partner reporter

The Panel For Educational Policy is not a "school board", has appointed members only, and terminates teachers at Executive Sessions before the "public meeting" begins. The PEP also does not publish an agenda for the public, nor do they post the minutes of the meetings. The public should attend the PEP meetings, because this is the moment at which anyone can see Joel Klein's disdain and dislike for the people of New York City.

The New York Times could not have been more wrong about the new policy panel (Anemona has never gone against the powerful New York City administration, even to the extent of covering up the corruption of not only the education fraud, but New York City judicial corruption in State Supreme, Manhattan Surrogate, And the Appellate Courts):

July 19, 2002
Politics Absent As Mayor Picks School Panelists
By ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS, NY TIMES

"Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg revealed his appointees to a new educational policy panel yesterday that is a central element of mayoral control of the New York City schools, selecting a group that is distinctly less political than the old Board of Education.

Mr. Bloomberg immediately sought to ensure that they would not indulge in the infighting and grandstanding of the past by instructing them to keep a low profile. He said the panel's job was to serve as a ''sounding board'' for the chancellor.

''I do not expect to see their names -- ever -- in the press answering a question either on the record or off the record,'' Mr. Bloomberg said. ''That's exactly what's wrong with the current system.'' If it happened, he said, ''I would not tolerate it for 30 seconds.''

Pressed to elaborate, he said, ''They don't have to speak, and they don't have to serve. That's what serving 'at the pleasure' means.''

All seven mayoral appointees, while not household names, are well-regarded in the fields of business, culture, academia and health. They are the kind of accomplished people Mr. Bloomberg might invite to a soiree at his Upper East Side townhouse.

Mr. Bloomberg trumpeted the panel's diversity. There is one white male, and one white female; there is a black male and a black female; there are two Hispanic women, one Dominican and one Puerto Rican; and there is an Asian man.

As the appointees stood behind Mr. Bloomberg in the Blue Room of City Hall, he said a few friendly remarks about each one of what he called ''seven distinguished New Yorkers.'' He stumbled over the name of Augusta Souza Kappner, president of Bank Street College of Education, reddening as he blurted that to her friends she is known as Gussie.

It was a marked shift from the often adversarial tone of the relationship between mayors, chancellors and Boards of Education in the past. But it did lead some people in the audience to wonder whether constructive voices of dissent would be suppressed.

''The policy board has a public responsibility,'' said Randi Weingarten, president of the United Federation of Teachers, who watched the announcement of the appointments from the audience. ''That means,'' Ms. Weingarten continued, ''that they are accountable to the public.'' She said, however, that she thought the mayor's intention was to avoid the political machinations of the past.

None of the panelists appear to be in Mr. Bloomberg's political debt. Mr. Bloomberg jocularly noted that one of them, Richard L. Menschel, a senior director of Goldman Sachs, had offered the future mayor his first job when he moved to New York. Mr. Bloomberg did not take the job.

The panelists are sharply different from past members of the Board of Education, which was often made up of political allies appointed by the borough presidents and the mayor.

For instance, Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani appointed his deputy mayor, Ninfa Segarra, to be a board member, in what was widely perceived as a blatantly political combination, and then helped engineer her ascension to president. Now, however, the new state law giving Mr. Bloomberg control of the schools forbids city employees to serve on the panel.

''He obviously wanted people who didn't need the stipend that the old board had, and who would be people who are for the most part too busy to come to a lot of meetings,'' said Diane Ravitch, the education historian.

''I just don't know just what they do,'' she added.

Three panelists have had children in the public schools: Mr. Menschel, whose wife, Ronay, was a deputy mayor in the Koch administration; Dr. Kappner, mother of recent graduate of Urban Academy, a progressive high school on the Upper East Side; and Ramona Hernandez, director of the Dominican Studies Institute at the City University of New York, whose son graduated from Stuyvesant High School.

The powers of the new 13-member Panel for Educational Policy, as it has been renamed, are somewhat vague. It can advise on policy; it must meet 12 time a year, and it can vote on the school system's budget.

As Mr. Bloomberg relished pointing out yesterday, they are all volunteers, stripped of the $15,000 stipends, offices, cars, drivers, personal assistants and other perks that the old board received.

And they serve at the pleasure of the mayor, which means they can be dismissed at any time.

It was not clear yesterday, city officials said, whether with nine current members -- including chancellor Harold O. Levy -- the board had a legal quorum to meet and function. Staten Island has appointed a member, Joan McKeever-Thomas, a parent leader in the public schools there, but the other four borough presidents have not.

But Mr. Bloomberg said he had a room ready for them anytime in the Tweed Courthouse behind City Hall, which he intends to convert into the headquarters for the school system.

Several panelists did linger to talk. Dr. Kappner said she thought Mr. Bloomberg was trying to instill team spirit and morale, but added, ''I don't feel that in any way inhibits me from speaking out on education.''

Correction: July 20, 2002, Saturday A grouping of biographical sketches yesterday for Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's appointees to a new educational policy panel misstated a former title of one appointee, Dr. Augusta Souza Kappner. She was an assistant federal education secretary, not an assistant housing secretary. The sketches also misstated the location of El Museo del Barrio, where another appointee, Susana Torruella Leval, is director emeritus. It is in East Harlem, not the Bronx. The sketches also referred incorrectly to the tenure of Philip A. Berry, another appointee, as a trustee on the City University of New York Construction Fund. He still serves there."

Here is the page on the NYC BOE website labelled "olddefault". Oh, by the way, none of the described duties and responsibilities are factual, and Michael Best has written to me and others that the PEP has "no executive or administrative function":

olddefault
The Mayor appoints eight of the members of the Panel for Educational Policy, including the Chancellor. Five other members are appointed by the borough presidents and must be parents of children in the New York City public schools. The panel’s responsibilities include approving standards, policies, objectives, and regulations that are directly related to educational achievement and student performance, as well as certain contracts, an estimated annual operating budget, and the DOE capital plan.

The panel holds a public meeting every month, which always includes a public comment section. Every parent can attend the monthly meeting to learn about DOE policies and express his or her opinion to the Chancellor and the other members of the panel.

Common Good, a clone of Proskauer Rose, had this to say (click into the link at the end for more information and you will get an "error":

Panel For Educational Policy Directives and Resolutions

The Panel for Educational Policy (formerly the Board of Education) has the statutory authority to review and approve all standards, policies, objectives and regulations of the Chancellor directly related to educational achievement and student performance, and to approve contracts and litigation settlements "that would significantly impact the provision of educational services or programming within the district." Despite recent reforms substantially expanding the power of the Chancellor, while reducing the authority of the Panel, the Panel retains authority over city-wide educational policies. (§§ 2590-g(1, 4-6))

The Panel has passed recent resolutions relating to:

* Continuing the policy that minors must attend school from age 6 until the end of the school year in which the child turns 17. (This policy is allowed under NYEL § 3205(3))
* Continuing authorization of all licenses issued by the Chancellor (in accordance with NYEL § 2590-g(2).
* Adjusting the structure of the retirement board. The adjusted structure was submitted to the retirement board for approval.
* Extending the high school day by 20 minutes, to be used exclusively for instructional purposes.
* Approval of the Chancellor's Comprehensive Instructional Approach for instruction in reading, writing and math, which involves the assignment of reading and math coaches to each school, a requirement that high schools devote 90 minutes per day to reading and writing, and other requirements for various grade levels.
* Authorizing the Chancellor to implement a system-wide instructional strategy for children with special learning needs.
* Approval of amendments to the five-year educational facilities capital plan (drafted by the chancellor pursuant to § 2590-p).

Read more about the Panel for Educational Policy.

On Google you can get the email addresses of the original cast:

New York City Panel for Educational Policy
Email contact information
LINK

Panel for Education Policy (Mayoral appointees have an * next to their names:

*Mr. Joel I. Klein, Chancellor, email: JKlein@nycboe.net, phone: 212-374-5110.
Ms. Evita Belmonte, Queens representative, email: ebelmonte@queensbp.org, phone: 718-286-2625.
Ms. Natalie Gomez-Velez, Bronx representative, email: ngomez@courts.state.ny.us, phone: 914-997-7594.
Ms. Martine Guerrier, Brooklyn representative, email: MGuerrier@brooklynbp.org
Ms. Jacquelyn Kamin, Manhattan representative, email: jkamin@manhattanbp.org, phone: 212-669-8166.
Ms. Joan Correale, Staten Island representative.
* Mr. Alan D. Aviles.
*Mr. Philip A. Berry, VP, Colgate Palmolive, email: philip_berry@COLPAL.com, phone: 212-310-2947.
*Dr. David C. Chang, President, Brooklyn Polytechnic Univ., email: chang@poly.edu, phone: 718-260-3500.
*Mr. Tino Hernandez.
*Dr. Augusta Souza Kappner, President of Bank St. College, email: ask@bnkst.edu
*Mr. Richard L. Menschel, Senior Director of Goldman Sachs, email: richard.menschel@gs.com, phone: 212-902-8133.
*Ms. Marita Regan, former D22 administrator (phone and email unavailable).

(Last updated: March 18, 2004)

All the members of the PEP, past and present, withhold information from the public (Patrick Sullivan announced this at a September 18, 2008 meeting with Liz Krueger), and all are knowingly violating Open Meetings Law. Why no one says anything is anyone's guess. (If you have any insight into why all these people would want to violate their integrity, please email me at betsy.combier@gmail.com, anonymously if you prefer).


Joel Klein arrogantly flaunts his illegal set up, and Robert Freeman, Director of the Committee on Open Government, has refused my request for advice on the violation of Open Meetings Law.

Below is a series of emails I sent pursuant to FOIL. I have not heard back from Mr. Freeman about an advisory opinion on the Executive Session issue. It has now been 5 months since I asked him for an opinion. My guess is he does not want to give one, which would be that Joel Klein and Mike Bloomberg are violating open meetings law. Luckily he has given his opinion xecutive Sessions in other cases see also 2403; 2408; 2418; 2426; 2928; 3339.

From: Betsy [mailto:betsy@parentadvocates.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 4:36 PM
To: 'SHoltzm@nycboe.net'; 'Michael Best'; 'JKlein@schools.nyc.gov'
Cc: 'RFreeman@dos.state.ny.us'; 'MFeinbe@schools.nyc.gov'; 'jrusso@schools.nyc.gov'; 'AbGolden@law.nyc.gov'; 'LKoerner@law.nyc.gov'; 'Longoria Carragher Arlene'; 'betsy@parentadvocates.org'; 'TCrane@law.nyc.gov'; 'MFeinbe@schools.nyc.gov'; 'jrusso@schools.nyc.gov'
Subject: Press FOIL Request from the E-Accountability Foundation

The E-Accountability Foundation
Parentadvocates.org

Betsy Combier, President
betsy@parentadvocates.org
VIA E-MAIL

October 10, 2006
Ms. Susan Holtzman, Mr. Michael Best, Chancellor Joel Klein
New York City Department of Education
52 Chambers Street
New York, NY 10007

Dear Ms.Holtzman, Mr. Best, and Chancellor Klein,

Under the provisions of the New York Freedom of Information Law, Article 6 of the Public Officers Law, I hereby request records or portions thereof pertaining to:

1) all resolutions, regulations, memoranda, policy bulletins, etc., on the distribution of tapes recorded during a Panel For Educational policy meeting
2) all resolutions, regulations, memoranda, policy bulletins, etc., describing the nature of the work carried out by the Panel For Educational Policy
3) all statutes referring to the legitimacy of holding Executive Session of The Panel For Educational Policy before the PEP meeting begins, as occurred on September 19, 2006
4) All resolutions, memoranda, statutes and policy giving members of the PEP the legal standing to vote on the termination of employment of a member of the UFT, without a hearing on the charges he/she was charged with, and without the UFT member present at the discussion during the Executive Session before the PEP meeting begins;

If there are any fees for copying the records requested, please inform me before filling the request.

As you know, the Freedom of Information Law requires that an agency respond to a request within five business days of receipt of a request. Therefore, I would appreciate a response as soon as possible and look forward to hearing from you shortly. If for any reason any portion of my request is denied, please inform me of the reasons for the denial in writing and provide the name and address of the person or body to whom an appeal should be directed.

Sincerely,
Betsy Combier

From: Freeman, Robert (DOS) [mailto:Robert.Freeman@dos.state.ny.us]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 9:43 AM
To: Betsy
Subject: RE: Appeal of FOIL 5411

An opinion will be prepared. It is advised, however, that we have a substantial backlog of requests for opinions and that it may be several weeks before a response can be drafted.

Robert J. Freeman
Executive Director
Committee on Open Government
Department of State
One Commerce Plaza
Suite 650
99 Washington Avenue
Albany, NY 12231
Phone: (518)474-2518
Fax: (518)474-1927
Website: www.dos.state.ny.us/coog/coogwww.html

From: Betsy [mailto:betsy@parentadvocates.org]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 8:31 AM
To: Freeman, Robert (DOS)
Cc: 'Betsy'; betsy.combier@gmail.com
Subject: FW: Appeal of FOIL 5411

Betsy Combier
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
September 29, 2008

Mr. Robert Freeman
Committee on Open Government

Dear Mr. Freeman,

I would like you to give me an advisory opinion on the two-year delay of the New York City Board of Education and Central Records Access Director Christine Kicinski concerning giving me the public documents requested from the Panel For Educational Policy, FOIL #5411.

Several years ago you told me that you did not know what the PEP was, and I can now tell you that the NYC BOE has set this panel up as a public entity, with public meetings. I have asked for the tapes of the meetings and have paid $5 after giving the NYCBOE a freedom of information request, which they have honored. Therefore, the PEP is a public meeting, subject to FOIL and Open Meetings Laws, and under your jurisdiction. Mr. Klein has said publicly that the PEP is the NYC “school board” and is a public meeting.

Mr. Patrick Sullivan, a member of the PEP appointed by Manhattan Borough Representative Scott Stringer, testified on September 18, 2008 at a conference with Senator Liz Krueger that he was told all the reports with numbers data on policies of the NYC BOE are being withheld until AFTER June 2009. He had a report with him, which he showed everyone. I will ask for the report as well as the transcript of his testimony in a few days.

My FOIL request dated October 10, 2006, has been given extensions approximately every several months (all the dates of extensions are given below in my September 1, 2008 email, corrected from the email sent last night:

“At this point due to the unethical multiple extentions of my original FOIL request, attached below, for PEP information #5411, I hereby appeal to Mr. Klein and Mr. Best, with a copy to Mr. Freeman, the constructive denial of public documents and documents that affect the public. Your extension emails are dated 4-23-07, 12-21-07, 1-29-08, 3-4-08, 4-3-08, 7-22-08, and 8-20-08 (not enclosed, as you must have copies).”

I request, therefore, your opinion on the two-year delay by the New York City Board of Education (alternatively, the New York City Department of Education) in providing me the documents that I requested under the Freedom of Information Law/Act.

Thank you for your consideration and response.

Betsy Combier
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
betsy@parentadvocates.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Betsy [mailto:betsy@parentadvocates.org]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 12:03 AM
To: 'Klein Joel I.'; 'mbest2@schools.nyc.gov'; 'Kicinski Christine J'; 'Longoria Carragher Arlene'; 'RFreeman@dos.state.ny.us'
Subject: Appeal of FOIL 5411

Betsy Combier
Parentadvocates.org
betsy@parentadvocates.org
September 28, 2008

Chancellor Joel I. Klein
JKlein@schools.nyc.gov

Michael Best, Esq.
MBest2@schools.nyc.gov

Christine J. Kicinski, Esq
CKicins@schools.nyc.gov

Ms. Arlene Longoria Carragher
ALongor@schools.nyc.gov

Appeal of FOIL # 5411
Dear Chancellor Klein, Mr. Best, Ms. Kicinski, and Ms. Carragher:

I am appealing your agency’s constructive denial of access to the information and documents I requested on October 10, 2006, FOIL # 5411, which is copied below:

VIA E-MAIL

Mr. Michael A. Cardozo
MCardozo@law.nyc.gov

The E-Accountability Foundation
betsy@parentadvocates.org

Mr. Robert J. Freeman
RFreeman@dos.state.ny.us

The E-Accountability Foundation
Parentadvocates.org
Betsy Combier, President
betsy@parentadvocates.org

VIA E-MAIL

October 10, 2006
Ms. Susan Holtzman, Mr. Michael Best, Chancellor Joel Klein

New York City Department of Education
52 Chambers Street
New York, NY 10007

Dear Ms.Holtzman, Mr. Best, and Chancellor Klein,

Under the provisions of the New York Freedom of Information Law, Article 6 of the Public Officers Law, I hereby request records or portions thereof pertaining to:

1) all resolutions, regulations, memoranda, policy bulletins, etc., on the distribution of tapes recorded during a Panel For Educational policy meeting

2) all resolutions, regulations, memoranda, policy bulletins, etc., describing the nature of the work carried out by the Panel For Educational Policy

3) all statutes referring to the legitimacy of holding Executive Session of The Panel For Educational Policy before the PEP meeting begins, as occurred on September 19, 2006

4) All resolutions, memoranda, statutes and policy giving members of the PEP the legal standing to vote on the termination of employment of a member of the UFT, without a hearing on the charges he/she was charged with, and without the UFT member present at the discussion during the Executive Session before the PEP meeting begins;

If there are any fees for copying the records requested, please inform me before filling the request.

As you know, the Freedom of Information Law requires that an agency respond to a request within five business days of receipt of a request. Therefore, I would appreciate a response as soon as possible and look forward to hearing from you shortly. If for any reason any portion of my request is denied, please inform me of the reasons for the denial in writing and provide the name and address of the person or body to whom an appeal should be directed.

Additionally, please take note that you never responded to the email below sent on September 1, 2008:

The practice of repeatedly advancing anticipated response dates for New York Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests ("serial extension letters") by the Office of Legal Services is neither authorized by FOIL, nor by the Regulations of the NYS Committee on Open Government.

This ongoing practice by the NYC Department of Education is, therefore, obviously being taken in flagrant disregard of Public Officers Law and NYCRR. An agency may issue one, and only one, "extension letter," according to the rules that I have read.

Here is the full text of §89(3)(a) of FOIL:

3. (a) Each entity subject to the provisions of this article, within five business days of the receipt of a written request for a record reasonably described, shall make such record available to the person requesting it, deny such request in writing or furnish a written acknowledgment of the receipt of such request and a statement of the approximate date, which shall be reasonable under the circumstances of the request, when such request will be granted or denied, including, where appropriate, a statement that access to the record will be determined in accordance with subdivision five of this section. An agency shall not deny a request on the basis that the request is voluminous or that locating or reviewing the requested records or providing the requested copies is burdensome because the agency lacks sufficient staffing or on any other basis if the agency may engage an outside professional service to provide copying, programming or other services required to provide the copy, the costs of which the agency may recover pursuant to paragraph (c) of subdivision one of section eighty-seven of this article. An agency may require a person requesting lists of names and addresses to provide a written certification that such person will not use such lists of names and addresses for solicitation or fund-raising purposes and will not sell, give or otherwise make available such lists of names and addresses to any other person for the purpose of allowing that person to use such lists of names and addresses for solicitation or fund-raising purposes. If an agency determines to grant a request in whole or in part, and if circumstances prevent disclosure to the person requesting the record or records within twenty business days from the date of the acknowledgement of the receipt of the request, the agency shall state, in writing, both the reason for the inability to grant the request within twenty business days and a date certain within a reasonable period, depending on the circumstances, when the request will be granted in whole or in part. Upon payment of, or offer to pay, the fee prescribed therefor, the entity shall provide a copy of such record and certify to the correctness of such copy if so requested, or as the case may be, shall certify that it does not have possession of such record or that such record cannot be found after diligent search. Nothing in this article shall be construed to require any entity to prepare any record not possessed or maintained by such entity except the records specified in subdivision three of section eighty-seven and subdivision three of section eighty-eight of this article. When an agency has the ability to retrieve or extract a record or data maintained in a computer storage system with reasonable effort, it shall be required to do so. When doing so requires less employee time than engaging in manual retrieval or redactions from non-electronic records, the agency shall be required to retrieve or extract such record or data electronically. Any programming necessary to retrieve a record maintained in a computer storage system and to transfer that record to the medium requested by a person or to allow the transferred record to be read or printed shall not be deemed to be the preparation or creation of a new record.

Here is the full text of §89(4)(a) of FOIL:

4. (a) Except as provided in subdivision five of this section, any person denied access to a record may within thirty days appeal in writing such denial to the head, chief executive or governing body of the entity, or the person therefor designated by such head, chief executive, or governing body, who shall within ten business days of the receipt of such appeal fully explain in writing to the person requesting the record the reasons for further denial, or provide access to the record sought. In addition, each agency shall immediately forward to the committee on open government a copy of such appeal when received by the agency and the ensuing determination thereon. Failure by an agency to conform to the provisions of subdivision three of this section shall constitute a denial.

Here is the full text of §1401.5(c)(4) of the Regulations of the NYS Committee on Open Government:

(4) if the receipt of request was acknowledged in writing and included an approximate date when the request would be granted in whole or in part within twenty business days of such acknowledgment, but circumstances prevent disclosure within that time, providing a statement in writing within twenty business days of such acknowledgment stating the reason for the inability to do so and a date certain, within a reasonable period under the circumstances of the request, when the request will be granted in whole or in part.

From now on, when the Department of Education finds it necessary to issue an "extension letter," please ensure that the anticipated response date cited in that letter, is the "date certain within a reasonable period, depending on the circumstances, when the request will be granted in whole or in part." "Date certain," of course, means the date by which a substantive determination will be issued, and that there will be no further "serial extension letters" forthcoming.

If I'm not mistaken, the Council of School Supervisors & Administrators (CSA) previously informed the NYS Supreme Court of the Department of Education's fondness of issuing "serial extension letters," accompanied by the failure to determine appeals. I have the entire file of case #120488/03.

At this point, there are a number of options:

1) The Department of Education immediately ends the practice of issuing serial "extension letters" and adheres to the letter and spirit of FOIL.

2) Chancellor Klein, Mr. Best, Ms. Kicinski, and the FOIL Unit staff supervised by them, all ensure that FOIL's time limits are complied with.

3) Either Chancellor Klein or Mr. Best determines any FOIL appeal alleging a failure to meet an original anticipated response date, or, if applicable, the new date that was cited within a single "extension letter."

4) I file an Article 78 with the NYS Supreme Court alleging a pattern of intentional procedural and substantive violations of FOIL and NYCRR.

5) I file a grievance with the Departmental Disciplinary Committee requesting an investigation of the aforementioned pattern, especially in light of the fact that the CSA already brought it to the attention of the NYS Supreme Court.

6) I file investigation requests with Commissioner of Education Richard P. Mills, the Board of Regents, and the NYS Commission of Investigation seeking detailed investigations of the aforementioned pattern.

Please inform me by close of business September 5, 2008, whether you are interested in resolving these matters amicably, with an eye to reaching a mutually acceptable solution.

At this point due to the unethical multiple extentions of my original FOIL request, attached below, for PEP information #5411, I hereby appeal to Mr. Klein and Mr. Best, with a copy to Mr. Freeman, the constructive denial of public documents and documents that affect the public. Your extension emails are dated 4-23-07, 12-21-07, 1-29-08, 3-4-08, 4-3-08, 7-22-08, and 8-20-08 (not enclosed, as you must have copies).

I must hear from you with an appointment to review and copy the documents requested no later than September 12, 2008.

You have 10 business days to fully explain in writing the reasons for further denial of access or to provide access to the records. Copies of all appeals and the determinations thereon must be sent by the agency to the Committee on Open Government (section 89(4)(a)). This requirement will enable the committee to monitor compliance with law and intercede when a denial of access may be improper.

Thank you for your consideration.

Betsy Combier