juggling duties

Meeting miscue puts Haynes ethics request on hold

At the appointed hour Wednesday morning, members of the Denver Board of Ethics were all set to consider how Allegra “Happy” Haynes might be able to successfully navigate heading up the city parks and recreation department while remaining a Denver school board member.

Only a key player was missing from the table – Haynes.

While it was not clear at the moment, digging through emails revealed that Haynes was not informed of the time, date or place of the meeting, or that she was expected to attend, said board director Michael Henry, who acknowledged fault.

Long story short: the board may convene a special meeting to consider Haynes’s request for an advisory opinion about how she can fulfill both roles in harmony with the city’s ethics code, Henry said. Otherwise, the issue would need to wait for the board’s next meeting in late October.

Haynes is to assume her $139,293-a-year role as executive director of the city parks and recreation department on Monday after her appointment earlier this month by Mayor Michael Hancock. Haynes, the school board president, is running for reelection for her at-large board seat in the Nov. 3 election.

“A number of people have asked the question, ‘Can you do both of those?’” Haynes said in an interview Wednesday after explaining how she was not in the know about Wednesday’s meeting. “I wanted to make sure that I dotted all the ‘i’s and crossed all the ‘t’s in terms of addressing my dual role as a member of the board and as a member of the mayor’s team.”

Haynes said she has received advice from the city attorney and will rely on guidance of the DPS general counsel, as well. She said that in cases in which the city department and DPS have a contract, agreement or other legal relationship, she would recuse herself from being involved in either role.

In her Sept. 9 request for an advisory opinion, made public Wednesday by the ethics board, Haynes notes that school board members are not paid and work as volunteers.

She wrote that any contracts between the school district and the city must be approved by the City Council, and that it is unlikely the parks and recreation executive director would take “direct official action” as defined by the city ethics code over matters related to DPS.

Regardless of the circumstances, Haynes’s absence Wednesday at a meeting others knew about illustrates the difficulties in juggling both roles, said Robert Speth, a northwest Denver parent who is running against Haynes for the at-large seat.

Speth, who attended Wednesday’s ethics board meeting, said both parks and recreation and DPS are large, complicated organizations that deserve full attention. He highlighted past conflicts between the two, including an ongoing legal battle over a controversial land swap in southeast Denver.

“I believe there should be absolute separation between the management and leadership of those two entities,” Speth said.

In 2001, the ethics board issued an advisory opinion that laid out ground rules for then-school board member James Mejia as he also simultaneously led the parks and recreation department.

Mejia pledged not to take part in any “contract requests, grants, cooperative agreements, as well as negotiations, progress reports, vouchers or other forms of payment receipts of revenues and associated correspondence” involving DPS, instead delegating those duties to a subordinate.

The advisory opinion said that the dual roles themselves do not represent a conflict of interest. The code, it noted, prohibits a city official from taking “direct official action” on a matter before the city if the employee has a “substantial employment, contractual or financial interest in that matter.”

However, the board urged Mejia to take additional steps to make sure he wasn’t involved directly or indirectly as a DPS board member in any matter involving parks and recreation.

Here, you can review Haynes’s request and the board’s 2001 opinion on the Mejia situation:

Mixed messages

Is the Board of Regents hostile to charter schools? Depends upon whom you ask.

PHOTO: Monica Disare
Regent Collins and Regent Johnson engage in a discussion after a Board of Regents meeting.

When the Board of Regents took the unprecedented step of rejecting two new charter schools last week, it sent shudders through the charter school sector.

Even before the meeting last Monday, the Regents had been making charters “nervous,” said Andrea Rogers, the New York State Director for the Northeast Charter Schools Network. The rejections only heightened the anxiety.

“I think these denials skyrocketed the issue to the front of people’s minds,” she said.  

And yet, during the same meeting, the board praised and signed off on the opening of five other charter schools, which brings the number of new schools approved this year to more than any year since 2013.

The meeting was emblematic of the mixed signals that this Board of Regents have been sending over the last few months, feeding different interpretations among both those who advocate for charter schools and those who champion traditional schools

The board’s willingness to criticize and question charters have many believing the Regents are, at best, skeptics and, at worst, opposed to the publicly funded, privately run schools that they authorize and oversee.

At the same time, the Regents have not been without praise for charters, and some charters say they have appreciated the support of the body and the state’s support staff.

Chancellor Betty Rosa said the Regents’ decisions are evidence of nuance, not rigid ideology or partisanship.

“I think there’s too many times when people want to simply say ‘you’re for’ or ‘you’re against.’ It’s so much more complicated than that,” Rosa told Chalkbeat in an interview Wednesday. “To me, if it’s a wonderful opportunity for kids — you got me. If it’s not, I’m probably going to be your worst enemy.”

As an authorizer, the Board of Regents has the power to approve new schools and decide which of its 87 schools should remain open. In addition to deciding the fate of individual schools, the board is rethinking how it evaluates all of its schools   and whether they should take a closer look at measures like surveys or chronic absenteeism.

With several new members and a relatively new leader, the Regents’ actions have been under particular scrutiny for signs of partisanship. Some have seized on recent events, such as critical statements made by some Regents as charter schools have come before the board for approval or renewal.

One Regent suggested that charter schools achieve high test scores by pushing out students; another suggested a charter school in Brooklyn is contributing to segregation.

Rosa has fiercely opposed a proposal that would allow some charter schools to certify their own teachers, calling the idea  “insulting.” The board also rejected a batch of Success Academy renewals, arguing that their authorizer attempted to renew the high-performing but controversial charter schools too soon. (The move had little practical effect, since their authorizer, SUNY, can override the board’s decision.)

Rosa said the sum of these decisions does not mean either she or the board is anti-charter. Her opposition to the teacher certification proposal had nothing to do with the source of the proposal — a charter authorizer — but because, she said, she believes the idea is an affront to the teaching profession and will allow unqualified teachers to enter classrooms.

The Success Academy renewals, she said, were returned based on legal requirements — and were not an appraisal of the charter network.

But taken together, observers of different educational ideologies have concluded that the board is more likely to probe problems with charter schools than in the past.

“It is quite a change from a couple years ago, and it does show greater misgivings about charter schools than what we saw under the board as it was previously constructed,” said Bob Lowry, deputy director of the New York State Council of School Superintendents. (Lowry said he appreciates that the board is paying more attention to how charter schools will affect the funding of surrounding school districts.)

The state’s teachers union has picked up on the change and praised the board for providing more oversight of charter schools, while calling on them to do more.

“The Regents, at this point, are providing much overdue scrutiny of the charter sector,” said NYSUT spokesman Carl Korn. “We believe that the Regents and the state education department need to do more, but this is a good step.”

Charter school advocates agree, seeing the Board of Regents’ actions as worrying. Since the board’s philosophy is hard to pin down, schools are starting to wonder if they can switch authorizers, Rogers said.

Yet there are signs that charters’ fear are based on conclusions that are far too sweeping. As the board rejected two schools outside of New York City, they also lauded applications for schools opening in the city a fact that may suggest differences in how the Regents assess schools in different areas of the state.

Regent Christine Cea welcomed a new school in Staten Island, saying she is “totally in favor of it.” Rosa expressed excitement about a new KIPP school in the Bronx, saying the community has “tremendous support” for its opening.

Rosa said Regents are more thoughtful and involved in reviewing schools now. She suggested that there are educational innovations that can be learned from charter schools, but also offered some critiques. At the top of her list, she worries that charter schools are not well-equipped to serve students with the most severe disabilities.

Several schools that are currently authorized by the board expressed their appreciation for the Board of Regents and those in the state education department’s charter school office who provide technical assistance to schools and create charter school recommendations for the board.

“On our quest to better serve scholars with learning differences, we have found no better ally,” said Eric Tucker, who is a co-founder of Brooklyn Laboratory Charter School. “Through technical assistance and oversight, the Regents push public schools like ours to continually improve to better serve the needs of all students, all days.”

Still, said Bob Bellafiore, an education consultant who works with charter schools, several Regents come from district school backgrounds, and so their default attitude is to question charter schools and support the traditional school model.

“They’re much more district school system people,” Bellafiore said.

What's Your Education Story?

Tips for teaching poetry in a women’s prison. ‘Remember, you are not allowed to hug anyone.’

PHOTO: Lwp Kommunikáció, Flickr CC
Inmates at the Indiana Women's Prison.

Adam Henze was one of seven educators who participated in a story slam sponsored by Chalkbeat, Teachers Lounge Indy, WFYI Public Media and the Indianapolis Public Library on Sept. 5. Every teacher shared stories about their challenges and triumphs in Circle City classrooms.

A poet and educator, Henze read a poem about a day in his life as a poetry instructor at the Indiana Women’s Prison. Henze recounts the painful struggle to reconcile his experiences with the crimes for which his students were serving time — some life sentences for murder

It’s a story full of darkness, but it also offers hope that, as Henze said, “we are the sum of the things that we have done, but we’re also the sum of the things that we have yet to do.”

Check out the video below to hear Henze’s story.

You can find more stories from educators, students and parents here.