Monday, August 20, 2007

Butter Wouldn't Melt in Their Mouths

One by one the CCSD school board proponents of charging high rent to the Charter School for Math and Science, a public school desiring to use a vacant public school building, sweetly assure the audience that they favor charter schools--and then prove it by adding an illegal quota system to the rent issue passed on a 5 to 4 vote.

If you were not at the school board meeting of August 13th but have had the time to view the two programs broadcast of the events, you are probably as annoyed as I am by the sanctimonious and hypocritical statements of members Jordan, Douglas, and Hampton-Green as well as by the Keystone-Kops aspects of the so-called participation and voting by cell phone of Meyers and Cook. These five treat their constituents as if they fell off the turnip truck yesterday!

In his successful campaign State Superintendent Jim Rex made much of what he calls "public school choice," suggesting it as a way to get successful, appealing, competing choices to parents and students without going the school-voucher route that would send public funds into private schools. He and the majority voting on CCSD's board need to take heed. Throwing up too many roadblocks to new charter schools will backfire. If the public gets tired of waiting for those choices, it will decide to support vouchers instead.

Not that the tactics being used are unexpected. Nor were they invented here in Charleston. They're being used in various forms all over the United States to halt, slow down, and cripple the growth of public charter schools. As former New York Daily News reporter Joe Williams writes in a recent issue of Education Next, apart from the more obvious legal barriers to successful charter schools being considered in state legislatures, the "'air war,'"

". . . there is also evidence of a perhaps more damaging 'ground war.' Interviews with more than 400 charter school operators from coast to coast have revealed widespread localized combat—what one administrator called 'bureaucratic sand' that is often hurled in the faces of charter schools. Indeed, as a 2005 editorial in the Washington Post described charter school obstruction in Maryland, 'It’s guerilla turf war, with children caught in the middle. Attempts to establish public charter schools in Maryland have been thwarted at almost every turn by entrenched school boards, teachers unions and principals resistant to any competition.'
The goal appears to be to stop charter schools any way possible."

For the rest of these interesting parallels to CCSD's latest tactics and tales of the turf wars, see http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/4611587.html .
To quote Hamlet on his murdering uncle, "One may smile and smile, and be a villain."
"Bureaucratic sand," indeed.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

Alice Paylor and company killed the James Academy of Excellence charter school in Dorchester County using many of the same tactics now being used in Charleston. Parents of the Math and Science Charter School students should hire Michael Rose now rather than later.

Anonymous said...

In the days before CCSD and centralized planning for everything, each school had a degree of self management. Successful schools usually reflected an excellent manager who also happened to be the principal at the helm of a well established faculty. Principals put together school budgets, hired/fired teachers, and approved/expanded curriculum and even recruited students. The local school board and superintendent were mostly invisible and only set the guidelines. They ultimately approved budgets, hired/fired principals (presumably based on their success in managing a school) and on rare occasions heard appeals of principals' decisions.

For successful schools this worked well. St. Andrews HS and its legendary Principal Bernard Hester come to mind.

Charter schools bring back the possibility for this kind of success, but with a stronger bond between parents, teachers and the principal. School Boards don't like it because along with taking away their opportunity to conduct buffoonish meddling (like our Keystone Cops) it also places the credit for success back where it belongs, among the people who earn it...in and among those who actually live with the reputation of the individual school where they teach or are enrolled.

Babbie said...

Thanks for bringing up Bernard Hester, who was MY principal in high school. He was a rare breed. I've never met another principal who was as inspirational to his or her students.

Anonymous said...

Today's obsession with centralized management and no toleration for localized innovation will undo what made American public education great. It's already happened here. CCSD could take a different approach and help cultivate many successful schools if it was willing to share just a little of its power. The SC charter school law is a good tool with reasonable guidelines. CCSD could look much better as a facilitator of these schools instead of being an obstructionist.

If 75 Calhoun can’t see what’s happening among the downtown parents as an opportunity then there’s no hope. Chalk up the Act of Consolidation as a total failure and deconsolidation would come too late to save our schools.

Let's work to establish more good charter schools like JICHS and OGCS. Following those examples the Math and Science school downtown would be a good investment that would benefit CCSD. But if county board members and the superintendent continue to say they are for these schools while working to undermine them, forget it. Give us vouchers.

Anonymous said...

Both Toya Green & Nancy Cook said they wouldn't send their kids to downtown schools because they are so bad. Buist is an exception, of course, which is where Toya's child now goes. In just the last 2 months both voted to throw money at Memminger with no magnet program, ignore CPA which has a magnet program on paper and then attempt to limit the charter school's lease at Rivers. If these were sincere efforts to improve downtown schools they should now be willing to send their kids to them. They weren't sincere so they still aren't willing to put their kids in D20 schools. We should remember this at the polls next year.

Anonymous said...

I keep hearing that CCSD jerked both James Island and Orange Grove charter school organizers around before they finally got out of their way. CCSD even threatened the teachers at James Island. State officials had to come down from Columbia to get CCSD to stop saying the teachers would loose their jobs if they were involved at all.

Anonymous said...

That is not true. I have worked at James Island for years and was apart of the charter process. That statement is untrue.

Anonymous said...

To anonymous 7:55 PM, what exactly were the road blocks that CCSD used to obstruct the charter school process at James Island? I remember that Bill Lewis was claiming that a charter school would have to pay rent. This was part of an attempt to give the image that a charter school wasn't a public school. I'm sure CCSD didn't exactly encourage the efforts for JI to go charter. Let's not give the false impression that CCSD has ever rolled out the red carpet for any charter school, at least not yet.

Anonymous said...

I am not familiar with Ken Childs. Does he work for a firm?

Anonymous said...

Ken Childs is with Halligan and Childs in Columbia. He has put a bid in for the RFP for counsel for CCSD. Cook has been using him for little stuff recently in her attempt to bypass Paylor. He is one that does a lot with the South Carolina School Boards Assn. so you know he is all about spending mo' money

Anonymous said...

Childs appears to live in the Summerville area. Since his office is in Columbia, and if he gets the job as legal counsel, does that mean he'll be able to bill for millage from his office to CCSD meetings? And we thought the million a year we were paying the current legal eagle was high. CCSD is way too big. It's so big it can no longer think and function rationally. Abolish CCSD. Deconsolidate before it's too late to save our local schools.

Anonymous said...

Ken Childs is a good choice to replace Paylor. He is more proactive and knowledgeable and less interested in politics. If a couple of lunches will do the trick then by all means, buy Cook lunch.

Believe me; Paylor is much more of the problem than you seem to think. If you do not agree, Google her in the archives section of the Post and Courier. See how often she loses cases. See how often she makes outlandish statements.

Anonymous said...

Here's a link to Ken Childs and his law firm in Columbia.

http://www.childs-halligan.com/

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when Nancy and Ken next meet for lunch. I'd like to hear how these two people could possibly find anything in common to talk about. He must have the patience of Job.

Babbie said...

In case you're wondering what his political connections are, here are his campaign contributions from the last 10 years or so--

Childs, Kenneth
Childs & Halligan P.a./Attorney WILSON, JOE (R) House (SC 2)
JOE WILSON FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $500 primary 12/16/05

CHILDS, KENNETH L
CHILDS & HALLIGAN PA
TENENBAUM, INEZ MOORE (D)
Senate - SC
INEZ TENENBAUM FOR US SENATE $2,000
primary 09/24/03

CHILDS, KENNETH L
CHILDS & HALLIGAN PA
SANDERS, ALEXANDER M JR (D)
Senate - SC
ALEX SANDERS FOR THE US SENATE $1,000

general 12/27/01
CHILDS, KENNETH
CHILDS & HALLIGAN PA
GRAHAM, LINDSEY OLIN (R)
Senate - SC
LINDSEY GRAHAM FOR SENATE $300

primary 12/13/01
CHILDS, KENNETH L
CHILDS & HALLIGAN PA
SANDERS, ALEXANDER M JR (D)
Senate - SC
ALEX SANDERS FOR THE US SENATE $1,000
primary 11/14/01

CHILDS, KENNETH
ATTORNEY
BRYAN, JAMES E JR (D)House (SC 03)
BRYAN FOR CONGRESS $250 12/29/97

CHILDS, KENNETH
COLUMBIA, SC 29211
ATTORNEY
BRYAN, JAMES E JR (D)House (SC 03)
BRYAN FOR CONGRESS $250

primary 12/29/97
CHILDS, KENNETH L
CHILDS & DUFF, ATTYS
SPRATT, JOHN M JR (D)House (SC 05)
SPRATT FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE $250
primary 11/29/91

Anonymous said...

Political contributions can be misleading. In fact for an attorney his contributions look modest. I'd rather know how he stands on public access and support for requests made under the Freedom of Information Act(FOIA). Read the informational briefs on school related topics for an idea. I'd like to know what cases he's fought & won...and what side he represented.

Anonymous said...

Representative clients of CHILDS & HALLIGAN PA as listed on their website:

Aiken County Public Schools

Anderson School District One

Anderson County School District No. Two

Anderson School District Four

Anderson School District Five

Bamberg School District One

Barnwell School District 45

Berkeley County School District

Beaufort County School District

Blackville-Hilda Public Schools

Blue Ribbon Schools of Excellence, Inc.

Calhoun County School District

Center for Educator Recruitment, Retention and Advancement (CERRA)

School District of Chester County

Chesterfield County School District

Darlington County School District

Diebold, Inc.

Dillon School District One

Florence County School District Two

Florence County School District Five

Great American Insurance Company

Greenwood School District 50

Hampton County School District One

Historic Columbia Foundation

Horry County Schools

Kershaw County School District

Lancaster County School District

Latta School District

Laurens County School District No. 55

Laurens County School District No. 56

Lexington County School District One

School District of Marlboro County

Millers of Columbia, Inc.

Mullins School District Two

National Beta Club

Newberry Electric Cooperative

School District of Oconee County

Orangeburg Consolidated School District Five

Pickens County School District

Richland County School District One

Richland School District Two

Rock Hill School District Three

Saluda County School District One

South Carolina Insurance Reserve Fund

South Carolina School Boards Insurance Trust

Spartanburg School District Two

District Five Schools of Spartanburg County

Tipperary Sales, Inc.

Trinity Episcopal Cathedral

Williston School District 2
















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Home
About Our Firm
Practice Areas
Meet Our Attorneys
Our Clients
Publications

Anonymous said...

Hey Newless Courier

The big story in town is why isn't the P&C running any articles about the Thomas Ravenel Case. What exactly is there motive for doing this? Why don't you break that story.

Anonymous said...

The City Paper is covering this story and the related story about the P&C very different coverage when compared to The State (in Columbia) and the Greenville News. Nice try, but I don't think that will distract us from this other story the P&C isn't covering. Kudos to The City Paper...but I wish they would cover some of this charter school stuff, too.

Anonymous said...

Ken Childs and his law firm have a very impressive group of clients. It's also obvious that many of them are far more successful in their relations with the public than CCSD has been.

Anonymous said...

Ken Childs is pretty good. But he has not stopped the mess in Marlboro County that involves Sherri Few and her whackos. At least he has tried to get them to comply with the Comprehensive Health Education Act, unlkie Alice Paylor in Charleston County and Dorcherster School District 2. Or didn't anyone read about this in the City Paper, The State, the Post and Courier, the Washington Monthly, and Ms.?

Anonymous said...

Go to http://pview.findlaw.com/view/1193756_1?channel=LP for information on Paylor's trial record.

Anonymous said...

The "Notable Client Outcomes" for Alice Paylor on the firm website at http://www.rrhlawfirm.com/experience/odp.aspx?oid=11 are two years old. See:

Alice Paylor secures defense verdicts for Charleston County School District
Mar. 2005
Alice Paylor, managing partner of Rosen, Rosen, secured defense verdicts in December 2004 and February 2005 in two cases brought against the Charleston County School District(CCSD).

Both cases involved former teachers suing school principals and CCSD for such actions as defamation of character, hostile work environment, sexual harassment, and/or racial discrimination.

The plaintiffs in both cases were seeking lost wages, reimbursement for financial losses and punitive damages.

Both cases went to jury trials where the juries found for the defense, the Charleston County School District.

She must be on a losing streak.

Anonymous said...

A rumor from a high level within the administration is saying that Gregg Meyers, Toya Green, Joe Riley and Nancy McGinley are working on a deal to change the direction of developing a new facility for the Academic Magnet High School (AMHS) in North Charleston. Instead they are looking downtown in a deal that may cause Burke to soon be history, at least on its present campus. This is still a rumor, but it is beginning to fit the context of other actions that have been documented already. It deserves more explanation since it is a potential bombshell if it is even remotely true.

Here is some background on the rumors. The projected cost of a combined campus for both AMHS and the School of the Arts (SOA) in North Charleston is being seen as too great by some CCSD officials and county board members. Both schools (AMHS & SOA) see sharing gyms and other campus facilities as a problem. The proposal Gregg is now floating, but only unofficially, will establish a vocational program at Rivers in response to the long standing requests from the Burke community to restore what was once a very successful program at Burke. The thought is that if the vocational program is placed at Rivers, with Burke students given access, then that will mollify the Burke crowd.

In the mean time, with NAACP and the Ministerial Alliance support, rumors and negative perceptions of just who a "low achievers" program (further rumored to be a Murray Hill discipline school spillover) at Rivers is really designed to serve. Some non-CCSD officials have been given the go-ahead by the Mayor and CCSD to use fear-mongering tactics and race baiting that are designed to effectively kill the charter school proposal, or at least kill the plan for a charter school starting up at Rivers.

As part of an elaborate bait-and-switch McGinley has already said the Advanced Placement Academy at Burke "will serve to attract students from all across the county". By implying that the AP Academy students will be "imported" and not "brought up" within Dist. 20's existing elementary schools she may have deliberately lighted the fuse to this plan to disarm the Burke alumni and begin to dismantle the downtown community's connection to Burke HS in its current location.

Here's their goal as far as it is known. Get some non-traditional students into the Burke campus (via the AP Academy). Justify moving the dwindling number of "traditional" or otherwise non-AP qualified students at Burke to Rivers by 2009-2010 using the vocational program to grease the wheels of the moving van. Move the AMHS into the now depopulated Burke HS using the AP Academy as the wedge. Do this under the cover of a "state ordered school reconfiguration"...because by that time Burke will be entering its 5th or 6th year ranked on state reports as a consistantly failing school...and of course this will be a year after the College of Charleston has distanced themselves from the school under the grant they will have already fully expended. Mr. Benton, the current principal, will simply retire again and move back to NC where he has long been known for "trouble shooting" failing schools. He's won some and lost some, so not problem.

To the state this would fit the definition of "radically reconstituting" a consistantly failing school. What a prize that would appear to be for state record keepers when the new AMHS at Burke shows up with a new school report card that goes off the charts as it were really part of a "failing school turnaround". As for "Burke at Rivers", they can start the process all over again with stop-and-go programs and second hand attention. It won't turn up as a deeply failing school again on state reports for years or at least not until another group of politicians has to deal with it.

Locally such a school bait-and-switch wouldn't have to be seen as a wholesale relocation, at least not initially. It's all a matter of how it is packaged for public consumption. The move could be pulled off as a morphing of the programs as the entire phased in move of AMHS into and Burke out of the present campus is orchestrated from behind the scenes.

What Gregg Meyers isn't bargaining on is that the Burke alumni will not go quietly if they see what is happening before it gets too far along. McGinley couldn't care less since she's building her resume for elsewhere. She's only the "overseer" on this plantation. She wants to eventually have her own place where she is less constrained. She'll do her time here and they buy into her own plantation later.

None of these people appear to be considering what the downside of such a proposal might be. The public outcry of a dirty deal and a sellout will permanently stain anything that will be associated with such a transition if that is what is currently being negotiated behind closed doors. What can be damaged will include the permanent reputation of AMHS. It will be a more of a leper in the eyes of parents and the public than Buist Academy has become after its mismanagement has been exposed. Porter-Gaud may be able to offer some thoughts on how much money is needed to overcome public distrust and cynicism after it's discovered that school officials sacrificed others for their own agendas...but P-G is a private school with an endowment...AMHS has no such ability to remake itself once the deal is done...at least not until all the witnesses are dead.

I can't tell you how many Burke community supporters suspected this was the ultimate goal even as the plans for the new school building were being presented to them by Harvey Gantt in 1999. People openly said as much when as CCSD officials were trying to reassure them that it wasn't their intentions to build the new school and then push Burke out. The rational may be justifiable in financial terms, but in terms of moral deceit and ill will the results will be very costly indeed. McGinley, Meyers, Green and Riley are reportedly in deep discussions to pull off nothing short of giving the remaining African-Americans on the peninsula "equal" access, but in another location and as long as it's access via the service entrance. They also want to discredit their critics in District 20 by offering to buy them off with worthless promises such as added funding for Memminger and offers for a charter school to lease part of Rivers.

Gregg Meyer and others on this team may enjoy the game of power plays designed to beat down their critics in District 20. But what good will these abuses serve if they fail to accomplish something of value in the long run? The stain of ill gotten gains will ultimately spoil the fruits of all labor. The public would be wise to prevent such a deal that will involve AMHS, Burke and Rivers in this way before it destroys everything that comes in contact with it.

I know this is only a rumor, but it's starting to fit too neatly among the facts we already know.

Anonymous said...

Opinion favors charter school supporters

Attorney general says state law prevents district from charging rent

http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/oct/20/opinion_favors_charter_school_supporters19695/

Question 1--does anyone ever agree with Alice Paylor?

Question 2--does Joe Darby ever agree with the AG?