NOV-18-2815 17:38 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 Peaett N THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT ~ CHANCERY DIVISION OP THE CITY OF CHICAGO, d CHICAGO LIGHTHOUSE ) CHARTER SCHOOL, ) aorscH 1874s il Plaintift, ) TALENDAR/RI ) TIME 00800 v ) Case No. TR gUACTLON ) ‘THE BOARD OF EDUCATION ) ) ) ) Defendant COMPLAINT FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND TNJUNCTIVE RELIRE NOW COMES Plainiift, CHICAGO LIGHTHOUSE CHARTRR SCHOOL, by and through its attorneys, HAUSER, 1220, LLC to present its Complaint at dyhw. BBintife s complains as follows: 81 AONS: dd 6 AH LOI PARTIES 2 a o 1, Plaintift Chicago Lighthouse Charter Schoo! (the “Charter School”) Eznovieprg hy corporation organized uncler the laws of the Stale of Illinois for the BEposegah, alia, operating public charter schaols, 2. The administrative offices of the Charter School ure located in Chicago, Cook County, Mlinois, 3 Defendant Board of Education af the City of Chicago (the “Board”) is a body politic and corporate organized under Section 34-2 of the MMlinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/34-2). 4. The administrative offices of the Board are located in Chicago, Cook County, lWhinois. 5, Forrest Claypool is the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of the Board. NUE, 6. Venue is proper in Cook County as the administrative aflices of he Board are located in Cook County, Illinois. 735 1LCS 5/2-103. 1NOV-18-2815 17:38 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 Peeeat 7. Article 27A of the Ilinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/27A et seq.) enables public school districts and boards of education, such as the Board, io grant charters and enter into charter school agreements with not-for-profit organizations, such as the Charter School. ‘Lhe Initial Contract and Renewal 8. On or about June 30, 2006, the Charter School and the Board entered into a Charter School Agreement for a five (5) year term commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2011 (the “Initial Contract”), (A copy of the Initial Contract is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference.) 9, Pursuant to the Initial Contract, the Charter School has been operating the Bronzeville Lighthouse Charter School (“BLCS") since July 1, 2006. 10. Paragraph nine (9) of the Initial Contract states that the Charter School will be held accountable in accordance with Exhibit F (Accountability Plan) of the Initial Contract, 11, The Accountability Plan in the Initia! Contract states that the Charter Schoo! will be held accountable in two categories: Pupil Performance and Financial Management/Compliance. 12. The Initial Contract provides the procedures that the Board will undertake in determining whether to renew the Initial Contract, 13, Specifically, paragraph 12 of the Initial Contract states, in pertinent part: 12, Renewal of Charter; Failure to Renew. No later than January 1, 2011, and no earlier than September 1, 2010, but in no event liter than the date set by the Office of New Schools, the Charter School shall provide a written proposal to the Board in accordance with Scetion 27A-9 of the Charter Schools Law, setting forth proposed terms of renewal of this Agreement, Pursuant to Section 27A-9(b) of the Charter Schools Law, the renewal proposal of the Churter School shall contain the most recent annual report and financial statement of the Charter School. The written proposal may contain proposed changes to this Agreement that the Charter School desires ta incorporate into the renewed agreement. ‘The renewal proposal shall be evaluated by the Board in accordance with paragraph 4 of Exhibit 6” (emphasis supplied.) 14, Paragraph four (4) of Exhibit F of the Initial Contract states: “4. Non-Renewal and RevocationNOV-18-2815 17:38 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 15. 20. 21, ‘The Board shall hold the Charter School necountahle in these and only these Categories (Pupil Performance and Financia! Manugement/Complinuce) through the Indicators contained in the annual Performance Reporis. The Board shall give fair consideration fo all Indicators for the current yeur in comparison to the previous years of the Charter School’s history when acting to renew, not renew, or revoke the Charter School's charter. ‘The Board may uet fo revoke or to not renew a charter, in whole or as to any Attendance Conter or campus, during the term of the Charter School Agreement in accordance with paragraphs 12 and 13 of this Agreement. ‘The Board shall not act to renew or fo not renew a charter until the issuance of the final annual Performance Report after the fourth year of this renewal period of the Charter School. While Attendance Rate data will be collected, classified, and reported annually, Low performance on this indientor alone (and no others) shall not be graunds for non-renewal or revocation. In all circumstances, the Board shall follow the requirements of the Hlinols Churter Schools Law and its Charter School Agreement, ineluding all duc process requirements, regarding the processes required for revocation, renewal, und non-renewal.” P.seat Qn September 1, 2010, the Charter School submitted a renewal application to the Board to renew the Initial Contract for a second five (5) year term. Between September |, 2010 and April 27, 2011, the Board undertook a review of the Charter School’s renewal application, As part of its review of the renewal application, the Bourd or its agents conducted site visits at BLCS. Following this comprehensive review, on April 27, 2011, the Board approved the Charter School to operate BLCS an additional five (5) years. The Renewal Contract On September 28, 2011, the Charter School and the Roard entered into a Renewal of Charter and Charter School Agreement for a tive (5) year term commencing July 1, 2011 und ending June 30, 2016 (the “Renewal Contract”). (A capy of the Renewal Contract is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by reference.) The Charter School and the Baard have been operating under the terms of the Renewal Contract since July 1, 2011. Paragraph nine (9) of the Renewal Contract states that the Charter School will be held accountable in accordance with Exhibit D (Accountability Plan) of the Renewal 3NOV-18-2815 17:39 From:WIRE DESK 22. 23, 24, 28, 26, To:csT 3123212148 Piatt Contract. (A copy the Accountability Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit 3 and incorporated herein by reference.) Paragraph nine (9) of the Renewal Contract indicates that Exhibit D is subject 10 annual revision and modification, The most recent Accountability Plan, applicable to the Renewal Contract beginning in February 2015, is the Plan attached hereto es Exhibit 3, ‘The Accountability Plan in the Renewal Contract states that the Board will annually measure the Charter School's overall performance based on its performance on indicators in two categories; Pupil Performance and Financial Management and Compliance. The Pupil Performance indicators are identitied in the Board's Schoo! Quality Rating Policy (“SQRP"). (A copy of the Board's School Quality Rating Policy is attached herelo as Exhibit 4 and incorporated herein by relerence.) ‘The purpose of the SQRP is to measure a school’s performance and identify schools in need of support and inereused oversight, based on the evaluation of key indicators, ‘A school’s School Quality Rating is determined based on a point system, A school is evaluated on 11 Pupil Performance indicators, The evaluation yields an overall weighted score which is used to determine a school’s Schoo! Quality Rating of either Level 1, Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3, ‘The 11 Pupil Performance indicators applicable to the Charter School are: (1) National School Atisinment Percentile on the NWEA Reading Assessment; (2) ‘National Schoo! Atainment Percentile on the NWEA Math Assessment; (3) National School Growth Percentile on the NWEA Reading Assessment; (4) Nationul School Growth Percentile on the NWEA Math Assessment, (5) Priority Group National Growth Percentile on the NWEA Reading Assessment (evaluated separately for Aftican-American, Hispanic, English Language [eamers (ELLs) and Diverse Learners); (6) Priority Group National Growth Pereentile on the NWEA Math Assessment (evaluated separately for Aftican-American, Hlispanic, English Language Learners (ELLs) and Diverse Learners); (7) Percentage of Students Meeting or Exceeding National Average Growth Norms on NWEA Reading and Math Assessments; (8) Average Duily Attendance Rates (K-8); (9) My Voiee, My School 5 Essentials Survey: (10) Pereentage of Students Making Suilicient Annual Progress on the ACCESS assessment; and (11) Data Quality Index Score. In the Accountability Plan, there are four Financial Management and Compliance categories and twelve indicators corresponding to those categories that are applicable to the Charter School, They are: Financial Condition | Financial Controls | Reporting ‘Legal mn) and Budget Compliance 1. Change in 1. Annual T. Budget 1. Legal _____ Net Assets vast MII ComplianceNOV-48-2015 17:39 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212149 Psat MN 2, Current il 2. Quarterly Ratio INE Statements HI 3. Nel Asset | 3 Ratio i 4, Cash-on- Fea/Stare/CPS Hand Compliance Docament I __ Submissions Mh 3. Loan Delinqueney I Budget My 28. Paragraph 12 of the Renewal Contract relates to renewal and states, in pertinent part: “12, Renewal of Charter Failure ta Renew. No later than January 1, 2016, and no earlier than September 1, 2015, but in no event later than the dute set by the Office af Now Schools, the Charter Schoo! shall provide u written proposal to the Roard in accordance with Seetion 27A-9 of the Charter Schuals Law, setting forth proposed terms of renewal of this Agreement. Pursuant to Scction 27A-9(b) of the Charter Schools Law, the renewal proposal of the Charter School shall contain the most recent audit report and financial statement of the Charter School. ‘The written Proposal may contain proposed changes to thls Agreement that the Charter School desires to Incorporate into the renewed agreement. The renewal proposal shall be evaluated by the Board in accordance with paragraph 4 of Exhibit D.” 29, Paragraph four (4) of Exhibit D of the Renewal Contract states, pertinent port “4, Annual Performance Evaluation, Revocation und Renewil “The Board shall conduct an annual performance evaluation in which it holds the Charter Schnol uccountoble in these Categories (Pupil Performance and Finuneial Management and Complinnee) through the Indicators contained in this Accountability Plan. ‘The Board shull give fair consideration to all Indicators for the current yenr in comparison to the previous years of the Charter School’s history when conducting the annual performance evaluation and when acting to renew, not renew, or revoke the Churter School's charter. ‘The Board may act to revoke or to not renew a churter, in whole or us to any Attendance Center or campus, during the term of the Agreement in accordance with paragraphs 12 and 13 of this Agreement. Tn all circumstances, the Board shall follow the requirements of the Mlinois Charter Schools Law and its Charter School Agreement, including all duc process requirements, regarding the processes required for revocation, renewal, and non-renewal. 5NOV-18-2815 17:39 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 Pett 30. 31. na a 34. 35. * L&I refers to Chicago Public School's Office of Innova When a churter is up for renewal, the chartor's academic performance on the PREP will be categorized us Meeting Standards, Making Reasonable Progress, or Fuiling to Mect Standards or Make Reasonable Progress, Similarly, the Financial Mana; analyzed to determine if viol occurred, ...” ment and Compliance indicators will be ns of the Charter Schools Law have Beginning in September 2015, representatives of Chicago Public Schools and the Charter Schoo! began a series of meetings and correspondences regarding the Charter School's renewal evaluation. Pursuant to Paragraph 12 of the Renewal Contract, on October 19, 2015, the Charter School submitied a renewal application to the Board in order to renew the Renewal Contract for a second five (S) year term. On October 26, 2015, representatives of the Board confirmed that the Charter School's proposal was complete and stated the following anticipated “next steps”: (a) “November 20, 2015: 1&1 will reach out to you if there is additional information requested from your school to round out your school’s application, Responses are due December 4, 2015; (fs) February/March2016: Mesting with your school and 1&1 to review the Renewal Recommendation; (c) March 2015[sic]: Bourd Vote on the Renewal Recommendation.” (A copy of the Board’s Octoher 26, 2015 email to the Charter School is attached hereto as Exhibit 5) Just two days later, on October 28, 2015, the Board approved and adopted a new policy, the Charter School Quality Policy. (A copy of the Charter School Quality Policy is attached hereto as Lixhibit 6) Paragraph Tl, of the Charter Schoo! Quality Policy provides, in pertinent part, that a gharier school shall be placed on an Academic Warning List, if the charter school has a SQRP rating of Level 3; or has a pwo-year SQRP point value average of 2,5 or Jowers or has a SQRP rating of Level 2 in three consecutive years. Paragraph V. of the Charter School Quality Policy provides, in pertinent part: nn) Standards for Non-Renewal: Ifa churter school secks to renew charter school, the CEO will make recommendations to the Board on school renewal based on the following standards: (A) Charter school operators who operate a single-site charter school will be recommended for non-renewal to the Board if the school (i is on the Academic Warning List during the final year of the charter nd Incubation, ihe office with which the Charter School was corresponding with regards to the renewal application. 6NOV-18-2815 17:48 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 Perea 36. 37, 38. 39. 40. 4 42, 43. 44, contract and has a current two-year SQRP point value average rating of 2.5 or below...” On November 4, 2015, the Board notified the Charter School that, based on the AWinois Charter Schools Law, paragraph 12 of the Renewal Agreement, and Section (V){A) of the Charter Schoo! Quality Policy, the Chieago Public Schools’ CRO would recommend to the Board not to renew the Chanter School's Renewal Contract. (A copy of the Board’s November 4, 2015, letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 8) Qn November 4, 2015, the Board notified the Charter School that it would not proceed with further review of the Charter School's renewal application. sd ‘On November 4, 2015, the Bourd notified the Charter Schoo! it would not proceed with site visits to the Charter School that had been scheduled for November 3 and November 4, 2015. Jd. ‘On November 18, 2015, the Board followed the CEO's recommendation and voted to not renew the Charter School's Renewal Contract. COUNT 1- BREACH OF CO} C1 Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-39 as though fully set forth herein. ‘The Renewal Contract is a valid and enforceable contract between the Board and the Charter School. ‘The Charter School and the Board have been operating under the terms of the Renewal Contract since July 1, 2011. ‘The Charter School has fulfilled its obligations under the Renewal Contract and is not in material breach of any term of the Renewal Contract, The Charter Schoo! is ready, willing and able to participate in the Board’s evaluation process and have the Renewal Contract renewed, ‘The Board has breached the Renewal Contract by the following acts or omissions: a, Pailing and/or Refusing to evaluate the Charter School’s renewal application materials in accordance with paragraph 12 and paragraph four (4) of Exhibit D of the Renewal Contract; b. Pailing and/or Refusing to conduct an annual performance evaluation of the Charter Schoo! in aecordance with paragraph four (4) of Exhibit D of the Renewal Contract; &. Failing and/or Refusing to give consideration to all of the appropriate Indicators as it is required to do in paragraph four (4) of Rxhibit D of the Renewal ContractNOV-18-2815 17:48 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 Piatt 45, 46. 47, 4, Failing and/or Refusing 10 give considerstion 1 any Indicators for the current ‘year in comparison to the previous yeurs of the Charter School's history as it is Tequired to do in paragraph four (4) of Exhibit 1D to the Renewal Contract; and e, Failing andor Refusing to follow the requirements of the Renewal Contract Tegarding the processes required for renewal and non-renewal as detailed in parageaph four (4) of Exhibit D of the Renewal Contract, As a result of the Board's implementation of the Charter School Quality Policy and ‘the Board's November 18, 2015 vote, the Charter School has not had an opportunity to be evaluated for renewal in accordance with the Renewal Contract. Based upon the Board's conduct in breaching the Renewal Contract, the Charter School has been damaged and will suffer irreparable injury as it will not have the ‘opportunity to be reauthorized by tha Board to operate subsequent to June 30, 2016, ‘The Board's conduct in breaching the contract and refusing to consider the renewal application of the Charter School will end the operations of the Chanter Schoo! on June 30, 2016, WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests the following rellef: A 48, 49, 50, ‘The Court enter an order in favor ofthe Charter School and against the Bosrd finding that the Defendant breached the Renewal Contr The Court enter an order requiring the Board to specifically perform its obligations under the Renewal Contract to cvaiuate the performance af the Charter School in accordance with the terms of the Renewal Contract; ‘The Court enter an order requiring the Board 1o specifically perform ils obligations under the Renewal Contract to evaluate the renewal application of the Charter Schoo! in accordance with the terms of the Renewal Contract; and . Grant the Charter Schoo! any further relief that the Court deems just and equitable. COUNT It DECLARATORY JUDGMENT, Plaintiff restates and rewalleges paragraphs 1-47 as though fully restated herei Pursuant to the Renewal Agreement, the Board was obligated to review the Charter School's performance and its renewal applications based upon an agreed methodology and standards as set forth in the Renewal Agreement, The Board refuses to evaluate the performance of the Charter School and its renewal application in conformity with the terms of the Renewal AgreementNOV-18-2815 17:41 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 P.geat St 52. The Plaintiff has been damaged by the Board's refusal 10 honor its contractual obligations in reviewing the performance and renewal application of the Charter School in conformity with the agreed methodology and standards of the Renewal Agreement. “There is a real and actual controversy hetween the parties and the Plaintiff has an interest in the controversy. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests the following relief: A B. ma 34, 58, 56. 37. That a declaratory judgment he entered, declaring the Board's November 18, 2015, vote to non-renew the Charter School Agreement invalid; That a declaratory judgment be entered declaring that the Board is required pursuant to the Renewal Agreement (o review the Charter School's performance in accordance with the standards set forth in the Renewal Agreement; That a declaratory judgment be entered declaring that the Board is required pursuant to the Renewal Agreement to review the Charter School's renewal application in accordance with the standards set forth in the Renewal Agreement; ‘That a declaratory judgment be entered declaring the Board's vote of November 18, 2015 in refusing to renew the renewal application of the Charter School to be void; and Grant the Plaintiff any further relief that the Court deems just and equitable. COUNT IIT INJUNCTION ‘The Plaintiff restates and realleges paragraphs 1-52 as though fully restated herein, Plaintiff hus a elearly asceriainable right to have the performance of the Charter ‘School evaluated pursuant to the terms of the Renewal Contract, Plaintiff has a clearly ascertainable right to have the Charter School"s renewal application to be reviewed pursuant to the terms of the Renewal Contract, Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law since the Board’s conduct will cause its operations as « churter school to cease. ‘The Plaintif¥ has a strong likelihood of success on the merits of its claims. ‘The harm that will be done to the Plaintit? outweighs ony interest that the Board has in enforcing its new policies or refusing fo perform under the Renewal Contract. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests the following reliefsNOV-18-2815 17:41 From:WIRE DESK To:csT 3123212148 Pete-tt A. The Court enter a temporary, preliminary and/or permanent injunction mandating the Board to review the performance of the Charter School pursuant to the terms of the Renewal Contract; B. ‘The Court enter a temporary, preliminary and/or permanent injunction mandating the Board to review the renewal application of the Charter Schoo! pursuant to the terms of the Renewal Contract; C. The Court enter a temporary, preliminary and/or permanent injunction prohibiting the Board from enforcing its November 18, 2015, vote to non-renew the Charter School Agreement of the Plaintiff, D. Alternatively, the Court enter a permanent injunction mandating the renewal of the Renewal Agreement for the term of July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2021; and The Court grant the Plaintiff’ such other relief as this Honorable Court deems just and equitable. Respectfully submitted, CHICAGO LIGHTHOUSE CHARTER SCHOOL. By: A NN One ys ERIC S, GRODSKY/ cgrudsky(@hauserizzo,com WILLIAM F, GLEASON/ waleason@hauserizzo.com HAUSER 1220, LLC 19730 Govemors Highway, Suite 10 Flossmoor, (L 60422 (708) 799-6766 Firm Number: 58715 [LI1AGRNFRAT\Bronaevile | ightios Charter Seicomptsiat | docx 10NOV-18-2815 17:41 From:WIRE DESK T orCST 3123212148 Pea. dead IEICATION ‘Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Code of Civil procedure, the undersigned certifies that the statements sot forth in this Instrument are trae and correct, except as to maters therein stated to be on information and belief and as to such malters the undersigned certifies as aforesnid that he verily believes the same to be true. President, Boakd of Bireciors Chicago Lighthouse Charter School n