The Connecticut Education Association that represents 43,000 teachers in Connecticut filed a complaint today with the State Department of Education claiming Superintendent of Schools Paul Vallas is “breaking the law by not allowing teachers, parents, and community leaders to participate in the educational process as outlined in state statutes.” The CEA filed the complaint on behalf of Gary Peluchette, president of the Bridgeport Education Association. The CEA charges are the latest against Vallas. Retired Superior Court Judge Carmen Lopez, aligned with Connecticut’s Working Families Party that controls four of nine votes on the Board of Education, filed a state lawsuit against Vallas’ three-year contract asserting Vallas lacks the certified credentials to serve. News release from CEA:
Bridgeport School Superintendent Paul Vallas is breaking the law by not allowing teachers, parents, and community leaders to participate in the educational process as outlined in state statutes, according to a complaint filed by the Connecticut Education Association (CEA) with the State Department of Education today.
The complaint details specific violations of state law regarding School Governance Councils, Connecticut General Statutes Section 10-223 j. CEA filed the complaint on behalf of Bridgeport teacher and President of the Bridgeport Education Association Gary Peluchette.
The Connecticut General Assembly created School Governance Councils to involve the community, parents, and teachers in the educational process across the state, but Peluchette says that’s not what’s been happening in Bridgeport.
“The beneficial purpose of School Governance Councils has been largely ignored by Bridgeport Public Schools and Superintendent Vallas. The complaint cites numerous violations of state law that need to be addressed and corrected immediately,” said Peluchette.
According to the complaint, state laws were violated because the following happened with members of School Governance Councils. The councils:
— were not given an opportunity to review the fiscal objectives of the draft budget for the school and provide advice before it was submitted to the superintendent
— did not participate in the hiring process of administrators
— did not work with school administration to develop and approve a school compact
— were not involved in developing and approving a written parent involvement policy outlining the role of parents in the school
— had no involvement in analyzing school achievement data and school needs relative to the improvement plan for the school
— did not assist the principal in making programmatic and operational changes for improving the school’s achievement
— have not been made aware of their authority, nor have they been given opportunities to exercise this authority
“These are just some of the examples of the flagrant disregard Bridgeport Public Schools Superintendent Vallas has shown for School Governance Councils and state law,” said Connecticut Education Association President Sheila Cohen.
Cohen added, “School Governance Councils have a successful track record of engaging parents, teachers, and community members in important school activities and providing collaborative support to improve student achievement. These opportunities and the benefit of state laws must be afforded members of the Bridgeport school community.”
Full complaint here.
Vallas leaves a wake of controversy wherever he shows up and leaves a mess behind but leaves with lots of money in his pockets. Shame on all the people who inflicted this Flim Flam Man on Bridgeport.
This made the top of the list of “Darn, I Sure Hope I Checked My Spelling and Punctuation Because Thousands of Teachers Are Now Reading This” posts.
You passed the editing and revising section because your comment was picked up by a national blogger.
susanohanian.org/outrage_fetch.php?id=1615
Reader Comment: Vallas leaves a wake of controversy wherever he shows up and leaves a mess behind but leaves with lots of money in his pockets. Shame on all the people who inflicted this Flim Flam Man on Bridgeport.
*** IT’S GOT TO GET WORSE BEFORE IT GETS BETTER, NO? ***
Words from speak up with permission:
Vallas isn’t used to following any rules or reporting to anyone let alone the lowly parents and teachers. He left Philly with a $74 million deficit. The NOLA district is primarily charters and it is ranked 69 out of 70 and most schools are rated D’s and F’s. Chicago was “reformed” by Vallas but is presently being reformed again. It appears his miracles have no sustainability. He will stay as long as the money pours in for himself and his educronies. Although a new disaster, similar to Haiti, could whisk him away.
Here are the details of the NOLA “successes” … BPS … This IS your future under the traveling privatizer:
The RSD in New Orleans is comprised of 83% charters (58 schools out of 70). Thus, the charters are running out of options for shuttling unwanted children back to community schools. And RSD is a colossal failure by the reformers’ own standards. But the reform set still tries to lie about RSD “success.” They play with the numbers, combining numbers, concealing numbers, and outright lying about the numbers:
deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/new-schools-for-new-orleans-dont-you-believe-it/
susanohanian.org/outrage_fetch.php?id=1615
Lennie, you’re famous!
Thanks, Sue, for the link!
I worked for him in Philly.
Watch the privatization soar by the addition of contracts for formerly district positions. Watch the dollars subtracted, spent on programs and technologies without the funding stream to follow through effectively. Watch the number of administrators multiply as new programs are implemented while attempting to accommodate existing positions. Watch the community become divided between those who support him added to those who benefit and those who suffer the result of his policies.
www .dailykos.com/story/2013/05/16/1209666/-School-turnaround-genius-Paul-Vallas-leaves-a-trail-of-destruction
Vallas isn’t creating this particular controversy–the union is. And why is that? Requires some dot-connecting. This particular law is pretty simple. It requires school boards–not just BP but all CT boards, to do two things for their poorest performing schools: provide for the establishment of School Governance Councils, and provide training for members of the councils. You can find the statute online. The law stresses the SGC’s are advisory only, meaning they don’t have any real power. They are to advise on all major policy issues except ONE: collective bargaining agreements. That’s interesting. The CT legislature wants parental input on everything from budget to school improvement plans, but NOT on teacher accountability or job protection. How did that ONE exemption got into the law? Hmmm …
After three years in existence (we aren’t at that mark yet anywhere in CT), the SGC’s can vote to reconstitute a bad school–hand it to the state or ask the state to charter it, etc. The law spells out the options. But wait, lawmakers again put teachers over parents: the law requires almost as many teacher voting members on each SGC as there are parents! So the chances of a vote to reconstitute a school, which could upset the union applecart, are slim! Now, look at the union’s complaint itself. Remember, the board is required by law to do only two things: establish and provide training. Does the union complain the BP BOE failed to establish or train SGC’s? No. It only complains that certain members did not participate in certain activities that are the responsibility of the SGC’s. It doesn’t even complain that the SGC’s as a body were prevented from undertaking their responsibilities or make a case for “why” certain members were not involved. Legally, it’s a total nonstarter.
So now let’s connect the dots. Other states passed “parent trigger laws” that made a lot of news. See:
parentrevolution.org/content/basic-overview
Couching its move in a desire for “community involvement,” CT rushes to pass the SGC law, with the union ensuring it is heavily represented with voting members included. Why? To stave off a potentially stronger parent trigger law that might actually lead to parents having power to do something drastic about a failing school. So that is why the union is so interested in this little statute! Along comes a new administration that is holding community forums and actually getting out and meeting with parents in other settings, away from the SGC’s where the union is not represented and cannot exert influence. Not saying this is a purposeful strategy of the administration, but it is obviously making the union nervous there is interaction going on where it’s not in the mix. After all, it’s kind of hard for a parent to sit there and complain about the quality of the teaching in his kid’s school when there are a bunch of teachers staring at you in the same room. So maybe that is why the union is complaining and making political hay out of a nonexistent issue. This is not brain surgery. This is not teacher bashing, this is pointing out that the union will waste the BOE’s time and taxpayer money in a political attempt to manipulate public opinion to protect itself.
It certainly sounds like union bashing … and it certainly sounds like it was written by someone from Excel.
BRG,
It’s your tin ear acting up again. Some of us thought travel to a drier climate might improve your listening skills and your comprehension. However in your worldview it’s the unions against all comers, but especially Charter Schools. Rather, how does this complaint from the State Education Association advance the life of the kids in the classroom?
Looking at City structures, Charter regulations, Council ordinances and other regulations makes one sensitive to ‘conflict of interest’ or specific agendas in play. Is the teacher’s professional association engaged in negotiations currently or in the near future on compensation, benefits and new contract terms for teachers? Is that a potential explanation for the current testiness? I have been most surprised as one who tries to keep track of City finances, including BOE, for the underwhelming concern of most school stakeholders in the failure to fund the requested school budget when the City Council deliberated and voted. What really gives here? Are the teachers content with a smaller funding? Time will tell.
To all readers, please note the above message has been written and approved by Paul Vallas, the traveling circus reformer. More examples of empty rhetoric will become available when he isn’t busy faking his online 093 degree. See descriptors below if interested in furthering the deformer message:
Sycophant: Synonyms
apple-polisher, bootlicker, brownnoser, fawner, flunky (also flunkey or flunkie), lickspittle, suck-up, toady
Related Words
yes-man; apparatchik, company man; hanger-on, leech, parasite, sponge, sponger; henchman, lackey, lapdog, minion, running dog, satellite, slave, stooge; admirer, cultist, devotee, enthusiast, fan, groveler, idolater (or idolator), worshipper (or worshiper), zealot; adherent, camp follower, convert, disciple, follower, me-tooer, partisan (also partizan), pupil, votary
Touché! Beware … whoever you are … you rule!
To all readers. Sounds like the above post was written by a worried teacher.
Worried: Synonyms
afraid, agitated, annoyed, apprehensive, basket case, bothered, concerned, distressed, disturbed, edgy, excitable, fidgety, fitful, flustered, fussy*, hesitant, high-strung, hysterical, irritable, jittery, jumpy, nervy, neurotic, on edge, overwrought, querulous, restive, ruffled, sensitive, shaky*, shrinking, shy, skittish, snappish, solicitous, spooked, taut, tense, timid, timorous, troubled, twitchy, uneasy, unrestful, unstrung, upset, uptight, volatile, weak, wired, worried
Actually I have nothing to worry about. I am not stealing money and dividing a community. You’ve got that covered.
I spent a lot of time reading the statute, analyzing the complaint and writing a thoughtful response. Not one of you addressed or even contested anything of substance that I submitted. It’s just personal attack after personal attack with no time devoted to developing any thoughtful response to the important–supposedly, since the district is once again spending taxpayer dollars on this–question at hand.
You are like Obama’s drones–indiscriminate. And Beware–Dude you don’t rule. You are just–meh. But hey, thanks for taking 30 seconds to google synonyms for us and cut ‘n’ paste ’em in. We didn’t know how to do that and it was enlightening. Now go google meh.
If beware was directing his comments at me, he is still avoiding the topic and the questions I raise in favor of a “vocabulary assignment” for sixth graders, perhaps. Superintendent Vallas neither wrote nor viewed my comments. If that is what beware is saying, he is mistaken.
I have pursued fiscal answers in this City for almost five years with no specific agenda aside from the belief the public’s business is truly the public’s business. When people strike out at others anonymously and refuse reasonable questions, as well as refusing to reveal their own interests and agenda, the potential good effect on public understanding is compromised.
I appreciate Outpost Educator in the necessarily lengthy responses from personal research. It is helpful to read these posts and learn something that is helpful in connecting ideas in the public forum. At this moment in time, the Bridgeport Public School administrators are ahead of the City-side operating budget administrators in timeliness in reporting revenues, appropriations, variances, and projecting year-end results. They report on grants and numbers of people employed. All of these financial results are available online and are a real advance for those who care about funding for public education. When will the City Council respond to my comments about this disparity by two players using the same MUNIS accounting program? When will all parties once again provide support for adequate funding to reach youth in the classroom? Where do these reports show the ‘manipulation’ and pillaging accusations made by beware? Can beware find and read the financial statements? Doesn’t this show progress for Bridgeport voters and taxpayers? Why not say so, or focus your criticism on facts? Time will tell.
Actually Josh T. I never read your post. Back to work, JT. Don’t forget it’s the civil right$ i$$ue of our time and it’s for the kid$.