The Battle Of Protests: Charter School Advocates Versus Opponents

Coble, Boyle
Charter school opponents Tom Coble, left, and city public school parent Tammy Boyle flank a city police vehicle that was on scene for pro-charter school rally.

Charter school advocates rallying on Thursday to oppose a legislative proposal inside a city school had competition outside from education activists who support a two-year moratorium on the independently run schools that they say suck resources from traditional education districts such as special needs costs.

The rally took place at Park City Prep School including parents and clergy organized by the pro-charter organization The Coalition For Every Child that support more school choice. They oppose state legislation calling for a two-year moratorium on creation of any new charter schools, claiming a wait list of 3,600 students for charter schools in Connecticut. Charter schools receive public funds but run independently of traditional neighborhood schools.

Christine King
Christine King, New Beginnings Charter School parent, makes point during rally.

“It does not drain money from the public schools we are even more accountable not less than traditional public schools, our selection process is above board we accept all students and charter school students are performing at a very high level,” said Bruce Ravage, executive director of Park City Prep.

Charter school opponents such as parent Tammy Boyle and former Board of Education member Maria Pereira conducted their own demonstration in front of the school. Pereira provides this statement:

We were courteous and polite at all times and even helped direct parents to the correct entrance who were attending this press event.

Shortly after 10:00 a.m., two BPS parents, Tammy Boyle and Joanne Kennedy, as well as BPS grandparent Tom Coble decided they wanted to hear the participants speaking at the event. They did not take in any signs, they zipped up their jackets to conceal their “Vote NO to Charter $chools” t-shirts and quietly entered the school. They did not make any comments, nor were they disruptive, however Bruce Ravage, the founder and executive director of Park City Prep Charter School approached all three and informed them they would have to leave. Tammy Boyle informed Mr. Ravage she would not leave because this was a public press event being held in a “public” school funded with “public” tax payer dollars. Mr. Ravage informed Tammy Boyle that it was a “closed event” and that they were not “invited.” They still refused to leave.

A few minutes late Bruce Ravage returned and encouraged them to leave because he had called the Bridgeport Police Department. They still refused to leave. The rally was just about wrapped up so Tammy and Tom exited. As they were exiting the school, two Bridgeport Public School Resource Officers pulled up in SRO police cars. Tom and Tammy were concerned about Joanne who was still inside, therefore they reentered the building. The police officers stood in the hallway and monitored the situation, but did not request that Tom, Tammy and Joanne leave.

Charter Schools love to state they are “public” schools, yet when the “public” wanted to enter a “publicly” funded charter school to attend a “public” press event the event was only for specific members of the “public.” Many of those in attendance were NOT Park City Prep Charter School parents, and there was no issue in their attending this event.

Both the state director for Northeast Charter Schools and Families for Excellent Schools as well as Dr. Steve Perry were in attendance. There were additional paid charter school staff there as well.

These highly compensated charter school proponents and parents repeatedly attend BBOE meetings which are always held in one of our public schools, and the BPD has NEVER been called to remove them. Please think of this disgraceful episode the next time charter school proponents claim they are “public” schools.

0
Share

27 comments

  1. I am officially challenging Bruce Ravage to support his claims that charter schools do not drain financial resources from public school districts.

    I don’t mean “rhetoric,” Mr. Savage. I am looking for factual data, spreadsheets, etc. that support your claims.

    I assure yo, you will be completely unable to provide any data or spreadsheets that support one iota of your baseless assertions.

    Pure and utter “propaganda.”

    0
    1. Most charters schools ceased being public schools a long time ago and are little more than private schools funded with public dollars. Think they are bad in CT? In Arizona many of them are little more than matchbook schools that are run for profit. I even see ads on TV every morning for an on-line high school that allows students to have more free time. This is funded with tax dollars and run for profit … and while Arizona does have a lot of very rural areas, these so-called schools are being marketed in Tucson which has a metro area of over 1 million people so they don’t have the excuse the on-line school is for kids who are far away from a traditional HS.

      0
      1. There are Charter Schools in CT. They operate under State Legislation and State funding. They are NOT permitted to be “for-profit” schools. They came into being because folks at the State level believed parents and their school-age youth were not receiving adequate alternatives at the local level.
        We should all have higher expectations for the performance of our schools, students, educators, administrators and community at large, and attend to adequate funding year in and year out locally. Can supporters with different opinions find common ground for collaboration around the needs of youth? Or is much of what passes for advocacy about personal power and political posturing? Time will tell.

        0
        1. JML, charter schools were created as an experiment to allow “educators” to create schools as “innovative laboratories” to “experiment” on how to improve the education of children, and then to share these “innovative” practices with true public schools. In fact, the CEA was instrumental in supporting this initiative and the first charter school in Bridgeport was founded by a former BEA and CEA member. They were never created to become a parallel public school system.

          As far as their non-profit status, Dr. Steve Perry’s charter management organization that has never had a client will collect $2.6 million for “managing” 2,339 students over five years. To put that in perspective, the BPS superintendent will supervise over 97,000 BPS students over the same five-year period and earn less than $1.3 million.
          So much for being “non-profit.”

          0
          1. If your reference regarding “personal power” and “political posturing” was regarding my advocacy work, my response is some of us are effective, and some of us are clearly not.

            I was reading a recent study that stated those who wear bow ties do so in order to portray an image they are more intelligent than they really are. You are the only person I know who regularly wears a bow tie, therefore I must ask you if you support the findings of the study. 🙂

            0
          2. Ms. Pereira,
            Your logic is running off the track in places, I feel.

            I made a statement that Charter Schools in CT are operated as non-profit entities. Is that true or did I make a false statement?

            You enjoy comparing fees received by an organization rather than a person, for one or more responsibilities and then multiply it by a number of years into the future as if your crystal ball has such clarity. Check with counsel to see if the amount of money paid to an organization bears any relationship to the status of filing as a 501(c)(3) or similar organization. If the sums received or the mission pursued are extravagantly out of order, the IRS has ways of reviewing and correcting these practices in my experience.

            Regarding the origins of the Charter movement, the experiments as you inform us were an attempt to provide reform where that was not happening. Some parents continue to seek what charters are offering. Whether there are things worth sharing, and I daresay Bruce Ravage might have an opinion on that, when community organizers get into the field of battle and choose confrontation rather than conversation as a primary mode of public expression, the likelihood of “sharing” or celebration with what is working is diminished.

            And relative to your opinion piece below, perhaps you will provide a citation to the article you read, assuming you were not indulging in an innocent fiction, to share with friends of mine like Attorney Mike Rosten who runs Bow Tie Real Estate or retired People’s Bank Chair David Carson who really were more regular wearers than I have been in recent times.

            If you are stuck on the issue of intelligence, that is unfortunate. I have attempted to share the results of my research with all parties on the public scene. The greatest disappointment for me is when the numbers are ignored, the unfair practices are not criticized by one and all or the Charter, Ordinances and CT Statutes fail to be followed and there is not a Sheriff to take note. Instead people post happy faces when they feel they have scored points. Very sad really. As if the machinery of local government doesn’t grind people up and spit them out, why do folks in the field help that same process? Why can’t you find fault with the facts or the idea and leave it there? Time will tell.

            0
        2. Sorry, John. You are way off base on this one. It has been a very long time since the term non-profit has been usurped by the phrase not-for-profit.
          Do you realize the NFL is a not-for-profit organization as well as the PGA? Whatever you wish to call the excess funds, profit by any other name is still profit.

          0
          1. Be aware, “non-profit” and “not-for-profit” are two different things. A “non-profit” is not allowed to make a profit. A “not-for-profit” is supposed to not be in business for the money, but is allowed to make a profit. Don’t confuse the two.

            0
          2. Bow Tie, you wrote “You enjoy comparing fees received by an organization rather than a person, for one or more responsibilities and then multiply it by a number of years into the future as if your crystal ball has such clarity.”

            I don’t need a “crystal ball” because unlike you, I actually read his over 500-page application twice. His application included a five-year forecasted budget.

            This is what happens when you want to comment on subjects you have absolutely no direct knowledge of.

            0
  2. Mr. Ravage informed Tammy Boyle it was a “closed event” and they were not “invited.”

    Seems charter school representatives say this a lot, especially to those students with special needs, who may have behavior issues, or who’s inglés no es muy bueno.

    0
    1. Ben Walker, let’s not forget how all four charter schools in Bridgeport, with available data, clearly underserve students who qualify for free/reduced price lunch. In fact, they underserve low-income student by between 22.4% – 33.9% when compared to the BPS District, They also underserve English language learners by between 1.1% – 13.1%. They also underserve Special Ed. students by between 3.3%-6.4%.

      Why is this important? The three subgroups that perform the worst on standardized tests are free/reduced price lunch, ELL and Special Ed. Therefore if any school underserves these student populations it inflates their test scores.

      0
    1. Just reading the foreword I can tell this report is misleading. It describes charter schools as public schools. Charter schools are private schools funded with public dollars.

      0
      1. Eric,
        When you have time to read beyond the foreword you will know the entire report is about different types of public funding flowing to public schools and Charter Schools. When public dollars are spent for most things there are rules and reporting requirements usually that let people see what is going on over time.

        You obviously have a right to an opinion and to calling school systems anything you like, but perhaps consider what would happen at the moment (based on this report) if the Charter systems in existence were to cease operating. If all the Charter students turned to the public systems, contrary to comments made by Charter opponents on OIB usually, fewer dollars would appear available to sustain them in their return. That would seem to make the entire system fabric more fragile than today.

        Why is there such opposition to Charters in the light of the weaker financing reported here for Charter students? Time will tell.

        0
        1. Eric, Bow Tie has no idea what he is writing about. The state allocates $11,000 per charter school pupil, however they only allocate $8,600 per child. In addition, the BPS would save over $5 million each year on unnecessary transportation and special ed. costs and the loss of federal Title I funds. If every charter school student returned to the BPS next year, and the $11,000 per pupil followed them, it would bring almost $30 million into the BPS.

          0
          1. Ms. Pereira,
            The recently distributed CAFR for the 2014 Fiscal Year indicates “Education Cost Sharing – Charter Schools” provided $18,585,000 in that line item specifically for Charter students. If I divide that number by your stated allocation of $11,000 then it looks like there may be some 1,689 Charter students? I see no reference to such a number but the math works.

            The State of CT provided $170 Million more to the rest of Bridgeport students it seems. When this is added to the amount from Bridgeport taxpayers and $21 Million from Federal grants to education, it looks like the BBOE receives more total funds per pupil than Bridgeport Charter Schools. And that is the point that I am raising. Let’s see what the total funding amount is and who gets to spend it for whatever purposes in the full public school system and in the public funded Charter Schools. If we work on it together, we may make some progress in increasing the level of public knowledge about the funding at least. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2014 is on the Finance Director web site, but the Single State Audit and Single Federal Audit additions are not there at this time. They are at the City Clerk’s office for inspection or copying. Time will tell.

            0
          2. There are slightly over 2,500 students in the five charter schools located in Bridgeport. The state allocates $11,000 per pupil. Charter schools also receive a variety of grants. They also raise significant amounts from their millionaire and billionaire investors. There are just about 22,000 students in the BPS.

            0
  3. To dovetail Maria’s comments, I used to lament at council meetings when an issue with a charter school would come before us, the council wants to feel good by supporting charter schools that might help a couple of hundred students while ignoring the 20,000 who go unassisted.
    It is the legal responsibility of the state of Connecticut to provide an adequate education for all of its children but it is not their responsibility to provide alternatives or choices outside of a functioning education system.
    The problem is public schools in CT are not properly functioning. They are failing our children.
    Get it right for everyone and then you can talk about “feel-good” alternatives.

    0
    1. Well stated, Mr. Walsh!

      And in so doing, the State of CT must fulfill its legal obligations.

      This includes the State making Mayor Finch make his budget fulfill the state’s Minimum Budget Requirement (MBR) for Bridgeport public schools.

      The MBR requires each municipal, at minimum, fund, in cash, at least 20% of its public-school budget.

      How many more years will the state allow Mayor Finch to get away with failing to meet the MBR? Bridgeport currently is the only municipality that has not met its MBR two budget years running. Will it be three?

      0
      1. Pete, Mayor Finch is now in his third year of failing to meet the MBR. When Vallas was still here, he underfunded the BPS by $1.1 million in 2012/2013.

        0
        1. Is it possible Mayor Finch while not meeting the MBR expectation at the beginning of budget negotiations 6-9 months before a fiscal year begins, and also not meeting them by the same standard at the later date, has been in agreement with the State of CT? Attending one or more of the BOE Finance Committee meetings in the past three years, this would seem to be the track record.

          Mayor Finch does not regard the BOE as a good place to have a public conversation. And he certainly does not see the City Council as a necessary place for that either. But if one can get on the phone, make an appointment with those in power who may forgive this transgression, provide additional money as a forgivable loan, or just find more money with a different designation or grant, let’s go to Hartford. Isn’t that what has been happening? Look at the City Council Education Committee and see what has happened at their meetings in the past year. Look at the minutes as a representation of what elected representatives are willing to say and do. Yet taxpayers, Federal, State and local have been spending around $350 Million annually in recent years when operating, grants and school building capital funds are totaled.
          Who is profiting now? What does success look like to justify such spending? Who cares? Is ignoring equivalent to ignorance? Time will tell.

          0
          1. Bow Tie, you wrote “Is it possible Mayor Finch while not meeting the MBR expectation at the beginning of budget negotiations 6-9 months before a fiscal year begins, and also not meeting them by the same standard at the later date, has been in agreement with the State of CT? Attending one or more of the BOE Finance Committee meetings in the past three years, this would seem to be the track record.”

            The MBR is codified in CT state, therefore any agreements he has with the BBOE or the State are illegal. The only body that can alter a CT law is the legislature itself.

            0
  4. The other point I find almost amusing is how the city needs to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on new school construction because children need new GREEN buildings to learn better but the city is just as anxious to give away (or rent for free) older BPS buildings to charter schools because charter kids can learn just as good in older buildings.
    Does anyone else see the irony in this? The experiment says one thing but the politicians do something else.

    0
  5. Getting back to Booty above, there is no difference under law or IRS Code between the terms non-profit or not-for-profit. The two examples that I gave of the NFL and the PGA are both 501(c)(3)’s.

    0

Leave a Reply