Assembly member Joan Buchanan

The teacher dismissal bill awaiting Gov. Jerry Brown‘s signature includes no specific language for streamlining the process of removing teachers for sexual and physical abuse, which had been the focus of earlier bills. The final version simply creates protocols to govern any dismissal case.

Brown has until Oct. 13 to sign it.

Assembly Bill 375, which passed both houses of the legislature last week, grew out of other bills, more narrowly written, that focused on teachers who posed threats to children. Those efforts, opposed by teachers unions, evolved into a wider bill that creates overall procedures with deadlines when none were in place before, prompting some lawmakers were characterizing as too long, too expensive and too cumbersome.

Sponsored by Joan Buchanan, a northern California Democrat and new chair of the Assembly’s education committee, the final version has the strong support of the unions, in part, for maintaining a three-member panel that decides a case — two teachers and an administrative law judge — and for loosening the eligibility requirements for teachers to serve on the panel.

But critics of the bill before Brown argue that it betrays the purpose of the original legislation, denying districts an explicit pathway to removing teachers accused of immoral and illegal behavior.

“For me, I see no benefit in the bill,” John Deasy, the LA Unified superintendent, told LA School Report, referring AB 375. “It neither strengthened nor weakened the current law. In other words it does not help. I look for legislation that makes it easier for districts to dismiss teaches who harm students quickly and cost effectively.”

Bill Lucia, CEO of Ed Voice, a grassroots nonprofit group, is urging Brown to veto the new law, calling it “unsafe for children” and saying it would increase “the likelihood that perpetrators will negotiate a buyout and a hall pass to inflict child abuse again in another California public school.”

Buchanan’s bill evolved from SB 1530, which was introduced last year and never made it out of an Assembly committee, thanks to a two Democrats voting against it and four abstaining — as well as heavy lobbying by the California Teachers Association.

The bill would have given school boards the authority to suspend without pay a teacher or administrator who is notified of dismissal for conduct involving sex abuse, drugs or violence toward children. It would also have given school boards, not a panel — the final authority over dismissals.

One Assembly member who abstained from the voting was Betsy Butler, who was narrowly defeated last year by Richard Bloom, the former mayor of Santa Monica.

Running as an underdog, Bloom had blasted Butler’s abstention, telling LA School Report last year: “I’ve never done that in 13 years of being a public official. I think it’s our responsibility as elected officials to register our opinions and have discourse on them. That’s what public discourse is about.”

But this time, Assemblyman Bloom abstained from AB 375, which had been held up in committee, only to resurface and reach the Assembly floor last week in the final legislative session, a time lawmakers usually scramble to approve bills before the deadline.

“AB 375 was significantly amended and passed out of one committee, then moved on to another committee where, a day before the Assembly and Senate votes, it received a favorable vote,” said Bloom. “While advocates for the measure were certainly prepared, there was virtually no time for school boards, community activists, or anyone other than insiders to evaluate and comment on the reformulated bill.”

Bloom said he scrambled to do his own research and found mixed assessments, with some calling the measure a “modest step forward,” while others told him that “limits on depositions, time constraints on investigations and other factors, would make it harder, not easier, to discipline those accused of heinous acts like child molestation.”

In the end, Bloom simply didn’t feel comfortable voting one way or the other.

“Given that neither I nor my staff had the time to independently evaluate these conflicting views I decided that I could not support the bill, but was not comfortable, at that point, in voting “No'” he said. “My abstention had the same effect as a “no” vote.

“I remain concerned that the legislature has unwittingly passed a bill that would make it more difficult to discipline a teacher like Mark Berndt.  I think that result, if accurate, is unconscionable.“

Berndt is a former third grade teacher who is awaiting trial on charges that he molested more than 20 students over five years.

 0-0

The bill awaiting Brown’s signature has unambiguously good news for a certain category of teachers in California public schools: It codifies compliance with a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court decision that being a member of the Communist party cannot be grounds for dismissal.

Previous posts: Richard Bloom Criticizes Betsy Butler For SB 1530 Vote; Assemblymember Bloom Opposes Teacher Dismissal Bill; Teacher Dismissal Bill Blocked Over Seven-Month Time Limit

Now, Padilla plans to join forces with Assemblymember Joan Buchanan (D-Alamo), head of the Assembly’s Education Committee, who introduced her own alternative teacher dismissal bill this week.

Buchanan might seem like an unexpected ally for Padilla, given that Buchanan voted no (along with fellow Democrat Tom Ammiano) on the previous version of Padilla’s bill, SB 1530, which was endorsed by LAUSD and opposed by UTLA.

Buchanan and Padilla say they will work together to pass AB 375, which shares some of SB 10’s key provisions, such as permitting teacher dismissal during the summer and allowing the use of evidence that is older than four years.

In a statement released to LA School Report, Buchanan said she opposed SB 1530 last year because its focus on teachers who abuse students was too limited:

“The dismissal process takes too much time and is too costly for all types of dismissals.  We need a better process that works for everyone – one that is fair, ensures due process, and can be done in a timely and cost-effective manner.”

It remains unclear at this point whether the Buchanan legislation is as rigorous as the Padilla proposal. EdSource has a good analysis of the two bills; read the story here. Or, see the full text of SB 10 here and the draft text of AB 375 here. However, cooperation between Padilla and Buchanan could mean AB 375 has a better chance of passing.

Previous posts:  Richard Bloom Criticizes Betsy Butler For SB 1530 Vote; Where’s UTLA Stand on Teacher Removal?;

“There is no reasonable explanation for why firing a teacher in California is such a time-consuming, tortuous and expensive procedure… Appeals often drag on for years — during which the school district must pay the teachers’ salaries and benefits — and almost invariably favor the teachers… The dysfunctional process benefits no one except bad teachers. The Legislature has been giving in to union resistance for far too long; it’s time to pass real yet reasonable reform.” — LA Times editorial

LA School Report is increasingly being recognized for its coverage of critical Los Angeles education issues. The latest example is the site’s inclusion in the Students Matter newsletter for our story about SB 10, the resurrected version of SB 1530: Teacher Dismissal Bill, Redux.

Read below for more highlights.

Board Members Richard Vladovic, Marguerite LaMotte, and Bennett Kayser will present a resolution that requires the district to seek the board’s approval for any future grant applications over $750,000.

Also up for vote at the Tuesday, December 11 LAUSD Board meeting is Board Members Monica Garcia and Tamar Galatzan’s call to state legislators to change “the lengthy, expensive [teacher] dismissal process required by state law,” which is a response to the legislature’s failure to pass SB 1530.

Steve Zimmer’s proposal to limit the use of test scores in teacher review will also be up for action at the board meeting. This resolution has been postponed several times since Zimmer introduced it back in June.

Two resolutions meant to improve student health will also be up for vote at Tuesday’s meeting: Zimmer and Garcia are backing a resolution that would improve school meals’ nutrition and would require LAUSD students get at least 20 minutes to eat lunch. The other resolution, to be introduced by Vladovic, LaMotte, and Kayser, urges LAUSD to advocate for more school-based health centers.

Last but not least, Bennett Kayser’s controversial proposal that would ban board members who have received campaign donations from charters from voting on anything related to charter schools will be postponed another month.

Link to Board agenda here.

Previous posts: Doe v. Deasy; Teacher Dismissals, Zimmer Postpones Charter Proposal, Board Agenda: Conflict Of Interest, Oversight

State Senator Alex Padilla (D-Pacoima)

SB 10, a bill aimed at streamlining the dismissal process for teachers accused of sexual misconducted, was introduced earlier this week and is now out in a full-text version.

A carbon copy of SB 1530 (the previous bill seeking to address this issue) SB 10 is among a handful of proposals sure to garner attention even before the session begins for real in January. As with its predecessor, SB 10 was submitted by Senator Alex Padilla.

Earlier this year, the teachers union seemed initially to be unopposed to SB 1530, which passed easily in the Senate, but then dug in its heels in the Assembly and helped to kill it. This time, lawmakers may think twice about doing the bidding of the teacher lobby.  One legislator who helped defeat the bill, Betsy Butler, was portrayed in a CNN report as having protected pedophile teachers and lost her election in November by a close margin. (See bill here. See CNN report here).

Previous posts: Union Points Fingers on Sex Abuse, Betsy Butler: Teachers Union Help Not Enough?

Board Members Monica Garcia and Tamar Galatzan will also introduce a resolution calling on state legislators to change “the lengthy, expensive [teacher] dismissal process required by state law,” which is a response to the legislature’s failure to pass SB 1530.

UTLA: Everything to Hinder, Nothing to Help?

Lots of blame was dished out last week after a state audit found weak dismissal and reporting practices at LAUSD regarding teachers accused of sexual misconduct.

Especially vocal was UTLA president Warren Fletcher, who has consistently lobbed criticism at LAUSD for how it has managed the scandal.

Now I am a Prop-30-supporting-dyed-in-the-wool union Democrat, but I have to ask – shouldn’t the teachers union also take some responsibility here?  Not if you ask the current UTLA leadership, which continues to insist on sacrificing student well-being to protect even pedophiles.

But things could be changing.

The state audit, triggered by the Miramonte Elementary School scandal earlier this year (in which a teacher was accused of feeding his students semen) served up a series of recommendations for the district to implement.

But LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy had already beaten them to the punch; his swift response in February and overhaul of reporting practices and other measures was acknowledged in the report itself (and touted by Deasy on Thursday morning when the audit was released publicly).

The response by UTLA leadership was to go on the offensive. Fletcher accused LAUSD in the LA Times of ‘wild swings’ in response to misconduct. His remarks (see the LA Times article) ignore the most important implication of the report: that the teachers union, through years of legislation and collective bargaining, has made removing pedophiles from the classroom a lengthy and expensive endeavor.

With such an entrenched and unyielding mindset, UTLA seems bent on driving itself to the fringe and losing the support of ardent Democrats like myself. No amount of finger-pointing will conceal that union leadership has stymied, rather than helped ease the process at every turn.

Could that be the canary in the coal-mine?

On Tuesday the LAUSD School Board is set to discuss a proposal from Board President Monica Garcia to support the reintroduction of legislation in Sacramento to streamline the dismissal process. UTLA-backed board members will be squirming. We will be watching.

The latest word from EdSource is that AB 5 is being revised slightly to try and mollify opponents and also to help make the state eligible for a No Child Left Behind waiver (see: Fuentes agrees to compromises on AB 5: Are they enough?). If approved, the amended bill could go back to the State Senate education committee early next week. But it’s not clear that’s going to happen without further changes. Romero, EdVoice and other education reformers are still strongly opposed to the law — as is LAUSD’s John Deasy.

What is AB 5? Why do ed reform groups, not to mention Deasy, hate it so much? And what is Fuentes offering to change?

The back story goes all the way back to the 1971 Stull Act, which mandates that teachers (and other accredited employees) in California be evaluated by objective criteria, including pupil progress. In almost every interpretation, that boils down to one thing: test scores.

Flash forward to 2011, when a group of anonymous parents and students teamed up with Ed Voice to sue LAUSD on the grounds that it was not enforcing the Stull Act, since it wasn’t using pupil progress to evaluate teachers or principals. The suit was called Doe v. Deasy, the irony being that the named defendant, Superintendent John Deasy, actually agreed with the plaintiffs. A judge recently ruled that the district was in fact not adhering to the Stull Act, and he ordered LAUSD and the unions to come up with a new evaluation system that would satisfy the law by December 4.

Which brings us to AB 5. Sponsored by Fuentes, the bill would essentially re-write the Stull Act. The “pupil progress” section would be obliterated, replaced with what the bill calls a “best practices teacher evaluation system.” The bill goes on to list the many attributes “best practices” would include, but the short of it is that teachers would be evaluated on what they do in the classrooms, as opposed to how their students perform.

“This is a bill that was ghostwritten by the CTA,” says Gloria Romero, former State Senate Majority Leader (and now head of California Democrats for Education Reform). “If enacted the way it is, it will set us back 40 years, in terms of teacher evaluations. It needs to be rewritten or abandoned.”

(CTA has not yet responded to my request for comment.)

On Wednesday, Ed Voice took out a full-page ad in the LA Times blasting Fuentes’ proposal: “AB 5 guts objective accountability of adult job performance in schools just as voters are being asked to invest more in education.” A number of other ed reform groups are lobbying against the bill, including Educators 4 Excellence, Students First and Alliance for a Better Community.

When I spoke with Superintendent Deasy last week, he said he found the timing of the Fuentes bill, coming so soon after the judge’s order in Doe v. Deasy, “unusual.” He also expressed dismay that the bill is funded by $89 million out of the Quality Education Investment Act, or QEIA, which provides money to low-income, low performing schools in order lower class size. That bill was the product of heavy lobbying from, yes, the CTA.

“CTA, which is like this very powerful organization, have spent every ounce of their capital making sure nothing happens to QEIA,” said Deasy. “This bill takes away QEIA funds – this is how AB 5 is being funded. I find that perplexing. I don’t understand it.”

“All sides of the issues agree that the QEIA funds are important and not something we should be cutting,” says Evan Stone, co-founder and co-CEO of Educators 4 Excellence.

According to a document sent to us by Ed Voice, the QEIA cuts would weigh heavily on LAUSD. District schools stand to lose a total of $30 million if AB 5 passes. Bell Senior High, for example, would lose $1.1 million, while John Adams Middle School would lose $300,00.

SI&A has helpful links to the Fuentes proposal and the recent changes he’s offered (see: Student scores at heart of new teacher ratings nationally).  The Senate has until August 31, the last day of the legislative session, to do something about AB 5.

“Everybody is on pins and needles,” says Romero. “This is the time of the year when, basically, the legislature is on call, so they can meet at any time.”  She’s not sure what’s gonna happen, but she knows one thing: “Sausage-making is taking place.”

Mayor Bloom

Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom, a Democrat running for the 50th State Assembly seat against Democratic incumbent Betsy Butler, isn’t refraining from criticizing his opponent for her abstention during the committee vote on SB 1530.

“I’ve never done that in 13 years of being a public official,” he told me earlier this week. “I think it’s our responsibility as elected officials to register our opinions and have discourse on them. That’s what public discourse is about.”

As you can read below, Bloom doesn’t mince words about what he thinks of Butler’s actions. Whether the vote will hurt Butler (or whether a revised version of the Padilla legislation will come out of this messy process) remains unknown.

SB 1530, sponsored by former L.A. City Councilman Alex Padilla, would have made it easier to fire teachers suspected of committing egregious acts, such as sexual or violent abuse. Written in response to the Miramonte Elementary sex scandals, the bill passed easily in the Senate on a 33-4 bipartisan vote

According to a recent op-ed by California director of Democrats for Education Reform Gloria Romero, that’s where the trouble began:

But then it came before the Assembly Education Committee, which shamefully bowed to the state’s powerful teacher unions and rejected the bill. All this took place while teacher union lobbyists communicated to committee members that they “were watching.”

The California Teachers Association is among the most powerful interest groups in the state. Between 2001 and 2011, they spent $118 million on political donations, more than any other group or individual (the 2nd highest group spent $47 million less during that same period). UTLA president Warren Fletcher was one of those who appeared before the committee to testify against the proposal.

And so, presumably thanks to pressure from the CTA, Padilla’s bill was stymied in the Assembly Education Committee after two Democrats (Tom Ammiano and Joan Buchanan) voted no and four Democrats (Butler, Mike Eng, Wilmer Amina Carter and Das Williams) refused to weigh in, killing the proposal by a single vote.

According to LA Weekly, “Butler said Padilla’s bill made the teacher-firing process “more political” and “jeopardized due process.” She and [CTA president Dean] Vogel want Padilla to compromise. She called her abstention “a nice no … that means I’m with you.'”

Butler has also recently joined an effort to find out whether state antibullying laws are effective.

Of the Padilla bill, Mayor Bloom said: “I thought it was a reasonable approach. We have a small but pernicious problem of dangerous people in the classroom.  It was just a common sense measure to protect school children.”

But even worse than voting against the bill, according to Bloom, was not voting at all.

“To not show up at all is frankly the wrong approach,” he said. “I think it’s the kind of thing that’s feeding people’s cynicism about the state legislature.”

Assembly member Butler has not yet responded to our request for comment.

Note: A previous version of this post identified Bloom as a Republican. We regret the error.