Privatization of Oakland public schools embraced by an elected school board
A vote by the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) on a 2019-20 spending plan that because of Assembly Bill 1840 will allow the school board to close schools and sell property and will again put OUSD back into state receivership under a trustee is scheduled for Feb. 25.
"What should not be forgotten, is that CTA (California Teachers Association), the OEA’s statewide “parent," actively supported the passage of AB1840," said Jack Gerson, Oakland Education Association executive board and bargaining team member from 2007 to 2011.
The plan is to hide the $30+ million the Oakland schools have in surplus by an accounting sleight of hand, declare a deficit of that same amount, and invite a de facto state takeover, as outlined below, so they can privatize a significant portion of the city's schools
The seven school board members act like they don't see or understand this. Maybe they're naive, stupid, or just good actors. At least six of them were elected with billionaires' money.
"The vote explains everything that’s happened over the last three years," said Mike Hutchinson of OPEN (Oakland Public Education Network). "Antwan Wilson, an engineered budget crisis, the Blueprint process, the forming of a 7-11 committee, BP 6006, the opportunity ticket, citywide school closure plan, the millions of dollars spent on school board elections, this year’s $60M increase in expenditures, the looming teachers strike, and more. It’s all been an effort close our public schools in order to move the property to charter schools and developers. And the entire school board is complicit."
Gerson also shows how the plan, readily accepted by the school board, has been in the works for a long time:
"On November 6 of last year, there was a presentation on this to the school board by the following: The Alameda County Superintendent of Public Instruction; the outgoing state trustee (when local control was “returned” to OUSD nine years ago, the OUSD state administrator became the OUSD state trustee with power to stay or rescind any district act he deemed to be financially risky); FCMAT (the public-private entity that audited OUSD for the state); he outgoing OUSD state trustee (who becomes the incoming OUSD county trustee); representative from the state education apparatus.
"And the OUSD board appropriately genuflected, cooed, and competed in who could lavish the most praise upon the new jailers."
"This is a takeover — this time, the county does the dirty work. But the OUSD board has been acting in this way for years — acting as the local executors of the corporate assault on public education. This is not a revelation. The real question is: Why did CTA support AB1840? Well, AB1840 promises additional funding to Oakland (and / or the other three specified school districts) if (a) they’re in deficit, and (b) they eliminate that deficit by making the cuts prescribed by FCMAT and the county.
"Most folks — including, I think, CTA — believed, last June, that OUSD was really running a deficit last year and would run one again this year. In fact, they had a $29 million surplus at the end of last year, and have to cook the books (mainly by hiding unallocated revenue in the “books and supplies” category, which they’ve bloated ridiculously) to make it appear that they have a deficit this year (and thus qualify for AB1840 funds)."
AB 1840 states, “This bill would authorize the Inglewood Unified School District, the Oakland Unified School District, the South Monterey County Joint Union High School District, and the Vallejo City Unified School District, if those school districts have an outstanding emergency apportionment loan as of July 1, 2018, until the emergency apportionment loan is repaid, to sell or lease surplus real property, together with any personal property located on the real property, owned by the school district and use the proceeds from the sale or lease to service, reduce, or retire the debt on the emergency apportionment loan, or for capital improvements of the school district’s facilities.”
And, “This bill would require the Oakland Unified School District, for the 2018–19 fiscal year, in collaboration with and with the concurrence of the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools and the County Office Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, to take certain actions by March 1, 2019, regarding its financial plans and school district construction plans, as specified. The bill would provide that, beginning with the 2019–20 fiscal year and ending with the 2021–22 fiscal year, the Budget Act for those fiscal years shall include certain appropriations, as specified. The bill would make the disbursement of moneys from those appropriations contingent upon the completion of activities specified in the prior year Budget Act to improve the school district’s fiscal solvency.”
The vote on a 2019-20 spending reduction plan are the “certain actions by March 1, 2019” referred to in the Bill.
AB 1840 further states, “The trustee appointed pursuant to this section shall monitor and review the operation of the school district. During the period of his or her service, the trustee may stay or rescind an action of the governing board of the school district that, in the judgment of the trustee, may affect the financial condition of the school district.”
And, “(a) The Legislature finds and declares that when a school district becomes insolvent and requires an emergency apportionment from the state in the amount designated in this article, it is necessary that the county superintendent of schools, under the supervision of the Superintendent, assume control of the school district in order to ensure the school district’s return to fiscal solvency.
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature that an administrator, appointed pursuant to Section 41326, do all of the following:
(1) Implement substantial changes in the school district’s fiscal policies and practices, including, if necessary, the filing of a petition under Chapter 9 of the federal Bankruptcy Code for the adjustment of indebtedness.
(2) Revise the school district’s educational program to reflect realistic income projections, in response to the dramatic effect of the changes in fiscal policies and practices upon educational program quality and the potential for the success of all pupils.
(3) Encourage all members of the school community to accept a fair share of the burden of the school district’s fiscal recovery.
(4) Consult, for the purposes described in this subdivision, with the school district governing board, the exclusive representatives of the employees of the school district, parents, and the community.
(5) Consult with and seek recommendations from the county superintendent of schools and the Superintendent for the purposes described in this subdivision.
(c) For purposes of this article, the county superintendent of schools, the Superintendent, and the president of the state board or his or her designee may also appoint a trustee with the powers and responsibilities of an administrator, as set forth in this article.”
