A Charter School And The Art Of Gaslighting

“As explained herein, Plaintiffs were subjected to abhorrent child sex abuse by an NVMI administrator, Coty Brice Tschappat”

– California Superior Court Case No.: BC664993

Without a campus secured for the 2023–24 school year, the North Valley Military Institute (NVMI) should be helping its students find a new school. Instead, the charter school’s leadership continues to pretend that it can secure a facility and persuade the Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE) to approve a Material Revision allowing a radical change to its educational program in time to start classes.

When the school’s outgoing “Superintendent,” Mark Ryan, told the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) trustees at the beginning of June that he needed their immediate approval of a proposed lease for Los Angeles Mission College to proceed with the plan, the trustees called his bluff and refused to be rushed into making a decision. Now, entering the month of July, Ryan has set aside the previous deadline by continuing to pursue an agreement with the trustees, sacrificing the opportunity to provide an orderly transition for the students.

As part of Ryan’s new offensive, he sent a five-page letter to the LACCD Board that claims “to dispel the lies being perpetrated” against the charter school:

• He leads by claiming that it is a lie to say that “NVMI has repeatedly broken the law,” but then goes on to admit that “The Los Angeles County Office of Education has sent four formal ‘Notices of Concern,’” each with “the title ‘Violation of Law and Memorandum of Understanding.’”
• Ryan accuses the LAUSD of causing NVMI’s financial difficulties by splitting up its PROP-39 offer onto multiple school sites even though the district made it clear that the space that NVMI was demanding was not available on any one campus. While Ryan refers to this action as “not complying with the law,” NVMI was unsuccessful in its attempt to force itself onto one campus through litigation. Ryan conveniently ignores and does not mention the wasteful spending on an LAUSD lobbyist, an extravagant graduation ceremony, or a trip to Washington DC to gain support from government officials for a plan to move the campus to the Sepulveda Flood Control Basin.
• The “Superintendent” expresses surprise that the $90,000+ the school spent for a staff retreat to Las Vegas has subjected them to an “extraordinary” FCMAT audit when choosing that destination “saved taxpayers more than $100,000” over a similar trip to “Palm Springs, Monterey, San Francisco, New Orleans, [or] Miami.”

While the above efforts are almost laughable in their desperation, Ryan’s comments about the 2017 lawsuit alleging “abhorrent child sex abuse” are a gross distortion of reality. The actions as described in the plaintiff’s court filing hold the possibility of affecting the students for the rest of their lives and to have the person in charge downplay the seriousness of these actions should disqualify him from ever working with children again.

In Ryan’s letter, he states that “there was a lawsuit alleging inappropriate social media contact between a staff member and students.” While the plaintiffs did state that NMVI administrator Tschappat befriended “students on social media, using platforms like Instagram, where he created message chains, in which he shared hardcore pornographic images”, this was only part of what they said occurred. Tschappat, who the plaintiffs say lived with Ryan during the time these offenses were said to occur, was also accused of:

• Exposing “Plaintiffs and other minor children to inappropriate sexual language (including phrases like ‘suck my d**k’).”
• Committing “a variety of intentional torts, including for assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.”
• Playing “a sexualized game of truth and dare” with children “at a school-sponsored party”. It is alleged that “during the game, students were forced to kiss/lick Tschappat’s feet and beard.” The plaintiffs also alleged that “these kissing/licking interactions were video-recorded at the time”.

Ryan claims in his letter to the LACCD that “the matter was reported by NVMI to the police and investigated,” but the plaintiffs told a different story. According to the lawsuit, “NVMI was largely disinterested and unconcerned” when parents brought their concerns to the school’s attention. These parents say that “the school even went so far as to say there was no ‘evidence’ of sex abuse or inappropriate touching by Tschappat; so…it had no obligation to report the conduct to the authorities.” This would violate laws that require mandated reporting of these types of suspicions.

As stated in the lawsuit, the parents also said that in retaliation for pursuing the allegations directly with the authorities, an NVMI employee “intentionally and maliciously filed false reports of child abuse with the Department of Children and Family Services (‘DCFS’)”. The resulting investigation of the parents by DCFS found “that all of the allegations were untrue and/or ‘unfounded.’”

Ryan’s letter to the LACCD also states that the investigation by the police “found that the social media accounts of the former employee MAY HAVE been hacked.” (emphasis mine) While this may explain why “no charges were filed,” since they could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the wording suggests that the police also could not prove that the allegations were unsubstantiated.

Ryan’s statement does not address the other allegations in the lawsuit. Nor does Ryan say what the final disposition of the lawsuit was.

The seriousness of the allegations contained in the lawsuit is compounded by Ryan’s relationship with the alleged perpetrator. While the plaintiffs described Tschappat as “a close friend and confidant of the school’s Superintendent,“ who “became friends at another school, Oakland Military Institute,” it has been recently alleged that Ryan is Tschappat’s Godfather. The same person who forwarded this information to me also alleges that the “Superintendent” hired Tschappat without “alerting anyone, such as filing a nepotism form”.

While Ryan was trying to persuade the Trustees of the LACCD to save NVMI by approving the lease that he had negotiated with Mission College, his words provide additional evidence for those saying that having NVMI colocate on this campus would be detrimental to the operations of the community college. Approving this lease would subject the students attending Mission College to threats posed by a school that has not only made huge mistakes in the past but always tries to deflect blame. This makes it unlikely that any problems will be fixed and increases the likelihood that these issues can happen again potentially creating more victims.

In his letter to the LACCD, Mark Ryan expresses his commitment to “serving the underserved population of students [NVMI] welcome[s].” It is time that he honors this promise and put the needs of these students ahead of his ego. His is not the only school with a willingness to help these children and their families and there are other options. Instead of allowing stakeholders to flounder as NVMI implodes, his exclusive focus should be on ensuring that the transition to other schools is as smooth as possible.

• A copy of the lawsuit can be found HERE.
• A copy of the letter sent by the plaintiff’s lawyers can be found HERE. Please note that this is NOT safe for work.

____________________________

Carl Petersen is a parent advocate for public education, particularly for students with special education needs, who serves as the Education Chair for the Northridge East Neighborhood Council. As a Green Party candidate in LAUSD’s District 2 School Board race, he was endorsed by Network for Public Education (NPE) Action. Dr. Diane Ravitch has called him “a valiant fighter for public schools in Los Angeles.” For links to his blogs, please visit www.ChangeTheLAUSD.com. Opinions are his own.