From: Dave Cortright <davecortright@yahoo.com>
To: Julia <juliaghs@aol.com>
Cc: Joseph Di Salvo <josephsds1@aol.com>; Michael Chang <michael_chang@sccoe.org>; Anna Song <anna_song@sccoe.org>; Grace Mah <grace_mah@sccoe.org>; Julia Hover-Smoot <julia_hover-smoot@sccoe.org>; LeonBeauchman <leon_beauchman@sccoe.org>; Craig Mann <craig_mann@sccoe.org>; Carmen Aminzadeh <Carmen_Aminzadeh@sccoe.org>; Charles Weis <Charles_Weis@sccoe.org>; Cary Dritz <Cary_Dritz@sccoe.org>; Lucretia Peebles <Lucretia_Peebles@sccoe.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 7:14 AM
Subject: Re: I'm disappointed, but still hopeful; please answer this question for me
Julia (et al.),
I do very much appreciate your engagement and directness. Thank you for that.
And while I would like to agree with you on your answer, the evidence I have seen leans heavily toward the LASD assertion. The most recent being:
BCS just fired their vice-principal, Marie Stuart. Of course BCS will say she resigned, but this looks an awful lot like the BCS administration creating a scapegoat for blame assignment when LASD presents their evidence to the court. Wanny is also not receiving a performance bonus this year. A slap on the wrist, and yet another tardy and superficial tactic to attempt to show positive progress correcting problems now that they know what will inevitably come out in court.
I implore you: several members of SCCOE staff must debrief Marie Stuart. It is very likely that LASD will compel her to testify under oath anyway. It will be greatly to your advantage to hear what she has to say before. (In fact, you really should do the same with Wanny, the board, current and former employees, and as many parents and families that you can muster.) I cannot overestimate how serious this situation is about to get for you.
I also hear that Marie Stuart—as all BCS staff—was required to sign a non-disclosure agreement. I really don't understand how a public school, paid for with public funds, can get away with such level of secrecy. But there it is. I have personally attempted to reach out to past BCS employees and they have been too afraid to talk to me about their experiences there. I think that in itself speak volumes.
As for other evidence pointing to illegal [student] admission and dismissal procedures:
- BCS has already proven itself untrustworthy and fully capable of illegal behavior, as shown by the FCMAT report. The precedent has been set.
- BCS has illegally asked for documentation during the application process that dissuades and denies minority, low-SES, and ELL families from applying.
- BCS administration have a proven history of lying. In two cases when I was there, they lied directly to you during your board meetings: Ms. Medlin and her fallacious claim that BCS was not asking LASD to close a school (despite their Prop 39 request clearly asking for exclusive use of Gardner Bullis), and Mr. Evans who denied that the "intent to occupy" letter—which included the thinly-veiled threat of legal action—came from BCS.
- Brave parents in the community have come forward with their stories about how BCS were unwelcoming to their children, like Mike Uhler and Scott Kaufman. These are the tip of the iceberg. Many more families like these are out there. And sadly, many are afraid to come forward.
- The BCS admissions lottery is an opaque process. BCS has provided no details for the exact process of how the lottery is run to ensure it is fair and unbiased. It is not on their web site. I asked the BCS board several times last winter for these details, but received no response. The date and time of the lottery was not published on the BCS web site, so concerned citizens such as myself were effectively barred from attending. And evidence from other charter schools indicate preferential admissions is common practice.
In the face of such overwhelming evidence, and the inevitability of this all coming to light once LASD presents in court, you would be remiss to not investigate further.
Respectfully,
·Dave Cortright
(My apologies for the late response; I was out of town for a long weekend.)
From: Julia <juliaghs@aol.com>
To: Dave Cortright <davecortright@yahoo.com>
Cc: Joseph Di Salvo <josephsds1@aol.com>; Michael Chang <michael_chang@sccoe.org>; Anna Song <anna_song@sccoe.org>; Grace Mah <grace_mah@sccoe.org>; Julia Hover-Smoot <julia_hover-smoot@sccoe.org>; LeonBeauchman <leon_beauchman@sccoe.org>; Craig Mann <craig_mann@sccoe.org>; Carmen Aminzadeh <Carmen_Aminzadeh@sccoe.org>; Charles Weis <Charles_Weis@sccoe.org>; Cary Dritz <Cary_Dritz@sccoe.org>; Lucretia Peebles <Lucretia_Peebles@sccoe.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: I'm disappointed, but still hopeful; please answer this question for me
Hi David,
Re your question, my response, of course, is "no".
You know my point of view so I will not reiterate it here.
Sincerely,
Julia
Comments