Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
3Activity
P. 1
Harlem Central - Brief - Final

Harlem Central - Brief - Final

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,031|Likes:
Published by Celeste Katz
Harlem Central - Brief - Final
Harlem Central - Brief - Final

More info:

Categories:Types, Legal forms
Published by: Celeste Katz on Mar 11, 2014
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/22/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 STATE OF NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT In the Matter of MARIA PLACENCIA, individually and on  behalf of her daughter, L.R., and TANYA BAH, individually and on behalf of her son, J.B., and SUSETTE BARBOUR, individually and on behalf of her son, J.W., and NATASHA BROWN, individually and on behalf of her sons J.J. and J.J., and JOSEFINA CALCANO, individually and on behalf of her daughter, S.N., and MICHAEL EDWARDS, individually and on behalf of his son M.E., and TINICA FEIMSTER, individually and on behalf of her daughter, D.H., and MARIA GARCIA-RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of her son, M.R., and LATOYA V. GRANT, individually and on behalf of her daughter, A.S., and TISHA HATCH, individually and on  behalf of her son, R.L., and VELMA HOWELL, individually and on behalf of her son, A.O., and CHANNELL KIMBLE, individually and on behalf of her sons, T.C. and T.C., and YOLANDA LOWE, individually and on behalf of her daughter, M.L.B., and WENDY MARTINEZ, individually and on behalf of her daughter, B.P., and ANGEL PIMENTEL, individually and on behalf of his son, T.P., and ROSEMARIE SAUNDERS-LEE, individually and on behalf of her daughter, S.A.L., and KOKAYEE SESSION-LANSIQUOT, individually and on  behalf of her son, M.W.S., and GWEN D. SHANNON, individually and on behalf of her daughter, T.Y.V., and SIMONE TAYLOR, individually and on behalf of her son, R.T.; Success Academy Charter Schools – NYC on behalf of Success Academy Charter School – Harlem 4, from action of the Board of Education of the School District of the City of New York and the New York City Department of Education regarding the co-location of grades five through eight of Success Academy Charter School – Harlem 4 (84M386) with existing schools P.S. 149 Sojourner Truth (03M149), P.S. M811 Mickey Mantle School (75M811), and grades kindergarten through four of Success Academy Charter School  – Harlem 1 (84M351) in tandem buildings M149 and M207  beginning in the 2014-2015 school year.  No. ___________
SUCCESS ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOLS – NYC’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF VERIFIED PETITION
 
 Susan L. Shin Kathleen Reilly Ian Jay Michael Gramer Ryan Gersovitz Arnold & Porter, LLP 399 Park Avenue  New York, New York 10022-4690 (212) 715-1000
 Pro Bono Counsel for Parent Petitioners and  Petitioner Success Academy Charter Schools –  NYC
Emily A. Kim Peter Cymrot Lindsey Luebchow Daniel Soleimani Success Academy Charter Schools 310 Lenox Avenue, 2
nd
 Floor  New York, New York 10027 (646) 597-4641
Counsel for Petitioner Success Academy Charter Schools – NYC
March 10, 2014
 
 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ..................................................................................................... 1
 
FACTUAL BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 3
 
I.
 
THE PARTIES .................................................................................................................... 3
 
A.
 
Petitioners ................................................................................................................ 3
 
1.
 
Parent Petitioners ......................................................................................... 3
 
2.
 
Petitioner Harlem 4 Middle School (Harlem Central) ................................ 6
 
B.
 
Respondents ........................................................................................................... 11
 
II.
 
THE CO-LOCATION APPROVAL PROCESS ............................................................... 12
 
III.
 
THE APPROVED CO-LOCATION SITE: BUILDING M149/M207 ............................ 12
 
IV.
 
ACTIONS TAKEN BY HARLEM CENTRAL AND PARENT PETITIONERS FOLLOWING THE PEP APPROVAL TO IMPLEMENT THE CO-LOCATION ......... 16
 
V.
 
THE TARGETING OF SUCCESS ACADEMY SCHOOLS ........................................... 17
 
VI.
 
THE FEBRUARY 27, 2014 SURPRISE REVOCATION OF HARLEM CENTRAL’S CO-LOCATION ................................................................................................................ 19
 
ARGUMENT ................................................................................................................................ 22
 
I.
 
THE COMMISSIONER HAS JURISDICTION TO REVIEW THIS PETITION ON AN EXPEDITED BASIS .................................................................................................. 22
 
II.
 
THE DOE’S DECISION TO REVOKE THE HARLEM CENTRAL CO-LOCATION WAS CONTRARY TO LAW ........................................................................................... 24
 
A.
 
The Revocation Was Contrary to Law Because Respondents Failed to Comply With Procedural Requirements for a Significant Change in School Utilization, and Due Process Requirements ............................................................................. 24
 
1.
 
Respondents Failed to Prepare an EIS and Hold a Joint Public Hearing and PEP Vote ............................................................................................. 24
 
2.
 
Respondents Have Denied Harlem Central Due Process As Required By Law ...................................................................................................... 27
 

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->