A little more sunshine...

Recently, BCS has taken umbrage to my publication of the deposition of one of their board members.  Now, keep in mind that a deposition is sworn testimony- it is the same as someone sitting on the witness stand in open court.  I made a conscious choice to publish the entire transcript, rather than cherry-pick inflamitory pieces.  Nevertheless, when I arrived at the BCS board meeting last week, BCS Board member Janet Medlin felt the need to criticize me for publishing the deposition. 

BCS often reminds LASD that they are a "public school".  Yet, when it comes to behaving like a public institution, some members of their organization seem to struggle with the concepts.  Their recent Board meeting was an excellent example.  Members of the public have complained that deliberations at BCS Board meeting are impossible to hear.  This concerns me quite a bit, since they are debating topics that are crucial to our community.  I decided I would take the drastic step of investing in professional sound equipment, so that I could record their meetings.  Last Monday, I arrived well before the meeting began and was setting up my equipment to record.  As BCS Board members arrived, a couple of them went out of their way to criticize my use of the recording equipment.  One board member refered to it as "intimidation". She complained about the "palace" where we hold the LASD Board meetings (a 1940 sq ft portable located next ot a garage on the Covington site.)   Another board member complained about the placement of small, unobtrusive microphones.  (Link to the description of the mics)  I'm pleased to say that despite having to stash these small microphones under chairs, the recording worked just fine.

I do want to acknowledge that some members of the BCS Board understood the public's interest, and spoke louder and more clearly to ensure we could hear the discussion. On a couple of ocasions, one board member actually paused his colleagues and asked them to repeat comments that were made. If we want to improve relations, it is important that everyone has the same information about plans and intentions.


Still, I fnd these complaints more than a bit ironic.  Section 54953.5 (a) of the Brown Act specifically calls out that members of the public are permitted to record any public meeting.  Further, the complains are more than a bit hypocritical, esp considering that BCS founders video-taped a whole series of LASD Board meetings when they were starting up the charter school.

So, what came out of this meeting?  I'll put that in another post, along with the recording.  In the meantime, the sunshine is a good thing.

A favorable ruling for LASD

One follow-up to my earlier post about the District's cross-complaint.

There was a ruling issued in Los Angeles yesterday that addresses some of the key questions of the LASD/BCS case.  In particular, the appellate ruling says that:

• Local elected officials and the community have a right to manage their resources locally, and the courts should generally defer to their judgement
• Prop 39 does not grant charter schools their "first pick" of the District facilities
• In allocating facilities, the District is entitled to consider the impact on ALL students, and does not need to put charter school children ahead of traditional in-District students.

The timing for this ruling couldn't be better.  I've attached it for folks to read if they'd like.

(Link to LAUSD ruling)

District Response and Counter-Complaint

Today was Walk-about Saturday, a chance to visit our campuses, talk to parents, and see all of the excitement that is a part of LASD.  It is truly one of those days when I feel very fortunate to represent our community by serving on the Board of Trustees.

Of course a lot of folks asked about the lawsuit with BCS.  On Friday, October 12th, the District responded to the BCS complaint for the 2012-13 facilities offer.  That document isn't particularly exciting, unless you have the BCS complaint sitting alongside and like deciphering the legal reasons the BCS complaint is invalid.  The discussion in court will be a lot more interesting.

Here's the District response to the complaint

Much more interesting is the LASD cross-complaint.  In this action, LASD puts before the court the questions that have circled our community for a number of years.  Among those questions, we have asked the court:

• Do BCS practices which exclude special needs students, English language learners, and socio-economic disadvantaged students impact their status as a public school?
• Do their extensive private resources factor into the comparison?
• If they are not a public school, do we still need to provide them the same level of facilities?
• When determining "reasonably equivalent", can the District legally exclude the impact of private donations such as the LAEF fundraising?
• Can we really believe their claims of overcrowding when they continue to admit students from outside the District?
• How can BCS claim to the community that their school is "wonderful and warm" and then tell the court that it is a "youth prison"?

I am very anxious to see these issues tried in court.  For too many years, our community has wrestled with these questions yet not brought them into the court system.  It is time to seek guidance from the courts.  It is time for BCS to answer hard questions about serving our community.

Finally, I feel compelled to mention that Ray Cardozo of Reed Smith has done a fantastic job of distilling all of the community input into a clear, concise legal argument.  Like many in our community, I have been log frustrated by some of the BCS practices.  Ray and his team have put these issues into a legal framework, and raised themas important Constitutional questions.  I am pleased to be working with him, and he is representing our students very well.  As a Trustee, I am appreciative of the thanks and good wishes form the community, but really, the hard work is being done by Ray, Paul, John, Dino, and others on the legal team.  Thanks to all of them.

Read the District's cross-complaint here.

How "equal" delivers better results

A parent sent me this interesting article on the education reform movement in Finland.  It talks at length about how they approached building the world's leading educational program.  One of the most important tennants of their effort was to strive for equlity in all of their schools.

LASD has also followed this same principal. We strive to ensure that the program is equitable across all campuses. We may pilot a program someplace before rolling it out widely, but we aim to ensure that your child has a geat educational experience no matter which campus they attend.  Why do we do this?  We owe every child a first-class education. This is true regardless of their background, or what special needs they may have.  Besides the moral aspects of this approach, it also has the benefit of building wide community support for our schools.  No matter which campus, no matter what the child's interests, we support the child's learning.  In doing so, we achieve consistently high results for all of our students.  Isn't that whay public education is all about?

Campaign Funding - A Little Sunshine

This weekend I was watching the football game with my daughters when there was an ad on against Prop 37 (the food labelling measure).  One of my daughters asked me about the notice at the end of the ad, which caused us to launch into a discussion about campaign finance.  Using Tivo to pause the ad, we read through who had funded the ad, and talked about why they might want to fund a campaign against a ballot measure.  It is in that same spirit, then, that I looked into some campaign funding at the local level. 

Like most folks, I'm looking for a couple of key things when I read these forms:

• Who funded the campagn?  Is it one person, or a number of donors?  A single donor isn't necessarily a bad thing- I decided not to do any active fundraising for my campaign, so I didn't have a large number of contributors.
• What interest might those donors have in the candidate's positions.  For example, if candidates take money from a PAC, I would assume that the candidate agreed with the PAC's positions on key issues.
• How much total funding have they raised?  Remember that this is the first filing, and the candidates can still raise and spend more money, but this is an interesting indicator.  By way of context, I spent about $3500 when I ran 3 years ago, and I believe that the other non-incumbent, Tammy Logan, spent a similar amount. 

Amanda Burke-Aaronson
Quite frankly, I'm not sure what to make of Amanda Burke-Aaronson.  Initially, I thought that she was well intentioned, but perhaps didn't understand the implications of a BCS parent on the LASD Board of Trustees.  However, I've become more concerned as the campaign progressed.  She declined to identify herself as a BCS parent at the first candidate forum.  She also dodged the question of who had funded her campaign.  Since California requires candidates to file statements about who is funding their campaigns, this is public information.  I am attaching a link to Ms. Burke-Aaronson's campaign funding statement here.

For those who may not know all of the players, I did a quick pass through the list.  It is important to note that I do not claim to be an expert in who attends BCS.  However, a quick glance is instructive.  There are current and former BCS Board members, as well as people connected to the BCS Education Foundation.  She received contributions from a large number of BCS parents, including the person who signed the ballot argument against the parcel tax measure for LASD last year.  Even my preliminary look through the list shows that at least half of her donors are affiliated with BCS. 

Along the same lines as that TV ad, I have to wonder why these BCS parents would suddenly pour $10,000 into someone's campaign funds.   I can't recall any LASD Board member who received such substantial outside funding, let alone such a concentrated amount from a group suing LASD.  I want to be clear- I still can't speak to Ms. Burke-Aaronson's motives-- but it does make me wonder what all those donors think she'll do, that they're bankrolling an election fund that is already 3x what I spent on my own campaign just 3 years ago.


Vladimir Ivanovic
Mr Ivanovic is also running, and has taken a decidedly more modest approach to his campaign.  I've seen him at a number of community events, but  he has only spent a very small amount of money as of the most recent filing deadline.  I've also attached a link to his filing.  His sole donor so far is the PTA Exec Board meber at the same LASD school where Mr. Ivanovic's children attend.  His total expenditures to date are less than $1000.


I haven't yet received the filings for the other candidates, but expect to post those shortly.  From the first candidate forum, both Steve Taglio and Pablo Luther indicated that they are primarily self-funded, which tends to make the filings less-than-riveting.


Updated: 10/11, 3pm  : Correction:  Vladimir Ivanovich's campaign donor is the PTA Communications lead for the school, not the PTA president.  My apologies for the error.