This Charter School Must Be Held Accountable

“It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities.”

– Josiah Stamp

After years of looking the other way as the leadership of the North Valley Military Institute (NVMI) failed to follow the terms of its charter, the California Ed Code, or generally accepted accounting principles, the Los Angeles Office of Education (LACOE) is finally set to hold a hearing on revoking the school’s charter. Having long followed NVMI’s misdeeds, I sent the following email to the LACOE Board before their discussions:

Dear LACOE Board:

As a blogger who supports public education, I have covered the actions of the North Valley Military Institute (NVMI) since I caught them illegally charging their students to attend summer school in 2018. My reporting informed the Sun Valley High School/Valley Oaks Center for Enriched Studies (VOCES) community about the allegations of “abhorrent child sex abuse” committed by an NVMI administrator living with the school’s “Superintendent,” Mark Ryan. I am the one who gave voice to the VOCES community who said they were subjected to bullying, sexual misconduct, and harassment by the students and staff of NVMI. When the NVMI Board turned down the LAUSD’s PROP-39 offer without having an alternative location secured, I correctly pointed out that this would put the school on a path toward closure.

The materials provided by your staff supporting their recommendation for closure are impressive. They provide a solid case for shutting down this school and insight into how this failure was allowed to drag on for so long, hurting the charter school’s students as it remained open.

As noted in the staff’s narrative, “the Los Angeles County Board of Education (County Board) approved the charter for the renewal of NVMI against the Superintendent’s recommendation”. The efforts to overturn the LAUSD’s decision to not renew NVMI’s charter were led by LACOE Board Member Dr. Monte Perez, even though he had recused himself from the vote due to his ongoing relationship with the school. While as a member of a Los Angeles Neighborhood Council, I must leave the room for discussions involving matters where recusal is necessary, Dr. Perez continued to participate, advocating his position as a member of the public.

Despite Dr. Perez’s relationship with NVMI, the documentation submitted by your staff shows that he continued to exert influence over LACOE’s regulation of the charter school. He not only did not recuse himself from a vote on a proposed material revision on August 16, 2022, he moved the motion to do so.

As a vocal proponent of this school that has a history of substandard student outcomes, financial mismanagement, and operational deficiencies, what role did Dr. Perez play in numerous failures to follow through with the concerns of staff? For example, a letter dated December 15, 2022, from the LACOE Deputy General Counsel required NVMI to provide the “report or summary from Oracle Investigation Group, Inc. regarding the outcome of the investigation of Major John Wells” regarding “allegations of wrongdoing by Major Wells, some of which are sexual in nature.” However, according to the presentation made at the July 18, 2023, meeting of this Board, receipt of this information is still “outstanding.” Was LACOE staff prohibited from holding NVMI accountable for withholding this important document?

The December 15th letter also provides an example of how NVMI’s leadership is willing to ignore the military value of honesty to protect its operational deficiencies. While “Major Wells had been released from [his] contract during the 2018-2019 school year with severance” after the allegations had surfaced, the LAUSD had reported VOCES’ “staff had seen Major John Wells on the NVMI campus.” NVMI confirmed that he had been rehired on July 18, 2022, even though it had not included him on the All Staff Information List submitted on September 24, 2022. Why was NVMI not held accountable for this act of deceitfulness?

This lack of honesty can also be found in the budget NVMI has presented. While Ryan has incorrectly told his Board that the charter school could not previously receive reimbursement for rent payments because the space was obtained under PROP-39, the law states that “base rent, debt service, or Proposition 39 pro-rata payments for existing or new facilities” are eligible under the State Facility Incentive Grant. The school did apply for these funds in the past but did not receive them. While it did not state the reason why they were rejected, a requirement of this program is that the charter school be “in good standing with its chartering authority and is in compliance with the terms of its charter at the time of application submission, and without interruption throughout the term of the grant.” Given the numerous issues detailed by the staff, will NVMI be able to receive the certification needed to receive an SB 740 grant which reimburses costs for private facilities? If not, then the budget is, once again, out of balance.

It has been clear for a long time that NVMI has failed to fulfill the educational program detailed by its charter. With the charter school unwilling to protect its students by giving them the opportunity to transfer to new programs in an orderly manner, this Board must step in to make it clear that NVMI will not be opening for the next school year. Additionally, a complete investigation must be conducted to ensure that the failure in oversight does not happen again.

Sincerely,

Carl Petersen

____________________________

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.