Gloucester Daily Times story here.
It should be noted that the charter office consists of individuals who are hired by the state to rigorously and vigorously review charter applications. Members of the charter office attend public hearings, attend applicant interviews and review applications. The charter school office recommended not to recommend the GCA charter in late January or early February of 2009.
Before this recommendation was made the 3 1/2 hour public hearing had taken place on December 11, 2008 (2 members of the charter office attended along with the assistant commissioner--no voting Board of Education member attended our hearing), 151 letters opposing the school and 16 letters supporting the school had been received by the commissioner/charter office, a charter applicant interview had transpired and the January 27, 2009 Board of Education meeting had taken place during which the board voted to retroactively waive the requirement that a voting board member be present at our hearing.
In short, the charter office did not make a recommendation in a vacuum. Between January 30, 2009 and February 13, 2009 Commissioner Mitchell Chester chose to dismiss the charter office's recommendation. How can his recommendation to approve the GCA charter be explained?
Please attend the public hearing on Monday, June 8th--5 p.m. at City Hall--being held by state legislators to draw attention to possible procedural errors in the application and approval process for the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Welcome...
I posted a link at the Gloucester Daily Times. Welcome visitors.
The first link (blog archives) explains why I, and others, oppose the GCA Charter School.
The second link (archives) sums up the flawed charter school application process.
Why
Open Letter to the People of Gloucester
The first link (blog archives) explains why I, and others, oppose the GCA Charter School.
The second link (archives) sums up the flawed charter school application process.
Why
Open Letter to the People of Gloucester
The debate continues....
To the editor:
Mr. Baird, board member for the proposed charter school, says in his column (The Times, Monday, May 18) that he feels bullied by the overwhelming, passionate, and vocal commitment of public school parents, teachers, elected representatives, and other residents of Gloucester, who oppose the charter.
In response to our opposition, he has published a flood of derisory labels for this ever-expanding community, which evidently offends him with its expressed concern for the charter's impact.
Many people have come forward to protest the charter school plan and the shabby neglect of Gloucester residents during and following public hearings. They have come from so many quarters and so many backgrounds that Mr. Baird is in danger of running out of derogatory names in his efforts to criticize them all.
Thus, in his columns and letters he has called one parent a Democratic aparatchick, another a Bush-like Republican. The rest of us he calls "bullies," "attack dogs," "mad dogs,""barking dogs" (Mr. Baird is evidently no more fond of dogs than of his neighbors), "witch-baiters," "fear mongers," "foot-stampers," "cadre of defenders of the system,"and, oddly, "ministers of the system."
These parents have, according to Mr. Baird, undertaken a "despicable smear campaign." (That's right. "They", not Mr. Baird, are undertaking a "smear campaign"! Can we spell "projection"?)
Click here to finish reading Roger's letter.
Roger Garberg
Gloucester
To the editor:
Peter Van Ness, spokesperson for the GCA Charter School, has made the claim that the people who signed the first page of a petition making no mention of the financial impact of the charter school were harassed.
While Mr. Van Ness may have convinced some with his clever, yet questionable PR tactics, he hasn't convinced everyone.
Having been a contact person for 62 of the 151 people who wrote letters of opposition to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education in December, I have been told directly by community members that they were not as informed as they could have been and simply distracted when they first signed the petition. Many have asked that their names be removed — without prompting from people opposing the school.
I have also witnessed firsthand the tenor of the opposition's campaign in the form of incredibly passionate letters written by the people of Gloucester. While I cannot speak for all of the actions of the people who oppose this school (many do not belong to a formal group), I know from the discussions, phone calls and e-mails of the people with whom I've worked closely that our interactions have been civil and intended to help people get correct information about a critically important issue.
To finish reading my letter click here.
Jane Cunningham
Gloucester
Mr. Baird, board member for the proposed charter school, says in his column (The Times, Monday, May 18) that he feels bullied by the overwhelming, passionate, and vocal commitment of public school parents, teachers, elected representatives, and other residents of Gloucester, who oppose the charter.
In response to our opposition, he has published a flood of derisory labels for this ever-expanding community, which evidently offends him with its expressed concern for the charter's impact.
Many people have come forward to protest the charter school plan and the shabby neglect of Gloucester residents during and following public hearings. They have come from so many quarters and so many backgrounds that Mr. Baird is in danger of running out of derogatory names in his efforts to criticize them all.
Thus, in his columns and letters he has called one parent a Democratic aparatchick, another a Bush-like Republican. The rest of us he calls "bullies," "attack dogs," "mad dogs,""barking dogs" (Mr. Baird is evidently no more fond of dogs than of his neighbors), "witch-baiters," "fear mongers," "foot-stampers," "cadre of defenders of the system,"and, oddly, "ministers of the system."
These parents have, according to Mr. Baird, undertaken a "despicable smear campaign." (That's right. "They", not Mr. Baird, are undertaking a "smear campaign"! Can we spell "projection"?)
Click here to finish reading Roger's letter.
Roger Garberg
Gloucester
To the editor:
Peter Van Ness, spokesperson for the GCA Charter School, has made the claim that the people who signed the first page of a petition making no mention of the financial impact of the charter school were harassed.
While Mr. Van Ness may have convinced some with his clever, yet questionable PR tactics, he hasn't convinced everyone.
Having been a contact person for 62 of the 151 people who wrote letters of opposition to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education in December, I have been told directly by community members that they were not as informed as they could have been and simply distracted when they first signed the petition. Many have asked that their names be removed — without prompting from people opposing the school.
I have also witnessed firsthand the tenor of the opposition's campaign in the form of incredibly passionate letters written by the people of Gloucester. While I cannot speak for all of the actions of the people who oppose this school (many do not belong to a formal group), I know from the discussions, phone calls and e-mails of the people with whom I've worked closely that our interactions have been civil and intended to help people get correct information about a critically important issue.
To finish reading my letter click here.
Jane Cunningham
Gloucester
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Serious Entertainment!
Some of you might recognize the name Hugo Burnham; he's drummer for rock band Gang of Four. He also has an opinion about the GCA Charter School. Read on.
To the editor:
I must, unusually, take exception to some part of your editorial concerning the proposed charter school. (The Times, Monday, May 11)
The "get over it, he won" dynamic is uncalled for, and reminds me uncomfortably of the aftermath of the national elections of 1999 and 2003.
Peter Van Ness has consistently appeared to be anything but transparent, which, with his oft-noted arrogance in content and tone has caused much of the distrust and fear running through our community. How many times has he said how his charter will somehow teach us all — parents, teachers and school district alike — how to better educate the city's children? Yet not once has he been specific about the magic bullet loaded in his charter gun, other than field trips to the Heritage Center.
Wonderful. Will those be weekly or daily?
He goes on about the arts as if our schools have none, that our teachers and students are Philistines all. I take exception to that.
In the editorial, to say the superintendent told "... a prospective arts instructor there would be no tolerance ..." for a school district employee showing support for the proposed charter school, is hyperbole and incorrect, certainly as far as the direct quote in your own front page story. The superintendent said only that it would "... be troubling ..." to him, and that it would only be considered in breach of legality if such support was active whilst on the clock. What part of that is "no tolerance" harassment?
Van Ness' secret list of supporters demands true transparency, and the whole city deserves as much — not least because so many people are distrustful of its veracity so long after its inception. If he believes it to be truly indicative of adequate and firm support, then a new petition should be distributed, especially now that we all are more informed about the facts, despite much being still unclear; not least the facts about the economic impact to the district, and facts about the options for the charter school site, most likely in a downtown location ... so well known for terrific parking opportunities and enormous open space available for children to be outside running around and playing, something every parent acknowledges the absolute need for.
Click here to finish reading Hugo's letter.
Hugo Burnham
High Street, Gloucester
To the editor:
I must, unusually, take exception to some part of your editorial concerning the proposed charter school. (The Times, Monday, May 11)
The "get over it, he won" dynamic is uncalled for, and reminds me uncomfortably of the aftermath of the national elections of 1999 and 2003.
Peter Van Ness has consistently appeared to be anything but transparent, which, with his oft-noted arrogance in content and tone has caused much of the distrust and fear running through our community. How many times has he said how his charter will somehow teach us all — parents, teachers and school district alike — how to better educate the city's children? Yet not once has he been specific about the magic bullet loaded in his charter gun, other than field trips to the Heritage Center.
Wonderful. Will those be weekly or daily?
He goes on about the arts as if our schools have none, that our teachers and students are Philistines all. I take exception to that.
In the editorial, to say the superintendent told "... a prospective arts instructor there would be no tolerance ..." for a school district employee showing support for the proposed charter school, is hyperbole and incorrect, certainly as far as the direct quote in your own front page story. The superintendent said only that it would "... be troubling ..." to him, and that it would only be considered in breach of legality if such support was active whilst on the clock. What part of that is "no tolerance" harassment?
Van Ness' secret list of supporters demands true transparency, and the whole city deserves as much — not least because so many people are distrustful of its veracity so long after its inception. If he believes it to be truly indicative of adequate and firm support, then a new petition should be distributed, especially now that we all are more informed about the facts, despite much being still unclear; not least the facts about the economic impact to the district, and facts about the options for the charter school site, most likely in a downtown location ... so well known for terrific parking opportunities and enormous open space available for children to be outside running around and playing, something every parent acknowledges the absolute need for.
Click here to finish reading Hugo's letter.
Hugo Burnham
High Street, Gloucester
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Support Representative Ferrante's Amendment
Representative Ann-Margaret Ferrante will introduce an amendment to the House as early as today. If the amendment passes in the House and then the Senate, the charter school will be prevented from opening as the current population in Gloucester is below 30,000.
The amendment reads as follows:
Ms. Ferrante of Gloucester moves to amend the bill by adding at the end thereof the following section:
“SECTION____. Subsection (i) of section 89 of chapter 71 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2006 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following sentence:- No new commonwealth charter school having been approved by the board, but not yet begun its initial year of classes, shall begin classes in any community with a population of less than 30,000 as tallied in the annual list of residents pursuant to section 4 of chapter 51, in its initial year of classes, unless it is a regional charter school.”
Please take a few minutes to show support for this amendment. E-mails and calls can be short and sweet. Identify yourself as a parent, grandparent, teacher, concerned citizen of Gloucester...... Mention the census numbers and the difficulties that our small city will face if we must finance the GCA Charter School.
Call and write:
Speaker DeLeo
Speaker of the House
617-722-2500
Chairman Murphy
House Ways and Means Chairperson
617-722-2990
Representative Ferrante
617-722-2425
Pass this on. Numbers matter. Thank you for all that you do.
Jane
The amendment reads as follows:
Ms. Ferrante of Gloucester moves to amend the bill by adding at the end thereof the following section:
“SECTION____. Subsection (i) of section 89 of chapter 71 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2006 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following sentence:- No new commonwealth charter school having been approved by the board, but not yet begun its initial year of classes, shall begin classes in any community with a population of less than 30,000 as tallied in the annual list of residents pursuant to section 4 of chapter 51, in its initial year of classes, unless it is a regional charter school.”
Please take a few minutes to show support for this amendment. E-mails and calls can be short and sweet. Identify yourself as a parent, grandparent, teacher, concerned citizen of Gloucester...... Mention the census numbers and the difficulties that our small city will face if we must finance the GCA Charter School.
Call and write:
Speaker DeLeo
Speaker of the House
617-722-2500
Chairman Murphy
House Ways and Means Chairperson
617-722-2990
Representative Ferrante
617-722-2425
Pass this on. Numbers matter. Thank you for all that you do.
Jane
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Ray Lamont's frustrating editorials....
Do Ray Lamont's Gloucester Daily Times editorials represent the voices of our community? You decide.
April 2, 2009
Click here to read the editorial and responses to it.
This from Iceman:
The founders of Community Arts Charter School are not GPS's "colleagues." They are a very small group of people with no training or experience in education.
And no, the debate is not "over." When a tiny handful of people manages to make off with public money -- against overwhelming community opposition -- to fund their fantasy liberal arts college, then you can expect a debate. You think "overwhelming opposition" is hyperbole? Look at the DESE's own reporting about the run-up to the charter school vote.
Looks like the GDT argument is no longer the standard, business-model "healthy competition" garbage? They are now hoping for "an opportunity for more collaboration, rather than competition" between the schools? They'll contort themselves and invert their metaphors in any way in order to avoid framing the GPS as anything other than a cantankerous old union member one inch from retirement. Maybe they should actually enter one of our schools and report on what they actually see.
February 26, 2009
April 2, 2009
Click here to read the editorial and responses to it.
This from Iceman:
The founders of Community Arts Charter School are not GPS's "colleagues." They are a very small group of people with no training or experience in education.
And no, the debate is not "over." When a tiny handful of people manages to make off with public money -- against overwhelming community opposition -- to fund their fantasy liberal arts college, then you can expect a debate. You think "overwhelming opposition" is hyperbole? Look at the DESE's own reporting about the run-up to the charter school vote.
Looks like the GDT argument is no longer the standard, business-model "healthy competition" garbage? They are now hoping for "an opportunity for more collaboration, rather than competition" between the schools? They'll contort themselves and invert their metaphors in any way in order to avoid framing the GPS as anything other than a cantankerous old union member one inch from retirement. Maybe they should actually enter one of our schools and report on what they actually see.
February 26, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Ed Shoucair of The Gloucester Education Foundation
March 25, 2009
To the editor:
I am writing on the topic of the charter school in Gloucester.
I admire the supporters of this initiative and their sincere wish for an excellent education for children of Gloucester admitted to the new school. However, I ask that they reconsider the approach they are taking. I have read their materials, heard their leaders speak, and am aware that they feel sure they are doing a good thing for Gloucester by creating an alternative school.
In my mind, the call for a charter school has provided a valuable public service by adding to the discussion on how to improve Gloucester's schools. A number of the charter school programs, such as "responsive classrooms" and the addition of more art into the curriculum, are good ones. In many instances, these programs and other initiatives in the charter school proposal exist in one form or another in Gloucester's public schools. But there is no question that these successful programs should be expanded and made available to all the students in the District.
The major shortcoming I see in the charter school is that the zealous belief in the benefits of a charter school prevented many of its supporters from seeing the alternative school's benefits will be dwarfed by the damage it will do to the larger school community. I also believe that the growing awareness of this fact is the reason for the loss of a number of the charter school's original individual and organizational supporters.
From the beginning, the charter school's leadership has claimed that there will be no or minimal negative financial impact on the existing system of public education in Gloucester. This is false. The truth remains that after an initial transition period, more than $2 million per year will be taken from Gloucester's public schools serving more than 3,300 students to fund a school serving 240.
At the February hearing before the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, the president of the charter school asked for approval for its proposal stating that there was "widespread grassroots support for the charter school." He gave evidence of this by saying the Gloucester Daily Times had written several editorials in favor of the charter school, and that "just the day before, the editor of the Times called and encouraged me to go before State Board and speak." Putting aside the impropriety of the editor's phone call, the Gloucester Daily Times editorial page is not evidence of widespread community support. Not on this issue. Letters and phone calls to the governor from those in Gloucester opposing the charter school ran nearly 10 to 1.
To finish reading Ed's letter click here.
ED SHOUCAIR
Washington Street, Gloucester
To the editor:
I am writing on the topic of the charter school in Gloucester.
I admire the supporters of this initiative and their sincere wish for an excellent education for children of Gloucester admitted to the new school. However, I ask that they reconsider the approach they are taking. I have read their materials, heard their leaders speak, and am aware that they feel sure they are doing a good thing for Gloucester by creating an alternative school.
In my mind, the call for a charter school has provided a valuable public service by adding to the discussion on how to improve Gloucester's schools. A number of the charter school programs, such as "responsive classrooms" and the addition of more art into the curriculum, are good ones. In many instances, these programs and other initiatives in the charter school proposal exist in one form or another in Gloucester's public schools. But there is no question that these successful programs should be expanded and made available to all the students in the District.
The major shortcoming I see in the charter school is that the zealous belief in the benefits of a charter school prevented many of its supporters from seeing the alternative school's benefits will be dwarfed by the damage it will do to the larger school community. I also believe that the growing awareness of this fact is the reason for the loss of a number of the charter school's original individual and organizational supporters.
From the beginning, the charter school's leadership has claimed that there will be no or minimal negative financial impact on the existing system of public education in Gloucester. This is false. The truth remains that after an initial transition period, more than $2 million per year will be taken from Gloucester's public schools serving more than 3,300 students to fund a school serving 240.
At the February hearing before the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, the president of the charter school asked for approval for its proposal stating that there was "widespread grassroots support for the charter school." He gave evidence of this by saying the Gloucester Daily Times had written several editorials in favor of the charter school, and that "just the day before, the editor of the Times called and encouraged me to go before State Board and speak." Putting aside the impropriety of the editor's phone call, the Gloucester Daily Times editorial page is not evidence of widespread community support. Not on this issue. Letters and phone calls to the governor from those in Gloucester opposing the charter school ran nearly 10 to 1.
To finish reading Ed's letter click here.
ED SHOUCAIR
Washington Street, Gloucester
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
