape recorder to the hearings even though in New York State it is legal to  secretly tape anyone with whom I am in a conversation.

I am, of course, writing a book.

All the people who work for the Gotcha Squad now or in the past have a very good chance of appearing in my book, but one person is definitely going to be in there: NYC Department Attorney Victor Muallem. I have sat in on several hearings where Victor was the DOE Attorney. In my opinion, he is one of the most incompetent attorneys I have seen, and the DOE does dig their attorneys up from the bottom of the barrel. I have asked many people why Victor acts like he owns the place, and everyone there simply shrugs and says that that's the way things are. Same with Ms. Sylvia Cheeks, who assigns hearing rooms. If she catches you in a hallway and you look like you dont know what is going on, Sylvia will tell you you have to sit in the waiting room (see picture above), sorry. According to sources she has no title, but took on this role because she can now tell people where to go. Literally.

So, lets get back to this morning, May 10, 2011. I arrived early like I usually do, around 9:30AM for a 10 o'clock start time for the teacher's hearing. The teacher showed up and we, I as the paralegal,  started going over the documents that were going to be used in the hearing at which Assistant Principal Francine Palmer-Mullings would be testifying today about how this math teacher was criminally incompetent and must be terminated. About a month ago more than half the school walked out in protest of this teacher's removal Fordham Leadership Academy For Business and Technology located in the Bronx, but AP Palmer-Mullings remembered none of that. She did not see all the students wearing t-shirts with this teacher's name on them, either. Nope, totally zoned out of everything except that this teacher must be terminated. Palmer-Mullings has quite a few skeletons in her closet, but the DOE Attorney on this case, Ms. Dilia Travieso, objected strongly to Arbitrator Roy Watanabe whenever any of that was brought in. (In Watanabe's favor, he did allow testimony about Palmer-Mullings being found guilty of pocketing $7000 that belonged to the robotics club, substantiated by Special Commissioner of Investigation or SCI. (Now we'll see whether Watanabe allows the issue of her taking excessive per session pay or not, and whether she was on more than one budget line at the school, and even whether she has a green Card).

So, there I and the teacher were, looking through documents in preparation for cross examination of Palmer-Mullings by the teacher's Attorney, who put me in the record as his paralegal, and Watanabe accepted this. The teacher needed a few pages copied, so I went over to the copy machine (the one in the picture at the top) and put the papers in the feeder and pressed start.

The new receptionist (she has been in her job a few months, Monday-wednesday) came up behind me and told me that the copy machine was only for lawyers, and I could not use it because I am not an attorney. I asked her if this was a new policy, and if it was written down, but all she knew was that I had to move away, pronto. That was news, as I and everyone else have used this machine since it appeared  I believe in September. I nicely told her that I was assisting the attorney in the 3020-a as his paralegal, and he needed the papers. She left the room, I finished one set, and went back to the far end of the room to sit down next to the teacher.

Suddenly, everyone in the room jumped out of their chairs as round little Victor Muallem came running into the area screaming at the top of his lungs (well, I dont know that for a fact, but he was VERY loud),
"if THAT woman (pointing his outstretched arm and finger at me) uses the copy machine, or tries to use it, I will call security and have her escorted out of the building."

He was so mad that he was shaking with rage. The room was completely silent (although I admit to  giggling). If I had not been part of the teacher's team at the 3020-a hearing on for today, I would have possibly told Victor that I saw no written policy, and therefore would use the machine until a written policy was produced. But I knew that Victor would escort me out with security and then I would have some media coverage for being thrown out of 51 Chambers street for using - or attempting to use - the copy machine on the sixth floor (is it public funds that pays for the upkeep and buys the paper???), but I'll have to get thrown out on another day - specially set up with the proper cameras outside to catch everything.

Victor is serious about throwing people out. The teacher whose hearing was today wanted to talk to his previous attorney at the beginning of his hearing, and they both went into an empty small room to discuss the case. Victor found them and screamed that they must leave immediately, the rooms belong to the Department and cannot be used by anyone else (the teacher is still an employee). The lawyer said that he wanted to stay, to discuss the case, and Victor called security and had the lawyer escorted downstairs and out of the building. From that day on, the Attorney was not allowed upstairs to the sixth floor without a security guard with him. He withdrew from the case and told the teacher to resign.

This is how they run things at The Gotcha Squad.

Gary - thanks for your help.

Betsy Combier

There Can Be No Change Under the Reign Of Bloomberg (Except In Ourselves )

Patrick Walsh writes the truth as he sees it and as I do too.

Betsy Combier

Raginghorseblog

The truth as I see it.

There Can Be No Change Under the Reign Of Bloomberg (Except In Ourselves )
April 15, 2011

LINK
In a sense, insofar as she so perfectly embodied the hubris, idiocy and recklessness of so much of the education reform campaign and particularly the educational vision of Mike R. Bloomberg, I, for one, am sorry to see the back of Cathie Black. Of course, she was appalling and an embarrassment to an entire city. But that misses the point.

No matter how hard Bloomberg and his trained seals tried, Black, unlike Michelle Rhee or Joel Klein or Arne Duncan or Chris Christie, could not be somehow transformed into an heroic figure fearlessly taking on all powerful teacher’s unions, the status quo, and the selfish teachers; those evil foes who were not only damaging the nation’s children (thus hindering them from “winning the future”), but bankrupting the American economy to boot.

Even aside from her tasteless public comments there was something in Cathie that people could not stomach. More to the point, there was something so grotesque and so obscene about Bloomberg naming Black the Chancellor of Education and then doing whatever it is that Bloomberg does to bend people to his will to secure Black a waiver that disgusted those generally indifferent to politics. I heard astounded reactions from people who never gave a thought to education before. And to some extent it galvanized them. Black’s mere presence at Bloomberg’s insulting Panel For Educational Policy meetings (in which a panel dominated by Bloomberg zombies would pretend to listen to the heartfelt testimonies of parents, teachers, students and community activists before rubber stamping whatever Bloomberg had ordered) created an instant carnival atmosphere where the hapless Black sat like a mute queen, now haughty, now pouting, in silence, surrounded by her praetorian guard (including Dennis Walcott) absorbing heaps of abuse, wholly incapable of answering even the most basic questions of policy. Her most memorable moment at such “panels” was mimicking the sound of the crowd who jeered when Black protectors grabbed their mics to answer yet another question asked of Black and Black scolded her questioners.

Such moments were at once surreal, illuminating and emancipating. They exposed, as much or more than the most well crafted argument, the idiot logic guiding not merely Bloomberg but all the well heeled narcissistic imbeciles whose imaginations are so paralyzed and egos so bloated that they believe to the core of their beings that corporate business people (like themselves) have somehow attained the highest form of human intelligence and therefore that all human institutions — libraries, hospitals, governments, schools, whatever –should be subordinated to the corporate business model.

Like no one else, on an almost daily basis, Black revealed this thinking to be the insanity that it is. More, as Mike Bloomberg was surely the only man in the entire world who would even consider a person as stunningly unqualified as Black to be the Chancellor of Education for the City of New York, Black revealed Mike Bloomberg to be an arrogant fool.

This, of course, was her undoing. As Bernie Kerik instantly became to Bloomberg’s predecessor Rudy Giuliani the moment people outside of Giuliani’s orbit looked into him, so Cathie Black was daily becoming to Bloomberg: an embarrassment that called Bloomberg’s very judgment into glaring, garish question.

So in the blink of an eye, dilettante “super star manager” Cathie Black was out and soft spoken Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott in. One might think such a self-created disaster as Black would humble a man, at least for the moment. But not Bloomberg. Not even for a moment. Even as he was stating that he “ accepted full responsibility” for the Black debacle, he sounded pissed that he actually had to say such stuff. Lost in the shock of the announcement was the fact that Bloomberg proved again that he is incapable of learning anything as he pulled the same stunt with Walcott that he pulled with Black.

The first sign that nothing will change under Dennis Walcott was the process of selecting Dennis Walcott. Which is to say, there was no process. There was no search, no consultation with the United Federation of Teachers, no reaching out to parents, no discussion whatsoever with anyone anywhere over who should replace the disastrous Black and assume responsibility for the education of over one million children in a school system that, from the inside, feels as if it is being held together with dental floss.

Walcott is the man and that is that. Such is life under the reign of Bloomberg. As both Diane Ravich and Noah Gotbaum have pointed out Bloomberg treats the public schools as if they are his private property to do with as he will. Many, including friends, have greeted Walcott’s selection with something approximating approval. At any rate, there has been none of the incredulity that came with the selection of Black and remained with her for every one of her 96 days as chancellor. A great deal is being made of Walcott’s public school education, his two years teaching kindergarten, his grandchildren in the system and the fact that he does not need to be surrounded by four deputy chancellors lest some one ask him a policy question. Such banter reveals far more about how thoroughly Bloomberg has degraded the position of chancellor than it does any thing about the qualifications of Dennis Walcott to bear it. Indeed, just like Bloomberg’s previous selections for chancellor, Walcott does not have the qualifications.

If anyone has any doubts about why Wolcott was selected, just look at the reception he has received from those who have spent the last decade trying to destroy the public school system any way they can. Geoffrey Canada, president and CEO of Harlem Children’s Zone — he who pays the children in his program do do their homework — and as such a corporate confidence man extraordinaire, called Walcott a “brilliant choice,” adding, “I feel terrific about it.” Former Chancellor Joel Klein currently employed as CEO of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation Education Division called Walcott “a superb selection” and “ a fighter for kids.”

I, for one, disagree. I, for one do not hold Walcott’s selection to be a good thing excepting, perhaps, for Bloomberg whom Walcott will certainly fight for. While it is true that Dennis Walcott is, by all accounts, an intelligent and amiable fellow and one conversant with the nuts and bolts of the Department of Education, while it is true that long ago and far away he worked in the Urban League, while its true he is now declaring that the school system is “ all about a partnership,” the greater truth is that Dennis Walcott is Mike Bloomberg’s stooge.

After faithfully serving Bloomberg for nine years no man in New York has more intimate knowledge than Dennis Walcott as to what happens to any Bloomberg appointee who dares to think with his or her own mind, who dares to speak his or her own opinion: who dares, that is, to be a free and dignified human being.

Dennis Walcott is more aware than anyone in New York what he has got himself into. And Dennis Walcott, for whatever reason, has willingly accepted that role. Anyone who believes the replacement of Black with Walcott will make an iota of difference that is beneficial to students, teachers and the school system is delusional.

What Bloomberg has been permitted to do is shocking and deeply disturbing. Or, at any rate, it should be shocking and deeply disturbing. In nine years Bloomberg has degraded the political landscape of New York so thoroughly that he has rendered the Chancellorship of Education either irrelevant or a joke. While Bloomberg reigns it does not matter who is chancellor. Klein, Black Walcott, whomever, they are all there to play dummy to Bloomberg’s ventriloquist and they all know that the minute they speak their own mind is the minute their fates are sealed. What’s worse is millions of New Yorkers know this too and somehow it is accepted. Such is the degraded state of our “democracy.” Indeed, if Bloomberg had any integrity at all he would simply eliminate the position of Chancellor for the duration of his term (if, indeed, his term ever ends) and save the taxpayers the salary of this now ceremonial position.

How many teachers can be hired on a chancellor’s salary?

There is something diabolical about Bloomberg. He specializes in corrupting people by successful appeals to their basest impulses. Of course, all such appeals would be unthinkable without his absurd wealth. Consider City Counsel speaker Christine Quinn. No matter how long she lives Quinn will have to live with the horrible truth that she helped undermine the political will of millions and millions of New Yorkers when she helped orchestrate Bloomberg’s illegal and legally singular third term. And she should live with it. And she should be reminded of her treacherous and cowardly act every day.

Consider New York State Education Commissioner David Steiner, the son of the great literary critic George Steiner, who must live the rest of his life with the knowledge that he allowed Mike Bloomberg to somehow persuade him to throw his integrity to the gutter when he approved non-educator Cathie Black’s waiver to be chancellor with the preposterous stipulation that the job of “chief academic officer “ — i.e. someone who actually knew something about schools — be created to work beside her. Steiner had to know that what he was doing was wrong if not out right grotesques. Nonetheless, like Quinn Steiner debased himself to do Bloomberg’s bidding. And by dancing the humiliating dance Bloomberg demanded both did irreparable harm not only to their souls, but also betrayed the people they swore to serve.

Nothing will change for the better with Walcott. Indeed, Walcott will be far more effective in pushing through Bloomberg’s agenda of total destruction all the time than Cathie Black could ever dream about. He’s already begun. Speaking before last Friday’s City Council hearing on the mayor’s preliminary operating budget Walcott made the extremely dubious claim that, “By any measure the gains our students have made in recent years have been extraordinary – far outpacing the rest of the State and cities across the nation.”

As a New York City teacher I have no idea what Walcott can possibly be referring to here – but the language is extremely reminiscent of Bloomberg’s and Klein’s when they were crowing before Congress about the since-debunked miraculous gains for New York students under their since-debunked miraculous leadership.

Walcott dutifully went on to channel two other Bloomberg fallacies. The first was how the city had no choice but to lay off teachers, a claim thrice publicly contradicted by Governor Andrew Cuomo who is no friend of teachers. The second, offered with no evidence whatsoever from this data loving contingent, was how seniority laws (or LIFO as they are now moronically called) are depriving children of their most “effective” teachers.

In short, on the part of the DOE nothing has changed, and as long as Bloomberg is mayor nothing will change — least of all Bloomberg. He simply doesn’t have the moral strength to change or admit he’s wrong about anything. Bloomberg is a free market utopian as impervious to reality as was Milton Friedman if somewhat nastier in his manner.

When he first arrived at City Hall and for some time afterward, Bloomberg repeatedly stated that he wished to be judged on how dealt with education, which was, in fairness to Bloomberg, in many ways, a mess. For a while, Bloomberg successfully fooled many into thinking that his almost yearly reorganizations, “data based instruction”, high stakes testing, school closings and championing of charter schools were actually making things better rather than just different for New York City students. This began to change with news of the fraudulent or grossly inflated testing scores and evidence of doctored graduation rates. Confidence in Bloomberg’s handling of schools went further south with his ridiculous selection of Black and further still with Black’s darkly comical impersonation of a chancellor of education.

Even as blind a narcissist as Michael Bloomberg must by this point know that if he is judged by his handling of the schools he would be judged – at the very best — a mediocrity and by many, in fact most, a failure. (Most NYC teachers, I am convinced, would rank Bloomberg as a catastrophe, a point, I am equally convinced, that would not bother Bloomberg in the least.)

I believe Bloomberg’s response to his failure is to spend the remainder of his term accelerating what he and his fellow “reformers” across the USA have been doing for a decade now: altering the public school system beyond recognition, setting it up for failure, hastening its demise and setting in motion its rescue by corporate America. This requires the destruction of the UFT, whose power Bloomberg has been undermining since his arrival at City Hall. All pretense of a working partnership between Bloomberg’s DOE and the UFT is now laughable. Bloomberg would love to leave office as the man who destroyed the teacher’s union. He’d love that even if that meant, as it would, that teachers could be fired at the whim of any psychotic principal, that the profession would be degraded beyond recognition, that generation of students would be subjected to nothing but test prep. No matter. Power has made Bloomberg stranger, crueler, and dumber. Bloomberg has moved past being reckless and is now so ruthless he is seemingly willing to unnecessarily lay off thousands and thousands of teachers to try and alter public opinion on seniority laws and get his way.

This is sick.

And, if it is not, it should be criminal.

What to do?

Appealing to a figurehead like Dennis Walcott is a waste of time and energy. The combination of the power of Bloomberg’s obscene wealth and Bloomberg’s ruthless policies are something not seen for a long, long time if ever before in American politics. As such they call for a different kind of response, a different method of fighting, some way of not allowing this man to totally degrade our political system and totally destroy our school system before handing it over to his pals in the “free market.”

Bloomberg cannot change. We must. What we have been doing has not worked. It may mean massive acts of civil disobedience and massive amounts of consequent arrests. It may mean sick-outs on a scale unseen in New York history. It may mean something not yet imagined to match the almost unimaginable reality we are living, in which the richest man in New York is running New York with dictatorial control over almost every aspect of its school system. This is disgraceful. This is insane. We need to figure out how we got here and how we allowed this. We need to figure out how to get out of here and how to transcend this. We need to figure out how to keep people as venal and vicious as Michael Bloomberg as far away from political power as legally possible.

The Teacher Advocacy Initiative

On June 29, 2009, Maria Colon and I met with UFT Staff Director Leroy Barr about what I and Maria believed was a solution to the problem destroying the lives of many tenured teachers, namely false claims made about innocent teachers by principals, with subsequent harm to the teacher's life and future career.

Maria and I worked on and presented The Teacher Initiative which I copy below. I also gave it once again to Ellie Engler and Mike Mulgrew the day after they told me that they no longer needed my advocacy at the UFT, and I would be dropped from the staff on July 22, 2010. David Hickey was at the goodbye and good riddence meeting. Then the UFT put my proposal on the UFT.org website as something that a teacher can count on when a principal is harassing him/her. Oh, really? I have never heard of any UFT rep. helping a member with the harassment by the principal. Never. I was also told never to question SCI or OSI agents. Is this because Mike Mulgrew and Emma Mendez were never investigated when they left Grady High School in 2004? Donald Herb the custodian at the time knows the answer.

Anyway, the UFT did, it is nice to know, adopt my proposal after they got rid of me, so I want to share my proposal with all of you not to say hey, it was my idea, but to encourage the implementation and discussion of how to end the Rubberization Process once and for all. all comments are welcome - if they are constructive and not destructive. I mentioned this proposal when I spoke on FOX News.

Thanx,

Betsy Combier

THE TEACHER ADVOCACY INITIATIVE
A Proposal for the UFT given to Leroy Barr, Ellie Engler and Mike Mulgrew in June 2009 and again in July, 2010

The process of re-assigning teachers to “Rubber Rooms” has become an explosive issue that the general public no longer wants continued. The press plays into this by writing about how scarce public education funds are spent on housing ‘bad’ teachers for months and/or years outside of the classroom when ‘these people’ should just be fired. We know that this is, in many if not most cases, simply the opposite of the truth. The Advocacy Initiative outlined below has teamwork as the central theme for UFT staff and Executive Board, District Representatives, Special Reps., members and advocates. The Advocacy Team provides closely followed case management as a support for all UFT staff and members and works to stop injustice before it starts.

We know that hard-working, excellent and caring UFT members are being unfairly charged on a whim of a Principal, other administrators, or in accordance with a “just get rid of somebody” mandate from higher authorities. There is an immediate need to address the practice of finding misconduct without presentation of valid and substantive evidence where “you are guilty and therefore you have to prove you are innocent.” The Advocacy Team would provide a much needed intervention in the rush to judgment.

There is, of course, still a need to find out who is guilty of misconduct and who is not, or who needs training and who does not, in an educationally sound manner. What the Advocacy Team could provide is early intervention to establish collaboration of all personnel in seeking accurate information at the beginning of the assessment process.

The New York City Board of Education is placing many Principals and APs in positions of making subjective judgments about personnel without the training and educational background necessary to validate their decisions. There is no standard to apply, and no accountability for the actions taken. For example, many Principals are writing “gotcha reports” instead of accurate comments on what happened in the classroom during an observation. These “gotcha” reports are used at 3020-a hearings. By this time, the process has already taken a toll on the teacher…and it is too late to turn the clock back.

The Advocacy Team would partner with the Principal and AP in the school to create a holistic approach to labor relations within the building by not waiting to quickly create an adequate defense after the TAC memos have been written, or after events and circumstances have made it impossible to repair the morale of all staff. Studies in this area have found that a “good” teacher has a positive relationship with the children/young adults in his or her class. If we can provide students of any age with techniques for personal self-discipline, responsibility, concern for others, communication skills, mutual respect, cooperation, problem-solving skills, and life skills supporting and reflecting good character, then we are on the path to assist in developing lesson plans and an education policy for children and young people who will be assets to our society and not liabilities.

If positive classroom relationships work, and this is a quality of “good” teaching, then we must expect our teachers, administrators, and staff to exemplify/model these qualities in the classroom and outside. When any administrator maintains a tough stance that employees perceive to be punitive, useful information that could provide students and school staff with tools to improve performance are hidden, kept secret, lost and discarded.

The short term effect of this punitive environment is to obtain scores on tests that may not reflect student abilities, increase the number of students suspended and placed in the school-to-prison pipeline, and terminations/resignations of staff. The long-term effect of this path may be possible lawsuits, parents and children fleeing the school, and an ultimate lack of qualified personnel to fill needed positions.

At times such as this (economic depression) all of us who advocate for public education must try to work on protecting people’s lives and careers against any rush to judgment based on unstated values and presumptions rather than fact. James A. Gross wrote an excellent book, “Teachers On Trial” with the following relevant passages:

“Fairness as well as effectiveness require that values be made explicit and that fact rather than assumption be the basis for assessing blame for deficiencies in education and formulating solutions…identifying and eliminating unfairness in the current disciplinary system for tenured teachers will require school districts to develop hiring, evaluation, promotion, and disciplinary policies and practices that can be validated with competent evidence. “ (p.2)

And,

"Attempting to determine what constitutes improper conduct and unsatisfactory teaching performance of necessity requires an explicit or at least an implicit statement about what constitutes proper conduct and satisfactory teaching performance. Well-meaning generalizations about educational excellence do not do that. An analysis of the nature of the standards used (or not used) in making these determinations, of course, has implications not only for educational policy but also for all judicial or quasi-judicial decision-making.” (p. 5)

An Advocacy Team trained in personnel management and conciliation techniques who addresses a problem at it’s inception would provide an added step in reaching the positive, enriching and successful outcomes sought by the New York City Department of Education, parents and all stakeholders. The purpose is to create win-win situations and not win-lose. Arbitration has a role to play in this process, but after other steps to conciliate/settle have been tried. Arbitration offsets a power imbalance, is based upon a need to decide past events, addresses a high number of disputes, compels participation, is speedy and effectively brings closure to the matter at hand.

If a teacher has been given tenure, this means that he/she has been in a classroom more than three years, and has been rated “satisfactory.” A conciliation meeting that is held at the start of some friction/harassment/negative reviews would preserve continuing relations in the school building before negative comments/actions forever close that door. The conciliation effort would put an emphasis on future dealings, not past events, would assist all parties involved in avoiding win-lose decisions, would leave all parties in total control of the process, and would promote resolution of problems without involving legal claims/entitlements.

The Advocacy Team would prioritize conciliation as a first cause of action. This is, we believe, key to the initiative’s success, and cannot be left to individual whim. How the Advocacy Initiative might work is:

When a problem arises, (and/or before there is any negative actions or harassment) either a teacher or a Principal may make a call to the Team asking for a conference to discuss the issues of concern to any party in the school. The chapter leader and District Rep. may also be invited to attend, depending upon the severity of the problem at hand.

All participants must have a chance to speak about “The Problem” and present any documentation available. The meeting serves to provide all parties a moment to decide what the issues are, and how to proceed. A record is made and suggestions are made on the spot or within a few days, on possible remedies.

All parties agree that the issues they have raised are truthful, and each person involved is required to commit to the implementation of solutions that are found to be reasonable.

No retaliation against any party after the presentation of any issue will be allowed.

The Advocacy Team must have trained personnel who have an office outside of a school yet call on the skills and advice of UFT reps. in the school when a problem starts there. A Team member is called in as needed and then follows a case throughout the year, and works to assist the member during the 3020-a process if the member wants the support.

In conclusion, we believe that if we intervene in a conciliatory and professional manner at the beginning of a possible problem, we can prevent the unnecessary removal of excellent and caring teachers from New York City public schools.

**********************

Here is the UFT published version that they are/will be implementing (or not):


Know your rights: Special complaints
NY Teacher newspaper, published April 14, 2011
LINK

Unfortunate though it is, at times UFT members report being harassed or subjected to intimidation by their supervisors.

These acts of intimidation may take many forms, which is why it is important that you contact the union for help.

You do not have to — nor should you — tolerate such harassment or acts of intimidation. A special complaint process was expanded in the 1990s to protect you from harassment or intimidation by your supervisors.

If you believe that you are the victim of supervisory harassment, tell your chapter leader immediately. You should also notify your UFT district representative.

The first thing you will need to do is to keep an anecdotal log indicating the place, time, date and any witnesses who were present during each incident. It is important to make this log as factual as possible, simply a recitation of the events as they occurred.

Article 23 of the UFT Teachers’ Collective Bargaining Agreement and corresponding articles in other UFT agreements set out a procedure to follow in cases of special complaints. It was designed to set up an expedited process for speedy resolution of special complaints not covered by the grievance procedure.

A special complaint will be filed with the chancellor by the UFT. Within 24 hours after it is filed, the Department of Education will inform the union of its representative to the joint investigating committee.

The joint investigating committee will be set up, composed of both DOE and UFT representatives. Its purpose is to reach a prompt resolution of disputes without having to resort to formal procedures.

The joint investigating committee will use a private meeting space at your school to discuss the issue and should complete its investigation in no more than one school day. The joint investigating committee will meet with you, the alleged harasser and witnesses to the alleged harassment that you notify them of. The purpose of these interviews is for the committee to gather enough information to help resolve the matter.

If the complaint is not resolved by the joint investigating committee, the union will determine if the matter has sufficient merit to request a hearing before the chancellor or the chancellor’s representative.

At the chancellor’s level meeting, the chancellor’s representative is required to “make every effort to informally resolve” the complaint. The joint investigating committee will report its findings and all persons involved will have the opportunity to be heard. According to the contract, the chancellor or his/her representative will make a decision within 72 hours of the close of the hearing.

If the complaint is not resolved by the chancellor, the union will review the matter to determine if it should be submitted for a fact-finding hearing before an arbitrator. Once the hearing has been held, the fact finder is required to issue his or her recommendation within 72 hours.

The UFT has filed a grievance, which is now in arbitration, to ensure that cases are completed in this expedited manner.

If you have a special complaint, you should be prepared to answer questions that come up with the joint investigating committee and you should focus primarily on the big issues — your most serious concerns.

Always be respectful and listen to all parties. You should also have witnesses to the harassment who can speak about what they saw or heard. Be prepared to prioritize your witnesses in case time runs short.

Think of what you want the resolution of the problem to be. This can include being treated fairly and respectfully, or more specific remedies that address your particular situation.

You should be aware that the joint investigating committee has no authority to discipline the alleged harasser. The goal is to resolve the problem going forward.

Source URL: http://www.uft.org/know-your-rights/special-complaints

The Rights of Kids, Texas Style

Wednesday, September 17, 2008


Why Just Having the Right to a Jury Trial Matters
LINK

Recently, I had a jury trial that reminded me why having the right to a jury trial matters, and why it is blatantly unfair that juveniles do not have that right, and yet their convictions from juvenile court can count significantly in sentencing decisions for crimes they may commit as adults.

My client was charged with stalking. I don't want to get into all the details, but I will say that, based on my interpretation of the stalking statute, I did not believe my client was guilty. Even assuming all the facts as laid out in the police report were true, I did not believe that my client committed the crime of stalking under any reasonable interpretation of the stalking statute. In Washington, this allows us to file a motion before trial, arguing that the charge should be dismissed. For the purpose of the hearing, you concede that everything in the police reports are true, but say that all of that information is insufficient to prove the crime charged. So, I filed that motion. The judge and the prosecutor each had their own different but equally unreasonable--in my opinion--interpretation of the statute, and so my motion was denied. My client was disheartened, but I told him I still thought we should win in a jury trial.

So, we went to a jury trial. This time, I made essentially the same argument in a motion to dismiss after the state rested its case. My legal argument was the same, but the judge this time was deciding whether the evidence actually presented at trial--as opposed to what the police reports said--was sufficient for any reasonable jury to convict my client of the crime. Again, I made my argument, and once again, the prosecutor had his unreasonable interpretation, and the judge came up with a strange interpretation of the evidence to go along with his strange interpretation of the law, and denied me again.

And so, I was left to argue the law to the jury. I had not disputed any real fact presented by the state. I gave a 5-7 minute closing argument. I just wrote the key words from the definitions in the statute and explained why, no matter what they thought of what my client did, they could not find that what he did was the crime of stalking. I was, essentially, making the exact same arguments on the law that I had made to the judge to the jury. The prosecutor made his arguments about why what my client did fit the statute and he argued his interpretation of the statute.

The jury deliberated for about 45 minutes, and found my client not guilty. This, despite the fact that the victim of the alleged stalking was a police officer.

When asked by the prosecutor afterwards why they acquitted, they said that the definitions made it pretty clear that what my client did wasn't stalking. A few days later, a friend of mine told me that a woman she knew had been on my jury, and that she had said that it took them a while to vote on who the foreperson would be, but that the "not guilty" verdict was easy.

And yet, if my client, like a juvenile, had no right to a jury trial, he probably would have been found guilty. He may have won an acquittal on appeal, but that likely would have been after he had done at least a significant amount of his probation and probably all of his detention time. Sometimes, even when your whole case is about a correct interpretation of the law, you need to have 12 citizens who can read two or three definitions, put them together, apply them to the virtually undisputed facts, and say, "not guilty." Sometimes, you need the jury to tell the judge that his interpretation of the law is wrong.
 
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Long time, no blog . . .

Yeah, I know you've heard that before. I apologize. Circumstances have conspired against me. So, here's an update:

I have moved from juvenile court to adult felonies. I was really torn when I was asked to make the move. It was considered an advancement in the office, but I had really grown to love juvenile work. I missed being able to do jury trials (and having my clients have the RIGHT to a jury trial), but I knew I would miss the kids. So far, though, I am happy where I am. I have been back in front of a few juries with pretty good results so far.

I am still busier than ever--the life of a public defender. And things at my office are far from perfect. But, what has inspired me to get back into blogging is what is going on at my old office in Dallas. They are really suffering. They are being messed with in the extreme by the political forces in the county, and good, experienced public defenders are quitting because they don't believe they can meet their ethical obligations to their clients under the quota system that has been imposed there.

My thoughts go out to all my former colleagues there in Dallas, whether they have chosen to leave or are trying to stick it out. I don't know what I would do if I were still there. On one hand, I respect those who have quit because they do not believe that they can fulfill their ethical obligations to provide zealous representation under the overly burdensome caseload standards that have been imposed. On the other hand, I respect those who are staying because they know that good, ethical attorneys need to be there to represent the indigent accused. I wish them all the best and hope that changes will be coming. (For more information about the situation in Dallas, check out Grits for Breakfast. As per usual, he is all over the issue.)

Hopefully, it won't be another year before my next post!

Lack of Remorse Not Sufficient To State A Claim To "Shocking The Conscience"

Individual’s “lack of remorse and refusal to take responsibility” for misconduct considered by the court in affirming hearing officer’s disciplinary determination

Cipollaro v New York City Dept. of Educ., 2011 NY Slip Op 03131, Appellate Division, First Department

Barbara Cipollaro was served with disciplinary charges pursuant to §3020-a of the Education Law by her employer, the New York City Department of Education, alleging that she had knowingly defrauded Department of $98,000 over a two-year period by enrolling two of her children in New York City public schools while she and her family lived in Westchester County.

The hearing officer found Cipollaro guilty of the charges and she was terminated from her position.

Cipollaro filed a petition pursuant to Article 75 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules seeking a court order vacating hearing officer decision and the penalty imposed.

The Appellate Division ruled that there was no basis to disturb the Hearing Officer's determination. Significantly the court said that in view of Cipollaro’s “lack of remorse and failure to take responsibility for [her] actions, as well as the harm caused by her actions, the penalty of dismissal, even if there was an otherwise adequate performance record, cannot be said to shock the conscience” [of the court].

The decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2011/2011_03131.htm

The Disaster of Mayoral Control and Parent "Involvement"

One of the most obvious failures of the Bloomberg administration has been the effort to control all parents in the NYC public school and charter school systems, and keep a certain level of "parent engagement" on his and the NYC Department of Education's terms.

In order to do this they - Bloomberg, his Deputy Mayors and his trusted advisors - set up first the Panel For Educational Policy, a puppet group ("PEP") appointed by Mayor Bloomberg and NYC Borough Presidents, that replaced the NYC Board of Education, and second, Community Education Councils, ("CECs") unfairly elected by "selectors" gleaned from Parent Associations' Executive Boards throughout the City (Charter Schools do not usually have Parent or Parent Teacher ("PA/PTA") Associations). See following story below. Neither the PEP nor the CECs have open and public elections, and no member of any group has to listen to the many people who stand before them and beg for help of any kind. In fact, members who challenge the administration in any way are fired, as we saw Bloomberg do in March 2004 over the failed third grade promotion policy. Where, exactly were all the failed third graders supposed to go, Mayor Bloomberg?

By the way, I was in the audience that evening (of the firing) and I sat directly in front of Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott, who I had met a few times. I listened as he insulted all the protestors who were exercising their right to speak out against the firings of the PEP members, and just before leaving the room, I turned around to say hello to Mr. Walcott, and I saw his startled face as he correctly assumed I had heard all his comments.

In a bizarre manner, they - the Mayor and his cronies - understood human nature to be one of greed and of the search for power and acclaim, and believed that they had the structure they needed to achieve their agenda of total control over the New York City's 1.1 million children, their families and guardians, and the accompanying Federal, State and local funding that went with them. They gave so-called "parent leaders" positions within their tightly controlled system that at no level had a voting system for the public. Public participation in government except by an elite few is dangerous, "they" knew. The limited selection structure, built on a foundation of appointments and closed, secret ballots/voting, divided parent groups and others, as those on the "inside" on the PEP and the CECs became the people who blocked others from information and services formerly offered by school boards to all who lived within the jurisdiction. This was planned and successfully executed, however nothing else in Bloomberg's 3 terms has yet been effectively put into place. It will be his failures that Bloomberg will be known for, much to the dismay of those of us who fought in 2002 and are still fighting to get back a democratic government based upon free and open elections. NYC needs an elected school board and open elections for school board members in each district, or the sham education "reform" will continue. If all the Borough Presidents had refused to appoint members to the Panel for Educational Policy in 2003, we all would have been in a better place in terms of our city's public schools effectively servicing the 1.1 million children in the system.

Many CEC members lived up to their roles by turning away parents and joining forces with the Department when issues that challenged the Department's agenda appeared before them. I, a parent advocate, started hearing from confused parents in 2002 when my oldest daughter was at Stuyvesant High School. The battle there focused on more than $380,000 that seemed to be missing from the PA funds. The chinese parents were attacked by the PA Presidents and some members of the Executive Board, such as Paola De Kock, for asking where this money was and why the IRS 990s were not filled out properly. I called the accountant hired by the Stuyvesant PA to do the 990s, and I was told that there was "so much money missing that there could be no audit." I contacted the Special Commissioner's office (Richard Condon), the Manhattan DA, the New York Post, Daily News, Wall Street Journal and other media, and no one would do the story or look into what happened.

We parents were sufficiently concerned by these attacks that we went to Jimmy Yan, Counsel to Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer and a  relative of one of the parents at Stuyvesant who didnt like the attacks of the Executive Board. Mr. Yan emailed me and called me that he was waiting for a reply from NYC DOE Superintendent Alexis Penzel, who was investigating. We never heard back. Scott Stringer appointed Patrick Sullivan to the PEP. We presented our issue to the District 1 CEC as well as the PEP, all in vain.

Then the Stuyvesant PA Executive Board scheduled an election to change the bylaws and successfully removed the Chinese Outreach Committee from a voting position on the Board.

When my youngest daughter's school, NEST+M at 111 Columbia Street in District 1 protested the stuffing of the Ross Global Charter Academy into the school in 2006-2007, (NYC DOE's Garth Harries said that NEST was an "underutilized plant"), we parents asked the District 1 CEC and President's Council for help, and we were called "racists". We filed lawsuits at the New York State Supreme Courts in NYC and in Albany against the New York City BOE and New York State Regents and won, with the help of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, in whose District NEST+M is located. See the Memorandum of Law.

What these and other events have done is drive a wedge directly through the heart of parent involvement in NYC, leaving distrust and even hatred among parents and between the groups and "cliques" exactly as the NYC BOE planned. Now it is painfully obvious that the parents on the PEP and the parents selected to be on the CECs are at minimum ineffective and in many cases deliberately proud of their positions of power and  "acclaim" and willing to please the powers that be (NYC BOE) at the expense of parents and children in the City's public and charter schools.

However, the NYC DOE and the Mayor's cronies have ultimately failed, as the story by Beth Fertig below shows, as well as the hugely embarrassing hiring and firing of Dennis Walcott , Cathie Black and Joel Klein. A solution to this one area of The Problem (Mayoral control) is: dissolve the CECs, get rid of the PEP, and let's all engage our State legislature in setting up an elected New York City School Board and elected community school boards. And I mean elected by ALL, not a select few.


Oh, by the way, Gwen (Hopkins, former Director of the Office of Parent Advocacy and Engagement) you should really be more careful when you talk badly about parents - and me personally - at your office, even now that you are at Tweed. You should know that walls have ears, pens and paper.

Betsy Combier

Ed Dept Ripped Over Waning Interest in Parent Elections

Thursday, April 21, 2011
By Beth Fertig
LINK

The deadline for city parents to apply and run for positions on Community Education Councils that sign off on school zoning changes and play an advisory role is Friday — but the city is still struggling with waning interest in the posts.

Fewer than 450 parents applied for 325 seats citywide as of Thursday, according to the Department of Education.

Each of the 32 local community councils representing elementary and middle schools consists of nine elected members, plus two appointed by the borough presidents and a non-voting student member. There are also citywide councils for high school parents, parents of English Language Learners and parents of special education students.

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer said the lack of interest shows the department hasn't provided the councils with enough support. He called its Office for Family Information and Action a "disaster," and said outside groups should work with parents instead.

"We can show them how to engage parents working with existing parent associations in the schools," Stringer said. "And we can do it on the cheap. It'd probably the best savings the DOE has had. And they don't need to even hire an outside consultant."

Stringer sent a letter to Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott Thursday recommending more outreach and recruitment, training of Community Education Council members and ongoing guidance to help them understand school budgets and zoning.

In a statement, Walcott replied that he has "repeatedly spoken about the importance of parent involvement in our schools and have had several meetings with parents and CEC members from a variety of communities."

"I look forward to working with Borough President Scott Stringer and other elected officials to ensure that they play a vibrant role in our efforts to increase parent engagement," Walcott said.

Department of Education officials said the agency has advertised in community newspapers in numerous languages to attract parents. It's also sent teams to communities with low turnout, and partnered with the Housing Authority and the Department of Youth and Community Development to reach more residents.

But as of Thursday, the agency said there were still five CEC's without the seven candidates needed to fill a quorum. The DOE wouldn't give a breakdown but said District 19 in Brooklyn had the fewest number of candidates. District 1 in Lower Manhattan had the most. District 3 on Manhattan's West Side, which had trouble attracting candidates, now has enough for a quorum.

Noah Gotbaum, the president of the CEC for District 3, claimed the DOE doesn't give parents enough reasons to want to spend long hours volunteering on the councils.

"The bottom line is the CECs have been emasculated," he said. "The groups have very little power, and they're not listened to when we do stand up and say this is what we want. We're completely ignored."

Gotbaum, a frequent critics of the DOE, said CECs have been ignored when they opposed closing schools or having charter schools share space with regular district schools. He also accused the department of deliberately obstructing parent involvement.

"The DOE has, since the very beginning, has put out false eligibility information," he said. "They've put out information which limits the number of candidates."

Gotbaum said parents of children in grades K-8 are allowed to run for Community Education Councils, as well as anyone who's had a child in the school system within the past two years. That could mean parents of 10th graders in some cases. But he this information is sometimes difficult to determine from the DOE, he said.

This is how the eligibility rules are explained on the election site:

"Parents are eligible to serve on the CEC for their local community school district if their child is currently in grades K-8 at a school under the jurisdiction of the community school district, or if their child was in grades K-8 at a school under the jurisdiction of the community school district within the past two years."

The DOE acknowledged an earlier version suggested only parents of children in grades K-7 could run, and officials say this current explanation is accurate.

Learning As They Go: A Look At Changes To The School System

Forty-two third graders failed at least one exam at P.S. 40 in South Jamaica.

Forty-two third graders failed at least one exam at P.S. 40 in South Jamaica. Tribune photo by Azi Paybarah

By Azi Paybarah, Queens Tribune
LINK

The turbulent school year, full of change and controversy, came to end this week, marking the completion of the new system’s first term.

From crime to the curriculum to the chain of command, New York City’s school system underwent its most dramatic changes in recent history, when Mayor Mike Bloomberg took control of the system and turned it upside down.

This week, looking back at the changes that were made, many of his initiatives were deemed successes, including his anti-crime program, while many were criticized, such as a third grade promotion policy.

While the Mayor looks back to evaluate how he did, the rest of the city is looking to the future, where more change still lies ahead.

Crime In The Classroom

This week, Bloomberg released crime statistics for the 16 city schools with the highest incidents of crime – schools that were targeted earlier this year in a new anti-crime initiative launched by the Mayor and the Department of Education (DOE).

Citywide, 13 percent of major school crimes were committed in schools representing one percent of the city’s school children. Among those schools were Far Rockaway High School and Franklin K. Lane on the Brooklyn-Queens border in Woodhaven. In January, Bloomberg named them Impact Schools, and working with the New York City Police Department (NYPD), had them flooded with police officers.

Major crimes, which occurred on average every day at schools like Lane, were cut in half, according to statistics released by Bloomberg and the DOE. Four additional schools outside Queens were designated impact schools in April, and results there were just as dramatic.

Crimes there dropped by 66 percent, compared to earlier that year.

According to a public statement from the DOE, “School personnel focused on responding to even the most minor infractions of the New York City Discipline Code.” That led to a spike in the number of suspensions at both sets of Impact schools. In the first 12 weeks, principals suspended twice as many students, compared to earlier that year. At the second set of Impact schools, suspensions rose 63 percent. Ultimately, the new policy led to the removal of 494 students to “alternative school settings or off-site suspension centers.”

In explaining the philosophy behind the Impact Schools, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said it is “the same approach we used to address crime in our neighborhoods.”

Whether it’s a teacher, school aide or police officer, “everyone is speaking with one voice,” said Criminal Justice Coordinator John Feinblatt.

“If students are afraid to go to school,” said Bloomberg in a public statement, “they simply cannot learn.”

Upgrades to school policies also helped. At Lane, for example, the handwritten hallway passes were replaced with a color-coded system that includes the teacher’s name.

Social Promotion Over

One of the most discussed changes to the school system was Bloomberg’s new promotion policy, which forces third grade children to pass both the citywide math and reading tests to move on to fourth grade.

The new standard was meant to combat so-called social promotion policy, which pushed failing students into higher grades.

To enact the policy, Bloomberg fired three members of the Panel for Educational Policy who opposed the measure.

“Mayoral appointees are there to represent the mayor’s view,” said mayoral spokesperson Chris Coffey. “If they don’t have the stomach to do that they didn’t have to stay. Mayoral control means mayoral control.” The policy passed eight to five with two non-voting student members opposing the policy.

Test administrators got failing marks after a series of snafus.

Students in District 29 and elsewhere studied by reviewing old exams, inadvertently exposing them to questions recycled on this year’s exam. Talk swirled of retesting those students, but DOE officials settled on scoring the original exam, minus those questions. Chairperson Jane Hirschmann of Parents Coalition To End High Stakes Testing said the whole test should be thrown out. She obtained a manual from the two companies who prepared the test, which said, “The tests favors white children by 11 questions…[and] no questions favor Hispanic and black children.”

Students who were absent for the reading exam were not given the same test for their makeup because Hirschmann released some questions to the media during a press conference. Third graders opened the newly created exams and discovered answer options that did not correspond to those in their test booklets.

When results of those exams were released, more than 10,000 third graders citywide failed, including 1,796 in Queens. When the policy was first announced, DOE officials estimated 15,000 might fail.

Two of the city’s top three school districts were in Queens. In School District (SD) 26, only 14 students failed. SD 25 came in third with 78 students failing at least one of the exams.

Thirteen elementary schools in SD 26 had a 100 percent passing rate for their third graders. The borough’s worst performing school was South Jamaica’s P.S. 40, where 42 third graders failed at least one exam.

Punishing Principals

“Poor performance” was the reason given for removing 45 principals this year, according to Schools Chancellor Joel Klein. Sixteen of the deposed principals were tenured, and two of them are “being formally charged with incompetence,” according to a public statement from Klein’s office.

Schools in Queens where principals were reportedly removed include Franklin K. Lane, Far Rockaway, Beach Channel, and Springfield Gardens High Schools; P.S./I.S. 499, J.H.S. 190, and P.S. 111. President Jill Levy of the principals union said the DOE “was not able to provide the support and skill development these principals needed in order to succeed.”

Removed earlier this year was Superintendent Diana Lam, who resigned after a special DOE investigator discovered Lam forced school officials to give her husband a $100,000 a year job.

School Boards

Replacing each of the city’s 32 school boards will be Community Education Councils (CEC), whose members were elected earlier this year. Each CEC will have nine elected parent representatives, and two members appointed by the borough president. Two citywide CECs will be established for special education and high schools. The CEC for Special education will have nine elected parent members, and two members appointed by the Public Advocate.

The main difference between School Boards (SB) and CECs are their eligibility requirements.

School board members were voted in by the public, had to live in the district, but their children did not have to attend district public schools.

“At one point I was the only one on the board who had their kids in public school,” said SB30 member Jeannie Basini.

CEC members are voted in by the executive members of each school’s Parent Association or Parent Teacher Association, and have to have a child in a district public school.

Although unclear in their roles, CECs are expected to operate similarly to School Boards, sources said.

One major procedural change was the high school application process. Students are no longer guaranteed a seat in their zoned schools, meaning each incoming ninth grader has to apply to the school of their choice. Since no seat is guaranteed, even in their nearest school, some students have been forced into schools across town. Adding to the influx of applications are the new federal standards of the No Child Left Behind Law, which allows students in failing schools to request seats in better performing ones.

Total Number Of Failing Third Graders In Queens School Districts

District = Total

24 = 364
25 = 78
26 = 14
27 = 484
28 = 243
29 = 404
30 = 209

Boroughwide = 1,796