The Pretext in Search for Superintendent

Superintendent Search in Disarray

On February 2, 2016 the Worcester School Committee held a “forum” on what qualities Worcester residents wanted to see in the new Superintendent of Schools.  The so called forum was confusing and to some extent showed how inexperienced or confused the three so called panelists from the school committee were.

As a rule panelist are the speakers. In this forum the panelist said nothing and Worcester residents spoke from the floor.

School Committee Woman McCullough ran the “forum” like a school marm. She seemed a little nervous and unsure as she told speaker after speaker “your time is up”, “please only talk about skills”, and “hold your applause”.

The irony here is that the first speaker from the audience asked what are the objective requirements for selecting a new superintendent and whether direct experience as a superintendent was required. The same speaker asked if speaking a second language other than English is a requirement.  The three school committee women on stage Donna Colorio, Dianne Briancharia, and Molly McCullough, could not answer the questions. Ms. McCullough said that she would refer the question to the school committee.

After the so called “forum” Ms. McCullough and Ms. Briancharia took the time to share their personal criteria for a new superintendent; the successful candidate they said would be effective, communicative, and a problem solver.

Ms. Colorio went out of her way not to give a statement on the qualities that she thinks a new superintendent should have.   I supposed that she might have worried about a question regarding her vote to take money from the Worcester Public schools and give it to charter schools.  

School Committee members John Monfredo and Brian O’Connell, although not on the stage, gave more coherent answers as what are the preferred requirements for a superintendent. Mr. O’Connell said that previous experience as a superintendent was preferred and the ability to speak a second language was a plus. Mr. Monfredo said that a Certificate of Superintendency was a must, but a doctorate was a preference.

The president of the teachers union spoke and asked that a member of his union be on the search committee.

A representative from the Worcester Educational Cooperative said that a superintendent should be able to fight for full funding from the State. The Worcester Schools are underfunded per the State’s educational formula. This is especially true for special needs students.

A parent said that a superintendent should also be able to get funding for gifted students.

Worcester resident, Ken Person, said that the Worcester schools were actually good schools when compared to other schools in the country. He wanted a superintendent that could continue and hopefully improve what is good about Worcester Schools.

A couple of teachers felt that there is a need for a superintendent to be able to communicate well with all principal parties, students, parents, teachers, and staff.

School safety was brought up by one speaker who thought that the decision to limit the search for a superintendent to within the Worcester School District was a mistake. He felt that a superintendent from a larger urban area with experience in school safety was needed. Although the speaker on school safety was one of only a few who described an objective requirement, the school committee had previously decided against it.

Some speakers mentioned diversity and the fact that over 90 languages are spoken by students in Worcester Public schools. They suggested that the new superintendent should be able to relate to this diversity not only educationally, but in terms of personal experience.

It was pretty clear that some of the school committee members could not or did not want to state objective criteria for a superintendent. To some extent the so called forum was a charade masking a subjective choice that seems already made.

The School Committee will likely choose Dr. Bienienda because she grew up in Worcester and worked her whole career in the Worcester Schools. The School Committee will ignore the facts that Dr. Rodriques has run a School District, has the same experiences of many in the Worcester Schools who have recently come to Worcester as the Worcester Schools become more majority minority.

Students' Rights Forum

Students ‘Rights Forum

On January 30, 2016 the Massachusetts Human Rights and the Progressive Labor Party organized a forum regarding students’ rights in relation to the so called School to Jail pipeline. About 30 people attended the forum. Half of the attendees were students. The groups had advertised the event at a couple of Worcester public high schools.  Several staffers from Worcester public schools could also be seen in the audience.

One of the presenters, Walter Joval a therapeutic counselor, spoke of the harm done to children by the school to jail pipeline and the trauma they suffered. Ruth Rodriquez, a long time activist, spoke on how charter schools were draining money from the already underfunded urban public school districts and how standardized high stakes testing is causing some students to leave school.

Nathan Wong, a defense lawyer, spoke of the rights the students have when facing the school police. He indicated that a student did not have to answer questions in a police investigation unless a parent was present; even with a parent present, a minor did not have to answer questions in an investigation. Mr. Wong noted that unless a person was under arrest the person was not obliged to remain with the police. He also pointed out although lockers are considered public and could be searched without a warrant; a student personal property required a warrant for a search.

I was the last speaker. I spoke on how the City of Worcester was out of compliance with the update of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) required by State statutes. I spoke as well on the topic of Chapter 222 which sets forth the rights of students in disciplinary matters. The purpose of Chapter 222 was to reduce the number of suspensions and time out of the class room for students. This is to be accomplished by providing a cooling off period for staff and students in order to ensure that no snap decision are made. The decisions regarding suspensions and expulsions should be well considered.

The full time school police do not have to comply with Chapter 222. The School Safety officer, Mr. Pezella, had indicated that arrests of children at school were up since the police were stationed in schools. There is a need to update the MOU to indicate that the police should operate per Chapter 222 and the police are directed by the principal or her designee.

It is understood that there will be times that the school police will have to operate in emergency situations and make snap judgments. What is an emergency should be defined in the MOU as it is also defined in Chapter 222. It is also understood that the some of the staff of a school prefers to have police on campus just for these emergencies.

Recently there was a safety audit of the schools and the concerns of all parties should be discussed in the implementation of the safety recommendations found in the audit.

During the informal talks after the forum, where information is exchanged, it became known that the school police and the staff at the Worcester schools are aware of the concerns the forum sponsors and others have about the school to jail pipeline. There seems to be some effort to use the school police in a cautious manner.

Several people representing community group indicated that there will be a larger meeting in March of parents, students, and concerned people to discuss the so called racist school to jail pipeline and other issues. Hopefully the City will invite this coalition to help in the formulation of its policies. 

The Misuse of Police Force in Worcester

The City’s Misuse of Police  

The order by a City official to arrest Chris Horton at the Martin Luther King Jr. Breakfast came as no surprise to me. The City has a history of misusing police force to solve what are social issues.

In the 1990s, then Mayor Mariano ordered the police to arrest students not in school during school hours, despite the fact that the Worcester School had truant officers who did the same job. This practice was opposed by a small group, International Committee Against Racism' which said that the police arresting children was a traumatizing event. The City bosses did not listen. The practice of the police arresting children for playing hooky was effective stopped by a complaint made to the State Department of Labor Relations. The Hearing Officer ruled that arresting children for playing hooky was outside of the police contract.

Recently Mayor Petty and others passed an ordinance allowing the arrest of panhandlers. The proponents of the use of police force against this social issue used the pretext of ‘public safety”. In memory there was never any one injured by a car while panhandling. Hundreds of people were wrongfully arrested under this ordinance. The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled the ordinances unconstitutional. The ACLU and a small group of activist, Real Solutions” opposed the unconstitutional ordinances.

 Last year the City Council instructed the City Manager to put police officers full time in the Worcester Public Schools.  The City Council and School Committee had assigned full time police officers to each of the high schools. They did this BEFORE the Safety Report was finished. They did this BEFORE the State required Memorandum of Understanding was completed. It is still not complete.

There is no evidence that Worcester Schools had a serious safety issue. There is no evidence that police in the schools have made any school safer today. There is evidence that more students are being arrested at school for non criminal activities that should be handled by the State mandated disciplinary policies found in M.G.L. Chap 222, Acts of 2012.

There is evidence that these arrests are traumatic experiences for the students and contribute to the school to jail pipeline.  Two small group Mass. Human Rights and the Progressive Labor Party are opposing the arresting of students at school. The groups are hosting a “Students’ Rights Forum" , 1-30-16, 1 PM Worcester Public Library.

The most obvious misuse of police force was the malicious prosecution of the BlackLives Matter protesters after the Kelly Square demonstration of 2015. There was not enough evidence for either the police or the DA to file charges. City Manager Augustus then ordered the police department to use an unauthenticated video to take to the Clerk Magistrate.

 The Clerk Magistrate ruled that there was some evidence of disturbing the peace.  At the trial the police sergeant said that he did not see anyone at the demonstration do anything criminal. The judge has ruled that there were no criminal penalties. On 1-21-16 the Court found three of the defendants responsible.

The Worcester SWAT was recently used on a raid on a wrong house and there has been no investigation of what went wrong or review of police.

Mr. Niddrie, co chair of the MLK Jr. Breakfast, could have talked to Mr. Horton BEFORE he called the cops. However the so called liberals in City government are quicker to use police force than to talk about other solutions.

In each of the events above there was an element of direct or disparate racism impact. This is especially true in the Worcester Schools where thousands of students face increase risk of arrest for non criminal matters.

 Many in the Black Community wonder aloud how did the MLK Jr. Breakfast get hijacked by the political establishment.

The use of police force to solve social problems is a sign of laziness and lack of creativity among our City officials. There is certainly a need to consider this when choosing who controls the police in our City.

BlackLives Matter and MLK Day

                            BlackLives Matter Rally 2014

The New Civil Rights Movement and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

There will be at least two different celebrations on Dr. Martin 

Luther King, Jr. Day in Worcester Massachusetts.

There will be the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Breakfast in 

Worcester is at Quinsigamond Community College at 8 AM. The 

tickets for this event cost $25.00 and they have to be purchased in 

advance.

There will also be the  March Against Racism on MLK Day in 

Worcester assembles in front of St. John RC Church on Temple 

St. Worcester. The march starts at 12 Noon. It will go down 

Green St. to Kelly Square, rally there, and then return to St. 

John Church. In many ways this march is in response to the 

racism and retaliation of the City of Worcester against the new 

civil rights movement of BlackLives Matter.

Many people do not remember or do not associate the urban 

rebellions of the 1960s with the old civil rights movement. The 

rebellions were not what were wanted by some respectable people, 

as we Black people were not seen as victims of racism. We were 

seen as the fighters against racism.

When Dr. King attempted to organize northern Black people in the 

cities he was rudely made aware of the militancy that created the 

Black Panther Party, Malcolm X, and the Worcester Black 

Coalition.

I suppose Dr. King expected the White racism he faced in Cicero 

Illinois. He could not have expected that young Black people in 

Watts would call him Martin “Loser” King. The old civil rights 

movement in the South was to some extent prettified with men in 

suits and religious people (all good and brave people). The men in 

dungarees and who spoke Geechee were only seen in the back. Dr. 

King eventually understood the contradictions of such tactics and 

began to support working class struggles, such as the garbage men 

strike in Tennessee during which he was assassinated.

With his death Dr. King has become a safe symbol for anyone. 

Streets are named after him. Schools are named after him. There 

was even a Martin Luther King Jr. innovation center. Now we have 

a Martin Luther King Jr.  holiday with its ubiquitous breakfasts. In 

Worcester there will be the 31^st annual breakfast.

Please do not get the wrong idea. I think that the people doing 

these things are good people and well intentioned. I know most of 

them and I consider them my friends. I am sure some of them 

would like to disassociate themselves from the new militancy of 

the BlackLives Matter. This has certainly been the case with some 

“liberal” people.

BlackLives Matter new civil rights movement has given a new face 

to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day in Worcester. The blockade of 

Kelly Square in 2015 by people protesting the killing of Michael 

Brown added a sharpness and militancy to Dr. King’s Day that has 

continued through the year in Worcester and many places in the 

Nation.

This militancy continues on January 18, 2016 when a coalition of 

groups and individuals will March Against Racism. The groups 

have raised several issues all dealing with anti racism including, 

opposition to the school to jail pipeline, an end to racist killings by 

the police, higher minimum wages, and end to the retaliation by 

Worcester City government against BlackLives Matter.

70 To 100 Teachers Could be Fired

                                 Co Chairs CPPAC

70 to 100 Teachers Could Be Fired

The Citywide Parent Planning Advisory Council (CPPAC) met on January 13, 2016.

CPPAC is an advisory council to the Administration and School Committee of the Worcester Public Schools. The council is made up of parents who represent the schools that their children attend. (From Worcester School Dept.)

The main agenda item for this meeting was the standardized testing of the students in the Worcester Public Schools. However another topic near the end of the meeting was seemingly more concerning to the group. It was an issue described as “urgent “by the co chair of CPPAC, Ms. Melissa Brady. Mr. Howard Lucas also a co chair, expressed concern over the issue of financing for Worcester Public Schools.

Ms. Brady indicated that the Worcester Public Schools have been short changed about 90 million dollars per year by the State for several years. This shorting is based on the amount of school aid coming from the State in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 70.  Although the formula is a little bit complex, Chap 70’s philosophy and intent has been characterized in the statute as:

“It is the intention of the general court, subject to appropriation, to assure fair and adequate minimum per student funding for public schools in the commonwealth by defining a foundation budget and a standard of local funding effort applicable to every city and town in the commonwealth”.

According to Ms. Brady the State legislature was considering at the recommendation of Governor Baker that another 11 million dollars be cut from the school budget. Former school committee woman, Ms. Tracey Novick, joined the discussion and said that the City of Worcester was not actively trying to mitigation the short changing, but it was considering cutting an additional 2 million dollars from its appropriations to the Worcester Schools.

It is likely that the Worcester Public Schools will have a short fall of at least 13 million dollars when compared to last year’s appropriations. This is on top of the shorted 90 million dollars.

The parents in the room were concerned about the possible reduction in school finances as this would mean a likelihood of increase class sizes to over 25 students in some classes. It would also mean a lack of resources available to the students.

Some parents express disappoint in Manager Augustus who has failed to attend the CPPAC meetings. There is an open invitation for him to come to the meetings and the previous City Manager attended CPPAC meetings on a regular basis. Someone said that Manager Augustus was more politician than manager.

The City Manager was not the only government official criticized. Ms. Brady indicated that she was disappointed with the State legislature, especially Senator Chang-Diaz, Chair Joint Committee on Education. She said that Ms. Chang-Diaz and her Joint Committee on Education had done little or nothing to oppose the cutbacks in State funding. Ms. Brady also was critical of Worcester Area’s State legislature delegates who have done similarly not much to mitigate the potential cuts.

Subsequent to the CPPAC meeting I spoke with Leonard Zalauskas, President of the teachers’ union. He said that he was aware of the problem and that it is likely that between 70 to 100 teachers could be fired. Mr. Zalauskas said that he had recently met with the Worcester Area State legislature delegation and expressed his concerns. However He said also that he did not want to go “ballistic” and he wanted to give a “temperate” response at least until the time that Governor Baker’s budget was made public. Mr. Zalauskas once again held his fire regarding the possible reduction of City money to the Worcester Public Schools, saying it had other money issues such as pensions.

The budget for the next fiscal year will be set in stone by July 2016 which does not give much time for people to oppose the budget cuts. I suppose this is why politicians set up the system this way.

Although everyone spoke as if color blind, these cuts are coming as the Worcester School District becomes more majority minority. I cannot help but suspect that the budget cuts are made easier by the talk of some narrow minded politicians who are slandering our children with the talk of the need for cops in the schools.

Corporal Punishment, School discipline, and Police Arrests

Corporal Punishment, School Discipline, and Arrest Trauma.

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts recently ruled that a 

couple who disciplined their child using corporal punishment could 

not be foster parents. The couple argued that they would not used 

corporal punishment on the foster children, but only their 

biological children. This argument was rejected by the Court.

The Court based its ruling affirmed the decision of the Department 

of Children and Families (DCF) that the foster parents use of 

corporal punishment on foster children who have likely suffered 

traumas of abuse or neglect was potentially harmful. It also ruled 

that even if the foster parents did not use corporal punishment on 

the foster children, their use of corporal punishment on their 

biological children could be emotionally upsetting to the foster 

children.

“… that children placed by the department have been exposed to an array of neglect and abuse, and their awareness of acts of corporal punishment in their foster homes "could well trigger the very trauma the placement was intended to mitigate." The hearing officer stated that the department could not simply place with the Magazus a child who had not been physically abused because foster children often do not disclose the full extent of their experiences until after being placed in substitute care. Moreover, she continued, the Magazus' willingness to refrain from using corporal punishment on a 9 foster child did not alleviate the department's concerns regarding the discipline of such child postadoption, when the child would no longer be under the purview of the department”

The Worcester Public Schools are legally similar to foster parents. 

They are parentis in loco which means that the schools have the 

same parental responsibilities as biological, foster parents, and 

guardians when the children are at school. Corporal punishment is 

not allowed at Worcester Public Schools with the exception of the 

use of Police Force.  The use of police force and arrest is traumatic 

and emotionally upsetting. Yet it is increasingly being used in the 

Worcester Public Schools for non emergency matters such as 

school discipline which is covered by Chap. 222 of the Acts. 2012.

Robert L. Simon M. D. has written

“False arrest and imprisonment can be an extraordinarily traumatic event. The author's evaluation of three cases, and a review of the recent forensic psychiatric literature and reported legal cases, clearly demonstrate that serious psychological impairment may follow false arrest and imprisonment. These cases are frequently litigated. “

Arrests made by the police for “disturbance and disorderly”, as 

defined in Chapter 222, are false arrests and imprisonment. These 

situations should be handled per the statutes by the Worcester 

Public Schools administratively and not by falsely arresting and 

imprisoning children.

 The number of arrests of students at Worcester Public is higher 

than last academic year with at least two students arrested in 

middle school. A Worcester School official has stated that most of the arrests have been for disturbances and disorderly which are not crimes.

The Worcester Public Schools published in outdated Memorandum 

of Understanding (MOU) on December 18, 2015. I am sorry to say 

that the MOU published on that date was a sham and a political 

stunt. The MOU published is the outdated MOU which does not 

cover police being full time in the school, their duties and 

restrictions, their training, nor their chain of command (can a 

principal order a police officer to stand down?). Dr. Rodrigues, 

acting Superintendent of Worcester Public Schools, said in a 

December 2015 meeting that an updated MOU would not be 

available until after March of 2016 when there would be some sort 

of curriculum for the training of police in schools.

The facts are the following:

·        the police in the school have not been trained for being School Resource Officers as there is no curriculum

·        there is no clear description of the police duties and restrictions in the schools

·        the police have not recognized that a principal of a school can make them stand down.

·        most of the arrests made in Worcester School are for non criminal events which are more appropriately handled by school administrators

·        there is evidence that police arresting children and children witnessing arrests cause trauma.

At the December 17, 2015 Worcester School Committee meeting, 

Ms. Idella Hazard opposed cops being in schools as it sends the 

wrong message to our children, is potentially damaging, and the 

resources could be better spent. Although she did not say that cops 

in the schools are a part of a racist school to jail policy, I believe 

that it is racist. This is especially true as the Worcester School 

Committee is all White and the majority of the children in the 

Worcester public schools are not.

No Intimidation at Political Trial

                                                                  File Photo 2015

A Bogus Trial of Retaliation

On January 7, 2016 the Kelly 4 BlackLives Matter protesters charged with disturbing the peace during the 2015 MLK Day protest had their day in court.  It was pretty clear from the start of the trial that the something unusually wrong was going on.

The trial judge prevented the defendants from having a jury trial. He said that case law allowed him to change the nature of the case from criminal to civil. In a criminal case the defendants can choose a jury trial. In a civil case the prosecution can choose not to have a jury trial. In either case it can be inferred that the trial judge did want to go through the hassle of a jury trial or he did not think that the charges rose to the level of criminality. In a civil case the prosecution only has to achieve the standard of “preponderance of evidence” and not the more difficult standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”.

The prosecution witnesses were in my opinion not credible and perhaps racists. The truck driver said that he was five hours late for a delivery due to the four and one half minutes blocking of Kelly Square. He then said he was fired from his job. Another witness said that the driver’s firing had nothing to do with the Kelly Square demonstration.

A woman driver who encountered the demonstration testified to yelling out to the protesters “you would not block me if my granddaughter is Black”.

Police supervisor, Sergeant Maddox, said that he would not have arrested anyone at the Kelly Square demonstration as he did not see anything criminal taking place. The Sergeant said that he did start to write his report until two and one half months after the incident, when ordered to do so by his superiors. The Sergeant  then said that his report was partially based on another  police report written by officer Brace who did not testify.

The defendants Jones and Gibbs gave as a defense their compelling political need to protest the unjust killings of people, especially unarmed young Black men. Defendants Ksen also spoke of his political motivations and the fact that he did not block any traffic. Defendant Conner did not testify, but her attorney indicated that Officer Brace misidentified her and there was no evidence that she blocked traffic.

The City officials who initiated the charges against the defendants did not testify. There is speculation that they brought charges in order to retaliation and intimidate BlackLives Matter protesters.

The judge said that he will mail out his decision to the KS4 defendants. The maximum for a civil case of disturbing the peace is a fine of $150.00.

There were a good number of people who came out in support of the BlackLives Matter protesters. They expressed a sentiment that no matter what the judge rules, the protests would continue and they would not be intimidated. A March Against Racism is being planned for MLK Day, January 18, 2016, 12 Noon.  St, John, Church on Temple St. to Kelly Square.