From: 'Subiwt; Date: To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdornz&5.1.o,riepEcurian.com RE: Letter to the editor Uptown Messenger Robbie Evans Comments about Unionization Efforts at Lusher May 9, 2016 at 10:41 AM kiki hustonTi,Chunlin Leonhard pbarron To:'Robert Morris' Cc: pbarron@tulane.edu;'Rachel Wisdom' ; reuben.teague@prudential.com; 'Richard F. Cortizas' alos 'Ann Balzer' : cwhelanptulane.edu. Blaine Lecesne . leon ard©Lyl no.edu. 'Kiki Huston' Sent: Monday, May 9,2016 10:10 AM Subject: Letter to the editor Uptown Messenger Robbie Evans Comments about Unionization Efforts at Lusher Dear Mr. Morris, Thank you very much for your diligent coverage on the Lusher unionization efforts. I would appreciate it if you could please post my personal comments below as a letter to the editor in Uptown Messenger as soon as possible. There is a lot of misinformation, partial truth and fear mongering out there. It is a difficult issue under the best of circumstances. We need facts, not fantasy, for our teachers to make the right decision. Mr. Robbie Evans, the vice president of the board that governs the Choice Foundation, a three-school charter network in New Orleans, recently urged the Lusher Charter School teachers to vote against their fellow teachers' efforts to unionize, calling union as "an impediment to charter schools' progress." (The Advocate, Monday, May 9, 2016 p. 1B) He also commented about "union-created deadlock where only ineffective and possibly abusive teachers would benefit." pointing to the infamous "rubber rooms" associated with New York public schools —"temporary reassignment centers where union-represented teachers accused of misconduct or incompetency have been sent while they await rulings from independent arbitrators." (Id.) Mr. Evans' comments are not only outdated but also completely inapplicable to the unionization efforts at Lusher. A more salient example contradicting Mr. Evans's comments is the Ben Franklin High School union. Ben Frank High School's governing board voluntarily recognized its faculty's petition in May 2014. Ben Franklin's unionized teachers and its administration concluded their negotiations of a collective bargaining agreement in March 2015. I studied the agreement carefully and talked to the people involved with the negotiation. I believe that the Franklin agreement struck the right balance between the teachers' concerns and the administration's interests to ensure quality performance. Multiple people from both sides have described the agreement as fair. It is simply wrong for Mr. Evans to assume without any attention to reality that unionization alone would result in protecting "ineffective and possibly abusive teachers." Recently, US News and World Report released its annual rankings of high schools. Ben Franklin is now ranked 53rd nationwide, moving up by 27 steps from its last ranking. While that is no solid proof that the unionization contributed to the improvement, this certainly shows that unionization alone does not lead to a race to the bottom. In an email to Ben Franklin alumni after the Ben Franklin Board voted to voluntarily recognize the petition, Mr. Duris Holmes, who was the president of the Ben Franklin Board at that time, pointed out that Ben Franklin had been a unionized school for most of its history. "This fact did not degrade the quality of instruction at the school then or the achievements of its students. There is no reason to believe that a unionized faculty at Franklin now will in any way hurt the school," continued Mr. Holmes. Now that Ben Franklin has blazed the trail, Lusher can learn from the Ben Franklin experience and make an agreement better for Lusher. If the Lusher teachers vote to recognize the union as a collective bargaining unit under the National Labor Relations Board supervised election on May 17, the Lusher administration and the Lusher teachers will sit together and negotiate an agreement, just like their peers at Ben Franklin. During this contract negotiation process, the Lusher administration does not have to agree to any terms that it feels would compromise the Lusher excellence. This is absolutely no reason to assume that the Lusher teachers who desire a voice at the bargaining table would try to do anything to compromise the Lusher excellence. The Lusher administration is certainly not obligated to agree to any terms that would create the "rubber rooms" problem, a practice that supposedly ended in 2010 according to the Advocate article. I am confident that, working together collaboratively as a team, the Lusher administrators and the teachers can come up with an agreement that will ensure Lusher's long term quality academic standards and bring the best out of Lusher's already excellent faculty. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard Member of the Lusher Board, but speaking only on her own behalf. Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel. (504) 861-5854 eon hard gloyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: httplissm.com/author,1615756 From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdorm§storienasaacom Subject: RE: Robbie Evans Comments about Unionization Efforts at Lusher Date; May 9,2016 at 10:33 AM To: jvsigliarne(Mheadvcx;ate awn, Robert Morris rroorris@noblmessetver.com Cc: pberrongtulane.edu, Blaine Lecesne 1:Aeoeme@lovno.edu, Kiki Huston k , reeben.tenue@prudential.com, Richard F. Cortizas :, Ann Salzer asalzer@tulane.edu, owhelanOtuiane.edu, , alosh Chunlin Leonhard leonhardiz?k)yno.ede Good Morning Ms. Williams and Mr. Morris. I hope you are both doing well. I want to make clear that Ms. Leonhard does not speak for Lusher's Board and that her email below merely communicates her own personal views. She has does not have, and has not sought, the board's consent to make these statements. Please note as well that she was in the minority of the board when it voted, on April 23, 2016, to decline to voluntarily agree to recognize the UTNO/ATF sponsored union. In addition, please understand that when Ms. Leonhard, Ms. Whelen and Mr. LeCesne recently made comments to Ms. Williams that the Lusher administrators have done something wrong, they were not speaking for the board and did not have, or even seek, the consent of the other board members to make those statements. I personally do not believe Lusher's administrators have done anything wrong, and I believe that other members of the board share that view. After much consideration, we prepared a Board Resolution to address communications with our faculty during the NLRB proceeding. I believe it respects the voice of all stakeholders in the School and allows the voting process to proceed in a fair manner in accordance with applicable labor laws and NLRB processes. That resolution specifically authorizes Lusher administrators to relate their views and information they believe to be relevant, as is permitted by law. To my knowledge, they have acted consistently with the resolution and the law, and are faithfully attempting to fulfill their duties to ensure the continuing success of the school. Finally, please do not consider any statement by an individual board member or group of members to be representative of the board's views, not even mine. Thank you very much for your interest, Sincerely, Rachel W. Wisdom COM- igmun. t t'nfl 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures. From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailtodeonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 9:94 AM To: jwilliams@theadvocate.com Cc: pbarron@tulane.edu; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Blaine Lecesne; 'Kiki Huston'; reuben.teague@prudential.com; 'Richard F. Cortizast; aloshb 'Ann Salzer'; cwhelan@tulane.edu Subject: Robbie Evans Comments about Unionization Efforts at Lusher Dear Ms. Williams, Thank you very much for your diligent coverage on the Lusher unionization efforts. I want to point out that Mr. Robbie Evans' comment about "union-created deadlock where only ineffective and possibly abusive teachers would benefit" is not only outdated but also completely inapplicable to the unionization efforts at Lusher. (The Advocate, Monday, May 9, 2016 p. 1B) A salient example contradicting Mr. Evans's comment is the Ben Franklin High School union. Ben Frank High School's governing board voluntarily recognized its faculty's petition in May 2014. Ben Franklin's unionized teachers and its administration concluded their negotiations of a collective bargaining agreement in March 2015. I studied the agreement carefully and talked to the people involved with the negotiation. The Franklin agreement struck the right balance between the teacher's concerns and the administration's interests to ensure quality performance. Multiple people from both sides have described the agreement as fair. It is simply wrong to assume without any attention to reality that unionization alone would result in protecting "ineffective and possibly abusive teachers." Recently, US News and World Report released its annual rankings of high schools. Ben Franklin is now ranked 53rd nationwide, moving up by 27 steps from its last ranking. While that is no solid proof that the unionization contributed to the improvement, this certainly shows that unionization does not lead to a race to the bottom. In an email to Ben Franklin alumni after the Ben Franklin Board voted to voluntarily recognize the petition, Mr. Duris Holmes, who was the president of the Ben Franklin Board at that time, pointed out that Ben Franklin had been a unionized school for most of its history. "This fact did not degrade the quality of instruction at the school then or the achievements of its students. There is no reason to believe that a unionized faculty at Franklin now will in any way hurt the school," conunuea mr. moimes. Now that Ben Franklin has blazed the trail for us, Lusher can learn from the Ben Franklin experience and make an agreement better for Lusher. If the Lusher teachers vote to recognize the union as a collective bargaining unit under the National Labor Relations Board supervised election on May 17, the Lusher administration and the Lusher teachers will sit together and negotiate an agreement,just like their peers at Ben Franklin. During this contract negotiation process, the Lusher administration does not have to agree to any terms that it feels would compromise the Lusher excellence. This is absolutely no reason to assume that the Lusher teachers who desire a voice at the bargaining table would try to do anything to compromise the Lusher excellence. The Lusher administration is certainly not obligated to agree to any terms that would create what Mr. Evans described as "rubber rooms" associated with the New York's public schools. I am confident that, working together collaboratively as a team, the Lusher administrators and the teachers will come up with an agreement that will ensure Lusher's long term quality academic standards and bring the best out of Lusher's already excellent faculty. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leenhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: http://ssrn.comiauthor=1615756 From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdornz:l'hi.o,riepEgrrian.corn Sub{: November 5, 2011 AABE board meeting minutes.DOC Dote; May 7, 2016 at 12:20 PM du, Alysia Loshbaugh To: Salzer, Ann K Found this — we did vote on the Tulane contract. Sorry I didn't remember. ai•Jravitztuirane ethi From: Sut.A.nt .C,k1te: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoi.n...voritipi9.1.ian...oill RE:[Lusher] May 2016 AABE meeting notice.DOC May 7, 2016 at 12:04 PM Alysia Loshbaugh No Not yet. I actually forgot. will try to get to that this weekend and let you know. I talked to Ann this morning and she is going to call Kathy about the contract. I told her to call me if the hold up is Blaine and that I would call him From: Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2016 11:47 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Subject: Re:[Lusher] May 2016 AABE meeting notice.DOC Did you determine what was done in the past re: Tulane agreement and whether the board has to vote to renew it? Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On May 7, 2016, at 11:38 AM,Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: Hi all Attached is a draft notice for the May meeting. Please let me know whether there are an items to add, particularly action items. I have an executive session at the end for us to get advice from Mag about the NLEB proceeding. If the present schedule holds, the election will have taken place by then. I don't have any of the minutes for any of the meetings we've had over the last couple of months prepared yet. I hope to have all of them done by then, but am having trouble keeping up and may not. I will circulate them when I have completed them. Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Ffigman Walther Wittmann L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlegr. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-andadministrators@googlegrn. For more options, visit bIgnol. g2ggle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoill...storitipi9.1.ian.c.onl Sut.A.nt [Lusher] May 2016 AABE meeting notice.DOC MIN?: May 7, 2016 at 11:37 AM TO: b ei-,,flei^wi`Y;ifl',..,--ki(y•-•q;g,,,,..g-oup.con.1, Bickford, Mag b cnthchy, ".11 Hi all Attached is a draft notice for the May meeting. Please let me know whether there are an items to add, particularly action items. I have an executive session at the end for us to get advice from Mag about the NLEB proceeding. If the present schedule holds, the election will have taken place by then. I don't have any of the minutes for any of the meetings we've had over the last couple of months prepared yet. I hope to have all of them done by then, but am having trouble keeping up and may not. I will circulate them when I have completed them. Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmann L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ‘,h•r-bod-a)d, A!;illairjiIiatZ11:1:M.02,i,:;?..5011":12.agQQ",geal:Q.UU To post to this group, send email to ikiV.m.4xmd-anci.-ROT.lintSzratOgtw4,1t.gi'WpS For more options, visit tlaz,.stigmLimcif,„),Z.1.16".01Yriasibacia• From: Si.thject: Date; To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdornz&etoriepEc,rian.com Re: Follow-up to Letter to Lusher Board Urging Voluntary Acceptance and Acknowledgement of United Teachers of Lusher May 7, 2016 at 8:47 AM 0d Bickford, Mag rr feague@prudentialcom, Richard F. Cortizas `cececce,?o no,edta, Chunlin Leonhard ieo)ha.rdelo' , Alysia Loshbaugh i, Paul Barron obarron@tulane.iwfti, Carol Whelan cwriean,:t;ine.etit.i, Ann Selzer ane.e( tf, Kilci us on Thank you so much. This is very helpful. Sent from my iPhone On May 7, 2016, at 8:43 AM, Bickford, Mag wrote: Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: eabteague@gmaii.com> Date: May 7, 2016 at 5:49:55 AM CDT To:"Bickford, Mag" Subject: Re: Follow-up to Letter to Lusher Board Urging Voluntary Acceptance and Acknowledgement of United Teachers of Lusher Sent from my iPhone On May 6,2016. at 11:45 PM, Bickford. Mag .aboickfortlq:Wncolinctia‘r.com> Sent from my iPhone On May 6, 2016, at 5:24 PM."rbteag Meg- Thanks, Reuben Sent from my Phone Elegiri forwarded massage: From; Aaron ANquiet ruo., ?;i1sx— A wrote: To;"blecesneOloyno.edu", tblecoene@loyne.edu> "pbarron OttAane.edu" epberroo@tulane.edua."monizestVioneswaikereorn" , leorshardWoyno.odu".,leontlerd(iNovno.adi›," sei2erfRUana odu" ,"rwisdom ,"ernatforK4noyno edi;" "RbLee% SoNeot: FHow o Letter to Lusher Board Urging Voluntary Anoeptenne ared Aoknowiedgetnerit of United Teeonore of Loaner' Dear Board Members, I wanted to follow up on my email below, and voice my concern over the current state of affairs at Lusher. It should go without saying that we all love Lusher and that we want what we feel is best for it. However, the actions of the administration are such that there may be some very real and very negative outcomes facing Lusher as a school and as a community, regardless of the outcome of any vote (if in fact a vote is actually held). I strongly urge that the board quickly put itself into a neutral stance, and not condone or allow a continuation of the current strong arm tactics that are being seen from the administration side of the equation. If the current actions are allowed to continue unchecked, any outcome, most certainly a defeat of the union, will result in a Pyrrhic victory for the administration at best, and may be so costly for the school and community well-being as a whole, that Lusher may have difficulty recovering. The tactics being employed will force out some of [usher's best teachers, and negatively impact its competitiveness. Most concerning to me is the fact that the entire anti-voluntary recognition camp based its argument on the proposition that all teachers should have the right to cast their vote in this decision. However, at this point, the administration is challenging the teacher's right to even do that. This reeks of hypocrisy and parents are taking notice. Further, as a labor attorney, I am truly shocked that you are not facing multiple unfair labor practice charges at this point. If my clients had been subjected to the actions of the administration like the teachers have, I would have filed about 10-15 unfair labor practice charges at this point. I can only imagine that those are coming. You, as a board, are rapidly approaching a point where there may be irreversible damage done to Lusher and the Lusher community. You need to take action to curb the administration and their actions, or you will face a morass that will be very time consuming, costly, and which nobody will win. I speak as a parent and as a labor attorney. I would greatly appreciate your taking my thoughts into consideration. Good luck and best regards, Aaron Ahlquist From: Aaron Ahlquist Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 4:51 PM To: b e,,Sne@ ne.e.du rcortasjones .r.com; eonhau @loyno e• u; asaker@tulnr e u; regerog en@ogdendev.com; rwisdomPstonepigrnan.cornjcw an@t-u ane.e u; akravitz@tulane,edir, armstro.)@km R bt.,< Subject: Letter to Lusher Board Urging Voluntary Acceptance and Acknowledgement of United Teachers of Lusher Dear Board Members, I know some of you professionally, and others personally, and to those of you whom I do not yet know, I look forward to the opportunity to speak with you. I am an attorney with a portion of my practice committed to union side labor law. I am also a Lusher Parent. I know that this petition for voluntary recognition of the teachers' union has raised a tremendous amount of emotion from parents on both sides, and puts tremendous pressure on the board. However, I would like to take a moment to point out something for your consideration that may seem obvious, but which I believe is an important factor to take into account. With a showing of 57% of teacher support, it is very likely that a union will be certified by the NLRB if this goes to an election. If it does not, there will most likely be time consuming and costly charges brought with the NLRB alleging unfair practices or irregularities, if not suppression of protected union activities. The majority support presented to the board gives the board an opportunity to voluntarily acknowledge the union and avoid the potential pitfalls and contentiousness that an election would bring. Further, forcing the election would likely also create entrenchment and a more contentious collective bargaining session. With an understanding that the board will much more likely than not be facing collective bargaining with the teachers, this showing of good faith could go a long way towards an amicable bargaining engagement. The clearest message that it would send, however, was that the board absolutely values the teachers that it, and the families and children of Lusher, place their hopes and confidence in every day. An organized teacher population would certainly present challenges, but if it is inevitable, then you should consider the ways to approach the next steps with as much positive impact as possible, and eliminate creating unnecessary contentiousness. I urge the board to voluntarily acknowledge the United Teachers of Lusher, and work with them to address their issues with the focus being on maintaining and building Lusher as a premier educational institution in New Orleans. I thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Aaron Ahlquist, Esq. WWW.41Q9li.i.id1RY.,0111 I litTilr,QOALT.I.YeBl,&gAgM M'cnthey''tafford, RIC in Alabama, Ronda,Louisiana, Mississippi, New York,ON,Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford. LLP in Caiifornia. Confidentiality Statement: This ornail nlay oontain attorney•ciient pleged or confidentiai information. it is for the soie use of the intended rer.Apient(s) it you have ret,-eived this transmission in error, immediately notify us by teiephone at 504-5W-1200 and roturn the original message to us at McGiinchay Stalford, 12th now: tiOl Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA, 70130 via the United States Postal Se.rvica. We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment containing rhe%data. please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. See tlitoGlinehey Stafford Disalaimar/Privaay Policy itt):/w incolinaheycorsidisclaimeri From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscicarlz&5.1.o,riapEcxrian.com Sabject: Re: Follow-up to Letter to Lusher Board Urging Voluntary Acceptance and Acknowledgement of United Teachers of Lusher Date; May 6, 2016 at 10:55 PM To: Cc; Aaron Ahlquist assizei.fruane.er.iu, rogerogcEen,Avi arrnvroriMoyno.edu, Rbtea Please call immediately. Urgent. ptarron@tulane.edu, rocnizas@joneswaikercom, leonhards:.feioyrio.edu, e, dev.corn milelanti?esetulane.eou, akravitz@twane.er.io, kikihust The press is reporting stuff. Please call. Or email. Sent from my iPhone On May 6,2016, at 9:51 PM,`blecesnealoyno.edu" ‹blecesne@loyno.edu> wrote: Mr. Ahlquist, I agree with everything you have said and have voiced the very same concerns to my fellow Board members numerous times, thus far, to no avail. Thank you for taking the time to provide your thoughtful insight which I hope makes a difference. Blaine LeCesne Dear Board Members, i wanted to follow up on my email below, and voice my concern over the current state of affairs at Lusher. It should go without saying that we all love Lusher and that we want what we feel is best for it. However, the actions of the administration are such that there may be some very real and very negative outcomes facing Lusher as a school and as a community, regardless of the outcome of any vote Of in fact a vote is actually held). i sirongiy urge that the board quickly put itself into a neutral stance, and not condone or allow a continuation ofthe current strong arm tactics that are being seen from the administration side of the equation. If the current actions are allowed to continue unchecked, any outcome; most certainly a defeat ofthe union, will result in a Pyrrhic victory for the administration at best, and may be so costly for the school and community weil-being as a whole,that Lusher may have difficulty recovering. The tactics being employed will force out some of Lusher's best teachers, and negatively impact its competitiveness, Most concerning to me is the fact that the entire anti-voluntary reoognition camp based its argument on the proposition that all teachers should have the right to cast their vote in this decision. However, at this point, the administration is challenging the teacher's right to even do that. This reeks c.;f hypocrisy and parents are taking notice. Further, as a labor attorney, i am truly shocked that you are not facing multiple unfair labor practice charges at this point. If my clients had been subjected to the actions of the administration like the teachers have, I would have filed about 10-15 unfair labor practice charges at this point. I can only imattine that these are comma. Thu. as a hoard. are ranidtv aantsanhino 1 point where there may be irreversible damage done to Luther and the Luther community. You need to take action to curb the administration and their actions, or ygo will face a morass that will be very time consuming, ' costly, and which nobody will win. I speak as a parent and as a labor attorney. I WOLlid grealty appreciate your taking my thoughts into consideration. Good luck and best regards, Aaron Aniquist From: Aaron Ahtwist Sent: Wednesday,Aprii u, uio ; To: blecesne@loyno.edLi; pbarrofItulane.edu; rcortizasAjoriesv.ialker.com; ieonhard@loyno.edu; asaizer@tularie.edu; rogerogden@ogdendev.com; rwisdom@stonepigman.com: cwhelari@tulane.edu; akravitz©tulane.edu; kikihustonfayaboo.com; armstron@loyno.edu; Rbteagueagmail.com Subject: Letter to Lusher Board Urging Voluntary Acceptance and Acknowledgement of United leathers of Luther Dear Board Members, know some of you professionally, and others personally, and to those of you whom I do not yet know, I look forward to the opportunity to speak with you. I am an attorney with a portion of my practice committed to union side labor law. I am also a Lusher Pt. know that Ibis petition for voluntary recognition of the teociJers' union has raised a tremendous amount of emotion from oarent:, on both sides, and puts tremendous pressure on the board. :tiowever, I would like to take a moment to point out something for your consideration that may seem obvious, but which i believe is an important factor to take into account. Wth showing of 57% of teacher support, it is very likely that a union will be certified by the NLRB if this goes to an election. If it does not, there will most likely be time consuming and costly charges brought with the NLRB alleging unfair pradoes or irregularities, if not suppression of protected union activities. The majority support presented to the board gives the board an opportunity to voitintaniy acknowledge the union and avoid the potential pitfalls and contentiousness that an election would bring. Further, forcing the election would likely also create entrenchment and a more contentious collective bargaining session. With an understanding that the board will much more keyI than not be facing collective bargaining with the teachers., this shov,iing of good t:?it'u could go a loop way towards an amicable bargaining engagement The clearest n.'ios-ege that it would send: however, was that the board absolutely values the teachers that it, and the families and children of Lusher, place their hopes and confidence in every day, An organized teacher population would certainly present challenges, but it it is inevitable, then you should consider the ways to approach The next steps with as much positive impact as possible, and eliminate creating unnecessary contentiousness. I urge the board to voluntarily acknowledge the United Teachers of Lusher, and work with them to address their issues with the focus being on maintaining and building Lusher as a premier educational institution in New Cirlflans. I thank you for slow time arid consideration. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwistiorn@stonepgmsan.com StMject: [Lustier] News reports Date; May 6,2016 at 11:22 PM To: lustier-boarsi-and-adasinitra tors@gc.ingle.group:i.com Blaine: Please call me immediately. 504-388-06400. Thank you. Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmarm L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other inforrnation in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gatvasmilancE adminirArator*;+Linsubsolbet: .: 6 110g.• To post to this group,send email to ci.V.I.et-:mril-ar,41-a.41minit'it.raton(4)=.41agmiM Gorrk. For more options, visit atipiALQ,LRKLavgjk.samalcasp.a. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. r,,t/isdorn5.1.criepEgtriartagn Sut.A.nt RE:[Lusher] Postponement of May Meeting from 5/14 to 5/21 MIN?: May 6, 2016 at 3:53 PM COM To: , Hi all. I have not heard back from all of you but we do appear to have a quorum for a meeting at 2 on 5/21. However, Carol cannot make it. And Lynden has suggested a way she can meet her deadlines if we have a June rather than a May meeting. So we could have a June meeting instead. Since we ordinarily don't meet between May and August, I don't know that anyone would want to reschedule for June. But if so, please let me know because we can do that if we want. Thanks From: Salzer, Ann K [mailto:asalzer@tulane.edu] Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 10:46 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com Subject: Re:[Lusher] Postponement of May Meeting from 5/14 to 5/21 Yes, I can attend. Ann Salzer Assistant Provost Tulane University asalzerPtulane.edu 504-314-2816 From: , Rachel Wisdom Date: Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 10:43 AM To:"lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com" Subject:[Lusher] Postponement of May Meeting from 5/14 to 5/21 All: There are at least six board members(Ann, Alysia, Kiki, Richard, Paul and me) who have conflicts and will not attend on 5/14. Carol and Reuben did not state that they could not be there, but expressed preferences for other dates. Reuben, due to flight arrangements, prefers 5/21. So, we are going to reschedule the meeting to 5/21 at 2 p.m. to try to get a quorum to attend. Another reason we need to meet then and need a quorum is that on 4/15, Lynden has asked me to put approval of the budget calendar and approval of a preliminary budget on the May meeting agenda, due to related deadlines she must meet. As per her email below, we need to meet and provide those approvals by 5/21. I inquired about 5/21 to several board members and both Paul and Rueben have confirmed that date works for them. Please let me know whether you can attend on 5/21 at 2 p.m. Thank you Rachel From: Lynden Swayze [mailto:lynden swayzeMusherschool.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 7:56 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Kathy Riedlinger Subject: Question about Board Meeting to Approve FY17 Budget Counting back 10 calendar days before the hearing, I believe thatthe board could meet to approve the budget on 05/21/16. As a cost saving measure, Lusher places the advertisement required by the Louisiana Local Government Budget Act, in one ad, along with other member schools of our charter school co-op. Below is the wording from the tear sheet for the ad. Notice of Hearings on Proposed 2016-17 Budgets for the Following Schools:(Hearings may last approximately one hour) For at least ten calendar days before its Public Hearing, each school's proposed budget will be available for public inspection during school hours in its Main Office at : its address listed below Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corporation Lusher Charter School May 31, 2016,6pm @ 5624 Freret St., NOLA 70115, Room 207 Below is the link to the Budget Act http://www1egis.1asgovilegis/1aw.aspx2d=95806 RS39:1307 states B. Upon completion of the proposed budget and, if applicable, its submission to the governing authority, the political subdivision shall cause to be published a notice stating that the proposed budget is available for public inspection. The notice shall also state that a public hearing on the proposed budget shall be held with the date, time, and place of the hearing specified in the notice. The notice shall be published at least ten days prior to the date of the first public hearing. Lynden Clay Swayze, CPA Chief Financial Officer Lusher Charter School Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corp 5624 Freret Street, Room 201B New Orleans, Louisiana 70115 504-324-7307 Fax: 504-861-1839 tynden swayie_®lusherschool.org You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@googjggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit httusjLgts_u_pLggs_gle.coni/s1Lptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators group. To unsubscribe from this groupand stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tohekbogtgLaryl-• administrators+unsubscribe@gooqlegro_. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@gg_ggiggmps,com. For more options, visit fps://groups.gggle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . Subject: [Lusher] Postponement of May Meeting from 5/14 to 5/21 °ate: May 5, 2016 at 10:43 AM All: There are at least six board members(Ann, Alysia, kiki, Richard, Paul and me) who have conflicts and will not attend on 5/14. Carol and Reuben did not state that they could not be there, but expressed preferences for other dates. Reuben, due to flight arrangements, prefers 5/21. So, we are going to reschedule the meeting to 5/21 at 2 p.m. to try to get a quorum to attend. Another reason we need to meet then and need a quorum is that on 4/15, Lynden has asked me to put approval of the budget calendar and approval of a preliminary budget on the May meeting agenda, due to related deadlines she must meet As per her email below, we need to meet and provide those approvals by 5/21. I inquired about 5/21 to several board members and both Paul and Rueben have confirmed that date works for them. Please let me know whether you can attend on 5/21 at 2 p.m. Thank you Rachel From: Lynden Swayze [mailtodynden_swayze@lusherschool.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 7:56 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Kathy Riedlinger Subject: Question about Board Meeting to Approve FY17 Budget Counting back 10 calendar days before the hearing, I believe that the board could meet to approve the budget on 05/21/16. Ac a onct cavincr 111PnClIrPI lichpr nlarpc thp advprticpment rerntirpd hv thp ninciana 1.N., 11.4 6,t. ON. ,41 .2--/ NA...1VA y....61101.•,..4.1 WA./ NIA.* V WA WA./ .2-/ ¼F N.A.0.11.11.1.1.1611. Local Government Budget Act, in one ad, along with other member schools of our charter school co-op. Below is the wording from the tear sheet for the ad. Notice of Hearings on Proposed 2016-17 Budgets for the Following Schools:(Hearings may last approximately one hour)For at least ten calendar days before its Public Hearing, each school's proposed budget will be available for public inspection during school hours in its Main Office at its address listed below. Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corporation Lusher Charter School May 31, 2016,6pm @ 5624 Freret St., NOLA 70115, Room 207 Below is the link to the Budget Act http://www.I egis.la.govilegis/law.aspx?d=95806 RS39:1307 states B. Upon completion of the proposed budget and, if applicable, its submission to the governing authority, the political subdivision shall cause to be published a notice stating that the proposed budget is available for public inspection. The notice shall also state that a public hearing on the proposed budget shall be held with the date, time, and place ofthe hearing specified in the notice. The notice shall be published at least ten days prior to the date of the first public hearing. Lynden Clay Swayze, CPA Chief Financial Officer Lusher Charter School Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corp 5624 Freret Street, Room 201B New Orleans, Louisiana 70115 504-324-7307 Fax: 504-861-1839 lynden swayze@lusherschool.org You received this messaae because you are subscribed to the Goode Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" Prowl To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@g_os_glegmps.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@qc/ggLe_groups.com. For more options, visit ht_Ips://groups.qooqle.com/d/optout. Fron Subjeot; OW:A?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. . .1%,..n@vorifipE9rriencorn RE:[Fwd: Lusher - Union Issues May 6, 2016 at 3:32 PM Whelan, Carol S blecesne q:;dloyno edu, lus3nel-borard-r)ny@fjo09egro,upt;.fx)rt/ Dear Carol: have notes and an outline from which I spoke, and remember very well, and independently from those, what I said. The substance of what I said is not as you relate below, so I assume you are thinking of someone else. said I wouldn't vote for voluntary recognition because I had not had enough time to get information about and assess the role of a union in a charter school and had serious concerns about the long-term effect that a unionized faculty might have on the school, both financially and in terms of its academic program. The information I have obtained since then has only served to heighten my concerns. I also said that it appeared our teachers had not had time to consider and assess information either, and that I doubted that petition demonstrated a majority support of the faculty because it had about 15 or so signatures I did not think should be counted. Under those circumstances, I did not think it was responsible to vote for voluntary recognition. And that was what stated at the meeting. While I do prefer a secret ballot vote to voluntary recognition, I have never said to anyone anything to suggest that I am in favor of a union at the school. As far as the" neutrality policy" is concerned, it is a resolution not a policy, and it governs communications to our teachers during the NLRB process, nothing else. And it specifically provides that the administrators and speak their views and provide information, as permitted by law. The law does not require them not to be anti-union in their views, statements or actions, but merely limits them (the TIPS information circulated by Blaine from Spencer and then by Mag too). If anything has been unfair in this process, it's the effort to stifle the administrators, to keep information from them and/or portray their conduct or motives as sinister. They are very experienced educators and know more about the school, its teachers and the role a union would or could play there than just about anyone. have read what they circulated and its not hostile, threatening or coercive in any way. So I just don't see any support for the assertions you reference. Our administrators are good people and great professionals, but they are not being treated that way. respect you very much, Carol, and I do not mean to impugn your experience or character in any manner. You, like our administrators, have relevant knowledge about unions in PkibliC SChools than most if not all of our board members. I just felt compelled to respond because I think some of the assumptions and arguments from the persons to whom you refer are untenable. No more on this for me. Peace to all and a nice weekend too. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 2:36 PM To: blecesne@loyno.edu; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Re:[Fwd: Lusher - Union Issues Hello fellow board members, This parent really understands what is happening and it is so sad to see. Is the board going to continue to let this go on? All ofthe board members who spoke up at the meeting on April 16th, both pro and con on the issue of recognizing the United Teachers of Lusher, said they wanted "everyone to have a voice", thus the need for the election. On April 29th the board met again and voted to support a resolution to maintain neutrality, and yet the board is not stopping the administrators' actions that both parents and teachers are telling us are very hostile toward them. I know and have worked with many of teachers on both sides of the issue and respect all ofthem. This is not a fair way to treat them. Carol Sent from my iPhone > On May 5, 2016, at 11:36 PM,"blecesne@loyno.edu" wrote: > We continue to ignore parents like this at our own peril. There are many > more who feel the same way. > Blaine Original Message > Subject: Lusher - Union Issues > From: "Susan B. Kohn" > Date: Thu, May 5,2016 10:30 pm > To: "armstron@hyno.edu" > "pbarron@tulane.edu" > "rcortizas@yahoo.com" > "Huston Kiki" > "aloshbaugh@gmail.corn" > "blecesneggyno.edu" > "leonhard@lgyno.edu" > "asalzer@tulane.edu" > "Reuben Teague" > "cwhelan@tulane.edu" > "rwisdom@stonepjgman.corn" > Dear Board Members, > I am the parent of a Lusher 9th grader. > While I obviously do not get a vote, I am neither for or against our > teachers unionizing. What I am against, and am so disheartened by, is the > divisiveness being created by the Lusher administration. It is one thing > for the administration to state its position about a union - which is its > right. It is quite another thing to do so in a divisive manner. And while > the Board issued a resolution of neutrality, given that the administration > works for the Board, its resolution seems meaningless in light of certain > actions taken by the Lusher administration. > It is disingenuous to argue that all teachers should have a voice and an > opportunity to vote only to turn around and attempt to stop the election. > As a lawyer and parent, it is embarrassing to see the administration take > the position that Lusher is a political subdivision not subject to the > jurisdiction of the NLRB given that Lusher took the opposite position in > its 2009 lawsuit against the Orleans Parish School Board, and received a > ruling from the Court that Lusher is not a political subdivision. > Regardless of the outcome of an election, how can the administration > expect to resolve conflicts with its teachers given the divisiveness it is > creating in the run up to an election. And if the teachers vote not to > unionize, my fear is that such a result will be nothing more than a > pyrrhic victory for the administration whose actions will cause good > teachers to leave the school. This is not what is best for our children. > I urge the Board to do everything possible to stop the divisiveness so > that our Lusher community can come together and the teachers and > administration can resolve their differences regardless of the outcome of > the election. > Sincerely, > Sue Kohn > Susan B. Kohn > Simon,Peragine, Smith & Redfearn L.L.P. > 1100 Poydras St. 30th Floor. > New Orleans, LA 70163 > jjjp://www.spsr-law.com > Phone: 504-569-2906 > Fax: 504-569-2999 > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > This email transmission(and/or the documents accompanying it) may contain > confidential information belonging to the sender which is protected by the > attorney-client privilige.The information is intended only for the use of > the individual or the entity named above. If you are not the intended > recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, > distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of > this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail > transmission in error, please notify the sender and delete this > communication from your computer system. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-only+unsubscribe@googlsgaups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlearmps.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://gtolpi s.google.com/dimsgid/lusher-boardonly/31baa29b284b867ada567bf5798ed576.squin-el%40secure.loyno.edu. > For more options, visitl=s2.fr„rot_imgoogle.com/d/optout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gooaleamps.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gooalegroups.com. to view tins uiseussion on we weo visit naps://groups.uoogie.corniuimsgiu/iusner-ooaruonly/4A.A28FA6-9975-4E3D-94F6-E I 74E7482AB6%40tulane.edu. For more options, visit hgps://gg000le com/d/o tout You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoogIggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onla_googiNroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit Iltips://gfgt. s.google.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED18ACCC%40SPEXCH.stonepig man.com. For more options, visit tittps://groupsmagle.comid/optout. From: SuNeot MIN?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rMsdomdtori:tipEgnan.com RE: RE:[Lusher] May 14 meeting -- poll May 5, 2016 at 2:52 PM Twtx;.m, Richard Cortizas rocntizasdyteio:.? com huh Alysia Loshbaugh Barron, Paul L pbfAn'oiltulo.rie.edu, ••0:)- 10gFC)upccm, Bickford Mag Me too. Ms. Williams called on my cell phone and left me a voice mail with an explanation. I just talked to Richard and neither he nor I think it Is wise to respond. Anyone who wants to know why can call me. From: Alysia Loshbaugh [mailto:aloshbaugh@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 2:49 PM To: Richard Cortizas Cc: Barron, Paul L; Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com; Bickford Mag Subject: Re:[Lusher] RE: May 14 meeting -- poll I also received a call from The Advocate today. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On May 5, 2016, at 2:41 PM,'Richard Cortizas' via Lusher Charter Board and Administrators wrote: All, Just a head up...I received a call message from the Advocate earlier regarding the union matter, and apparently wanting a comment from me about the board position? Please note that I am inclined not to respond, as I would feel it inappropriate to interject my personal beliefs. Is there a formal communications process that we follow regarding media? Are we referring media calls to the President? Administration? If anyone knows please let me know...otherwise I do not plan to respond. Thank you. Sent from my iPhone On May 5, 2016, at 10:20 AM,'Richard Cortizas' via Lusher Charter Board and Administrators wrote: I can not attend on the 21st in the morning. That is my son's birthday and we have a party scheduled from 10a.m.-12p.m Sent from my iPhone On May 4, 2016, at 8:55 AM,Barron, Paul L wrote: We have friends in town over the weekend because of graduation and I am not able to attend the meeting on the 14th. However, at this time, I am able to attend a meeting on the 21st. I have placed that on my calendar in the event that there is no meeting on the. 14th. paae The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communic:ation. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not c:onstitute an electronic: signat Li re. From: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-and-administrators@goodegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 8:22 PM To: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com Subject:[Lusher] May 14 meeting -- poll I have heard from board members who, like me, have conflicts on 5/14. So, I am polling to try to ascertain if we will have a quorum. Please let me know whether you can attend. Thank you. Rachel W Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmann L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@gm. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-andadministrators@gmgltganua=m For more options, visit hLgrupggJe.com/dIoptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadm inistrators+unsubscribe@gmgicgrinps.con. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-andadministrators@gmgltgroanisan. For more options, visit bMaligratgaggglgle.comi optout You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@googkgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-andadministrators@gglegoups.com. For more options, visit 1=os://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-andadministrators@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit blips://gro-ups.gaq_ogle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisciorn@storiepEnfrsan.com StMject: [Lusher] May 14 meeting -- poll Date; May 3, 2016 at 8:21 PM com To:lushMew, I have heard from board members who, like me, have conflicts on 5/14. So, I am polling to try to ascertain if we will have a quorum. Please let me know whether you can attend. Thank you. Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmann L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kabgaggiglanck. minilArator$+unsubwitua@cjia. To post to this group,send email to .4V/.e.t-Warcl-ar,4,1.-a.4,1.minW,ratt,TAVAtzlgroqr‘,s corn,. For more options, visit ntualamps,m0sdattaloatom. From: Subjeot: Dote; To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisriorna.storiepiwrsartmol FW: Question about Board Meeting to Approve FY17 Budget May 4,2016 at 8:04 AM Salzer, Ann K acialzort§tuive odu, Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmaileom) almtliy....iugh@govoLoorn See below From: Lynden Swayze [mailto:lynden_swayze@lusherschool.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 7:56 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Kathy Riedlinger Subject: Question about Board Meeting to Approve FY17 Budget Counting back 10 calendar days before the hearing,I believe that he board could meet to approve the budget as late as 05/21/16. As a cost saving measure,Lusher places the advertisement required by the Louisiana Local Government Budget Act, in one ad, along with other member schools of our charter school co-op. Below is the wording from the tear sheet for the ad. Notice of Hearings on Proposed 2016-17 Budgets for the Following Schools:(Hearings may last approximately one hour)For at least ten calendar days before its Public Hearing, each school's proposed budget will be available for public inspection during school hours in its Main Office at its address listed below. Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corporation Lusher Charter School May 31, 2016,6pm @ 5624 Freret St., NOLA 70115, Room 207 Below is the link to the Budget Act http://www.egis la govilegis/law.aspx?d-95806 RS39:1307 states B. Upon completion of the proposed budget and, if applicable, its submission to the governing authority, the political subdivision shall cause to be published a notice stating that the proposed budget is available for public inspection. The notice shall also state that a public hearing on the proposed budget shall be held with the date, time, and place ofthe hearing specified in the notice. The notice shall be published at least ten days prior to the date of the first public hearing. Lynden Clay Swayze, CPA Chief Financial Officer Lusher Charter School Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corp 5624 Freret Street, Room 201B New Orleans, Louisiana 70115 504-324-7307 Fax: 504-861-1839 lynden swayze@lusherschool.org From: Subjeot; OW:A?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. . RE: Agenda item for the May 14 regularly scheduled board meeting May 4, 2016 at 8:03 AM du, Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) Salzer, Ann K Are you available on 5/21? That is the latest date for needed budget approvals for Lynden. From: Salzer, Ann K [mailto:asalzer@tulane.edu] Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 11:34 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Subject: FW: Agenda item for the May 14 regularly scheduled board meeting Rachel, FYI —Tulane's commencement is May 14 and Alysia and I are both working it. Can you reschedule the meeting? Ann Ann Salzer Assistant Provost Tulane University asaizerPtulane.edu 504-314-2816 From: Chunlin Leonhard Date: Tuesday, May 3, 2016 at 11:15 AM To: Rachel Wisdom Subject: Agenda item for the May 14 regularly scheduled board meeting Dear Rachel, I would like to submit the following agenda item for the regularly scheduled May 14 board meeting. Motion to direct the Lusher administration to refrain from engaging in anti-union activities and to comply with the Board's neutrality policy. Thank you. Best regards, Chunlin Associate Professor of Law 1'1; II hA VII CLUJ!, LL.IVI. r I tJ61c1111J Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leenhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: http://ssrn.comiauthor=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email toh,isher-bwrdonly+Linsi.:th$cribq@„gmiggrovps.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlyftooglegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit httm,://groupglexcornislimsgiJitt:!.*I'w-kirdonly/03881747,00001c0c,00000009%401eonhard-PC. For more options, visit http5.;:agroups.googie,comidtaptout. From: Subject: Date; To: Cc: VVIsdom, Rachel W. ivisdorn@storiepEgamacorn RE: Board's Review of Union Petition Briefing Papers May 2,2016 at 2:08 PM Bickford, Mag rnbic*:iordernoarscheycorn Chunlin Leonhard leonhard@loyno.edu, lusher-board-onlyegooglegrotips.com, blecesnetVicyno.edu Mag: Blaine does not speak for the board. If you need information from me, please call me because I am too swamped to keep up with all of these emails. Thanks, R From: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne©loyno.edu Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 1:34 PM To: Bickford, Mag Cc: Chunlin Leonhard; lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Board's Review of Union Petition Briefing Papers Mag, A committee equally divided on this issue would not have changed the inarguable fact that the client, AABE,did not authorize inclusion of the jurisdictional challenge in the memo. Nor does Kathy have the unilateral authority to insist on its inclusion. In fact, her doing so in light of the Board's neutrality policy and knowing the Board did not authorize it, is a further violation of Board policy. This is very troubling and we need to have an attorney-client meeting with you and Board members only to discuss this at your earliest convenience upon your return. Kathy's continued, unrelenting intrusion into the attorney-client relationship is what led Robert Spencer to withdraw as counsel. He told me upon withdrawal that he had to remind Kathy several times, when she attempted to dictate legal strategy, that she was not the client, the Board was. She is now undermining the Board's relationship with you as well and it has to stop. The Board has vowed to be neutral and Kathy cannot insist on tactics that violate the policy no matter how adamant she is. Blaine > Chunlin, > Please understand that I was copied on many emails on the topic and did > not have a vote from the Board. Kathy was adamant thatjurisdiction be > included. I could not omit this argument without this. Further, > jurisdiction cannot be waived and had to be included. The issue has not > been clearly decided other than by other districts. > I again request for a committee with authority. It would have been > helpful. > Sent from my iPhone > On May 2, 2016, at 12:19 PM,Chunlin Leonhard > > wrote: > Hi, Mag,let me make sure that I understand your message. Did you mean to > say that you contested the jurisdiction in your brief? If that is the > case, where did you get the authority to do so? As you correctly pointed > out, our board was clearly split. There was an attempt to represent > personal opinion as the Board's authorization, but you know that is not > the board's authorization. Absent an express authorization from the > board to do so (especially in light of the neutrality policy), you have no > authority to contest the jurisdiction. I thought Blaine's last email > to you on this topic made it clear. Your response to his email indicated > that you "hear[d][him]." > Please clarify your position. > Thank you, > Chunlin > From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@Luglinchey.com] > Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 11:56 AM > To: Chunlin Leonhard > > Cc: > lusher-board-orily@go_glegrsos.com > Subject: Re: Board's Review of Union Petition Briefing Papers > I am in Omaha. Just arrived. The pleading has to be filed in the next 6 > minutes and my guess is Camille has done that. Kathy had reviewed it. We > can send you a copy. We did include the jurisdiction argument. Because > the board was split, I had to do that without a subcommittee to direct me. > Sent from my iPhone > On May 2, 2016, at 11:51 AM,Chunlin Leonhard > > wrote: > Hi, Mag,I understand you are busy getting ready for the hearing tomorrow. > I understand that you are submitting the brief on the bargaining unit > today. Can I please review the memorandum before you file it? Thanks, > Chunlin > Associate Professor of Law > Director, LL.M. Programs > Loyola University New Orleans College of Law > Tel.(504)861-5854 > leonhard@loyno.edu > You can access my papers on SSRN at: > h_ltp://ssrn.com/authoi -1615756.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm? partidl 61 5756&coridr 649&runid 14702&ur httplissrn comlauthor=1615756> > www.mcglinchey.com > wwvv.CafaLawBloo.com1M://www.CafaLawBlog.com> > McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New > York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in > California. > Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client > privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the > intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, > immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original > message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New > Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. > We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any > remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed > or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment > containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a > replacement will be provided. > See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy > pt ://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmglegsups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlearoups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/clim s_gidiusher-board-only/7A0D3336-7C7C-4D17-833AC7DA D0191:053%40mcglinchey.corn > For more options, visit h_Vs:11gr_ows google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googkgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googleg_42_upr s.com. To view this discussion on the web visit 12Ds://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/d9ef801969d0e05237d13c4a7aa2c036.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit ices://groups.google.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribeOggggiffitsyps.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-onlv@dooalegiggps.com. To view this discussion on the web visit titips://cirgkpi gooale.com/dhlisclidAusher-board0nly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED17A7D6%40SPEXCH.stonegig man.com For more options, visit Ittips://aroups.ggole.com/d/ootout. mm, awn>> we glut'mn'w Sumac RE A iener re "re Lusner oernrnunrly can>>: am at is AM re m)ka Cc: rm. arealrnger >: I disagree. Please try lo be suppumve nf our during this dilficult lnne, especrally-vlm has persnnal dilicullies that must make mis even more trying. I beg you Tne are doing only wnal lne law allows. aner review by counsel, and lhey have a rignlle speak on lire issue. Original Message From' hiecesne@loyno edu [mainn'blecesne@laync edu] Sent: Saturday, April an, 2015 19:33 AM To: Lynden Swayze Cc Hazlm Dayen; Lusner cnaner; szy \Mley Ales; sneilz Nelson; cnarlene Henen; Frank lereel; leonnard@leync.edu; ewnelan@mlane,edu: rbteague@gmail mm; rconizas@joneswalkemonr; asalzer@tulane.edu; logerogden@ogdendev com; Nsdom. Rachel Suhje Re: ALeflerto lne Lusner Community It is not me uninn causing mis divisiveness. Blaine This Kellerlusl emphasizes kl me (he davlsivene lhfi'lhis issue has: lumen: la our community. That is what unions rio, 1 Crossed a union line as my yeal as a {cachet Jeffelscn Parrsn in me i was loreunaie 10 work 31 a school wnere mere were aimost no members and our faculty healed quickly after the strike, However, i rm friends ma: wen! lo walk in schoolslhatwele heawly union, and since May Crossed lne picket line they were osimerzerl (or all me years they warkerl at mar school a shall time age, rlrrouglr smveys completed by our mall Lusner was recognized as a top place le work rn line city How did we gel 10 W357 0m commum'iy is broken ri can never be repaired, No maner whar ine outcome the hard feelings remain I am saddened and sickened by a" this Lynden Swayze 5624 Fielei Sr New orleens. LA 70115 5943244307 lynden swayze@lusnereenoel,org 30 2'01'luy' *2 :10mariner, 01' i' real v. a While I respect that there are many views on the attempt to unionize Luther teachers, and that the F,,,x.ecutive team is strongly opposed to such a move, am appalled at what can onhj be desffibed as propaganda me,squerading as a letter toe community that is selectively addressed. You see, the Lusher community is, in fact. a community. As such, we communicate with one another. But, while i often discuss Lusher letters with others in the community, I quickly learned that this communication was difiarent Although I received this message, it was not apparently sent out to the usual fist of recents that includes the entire community. quickly came to the realization that many parents and members of the se-called community who spoke out in favor of the union during the emotohaliy charged board meeting last week did not receive the leite Did he senders of this e-mail who balked at the alleged secrecy in &tailing a union simply lose their usual e-mail list? I doubt that, as the other e-mail received with a link to the usual weekly Lusher lette.r found its way to every member of the community. Are we forming Lusher "subcommunities" now, wonder? in the spirit of including the entire community, have elected to CC this response to members of the Lusher Board, As for the letter's content. I strongly disagree with its tone, its implication that a union effectively hrea, down the Lusher that was built by the hard work of its ti5•eies corn riity of administrators, parents, and teachers. There is not one shred of scientific evidence that validates such bkinket accusations and misinformation, There is only the claim that a union would "add an additional layer of bureaucracy, and feed an adversarial tone." Well, here is where this letter leaves me confused. The letter itself takes an adversarial tone, as evidenced by the following statement made by bureaucrats who run the school: That is why we, and most of the faculty, are here. We are driven by excellence." Now, I'm sure those responsible for sending out this letter will deny that such statements have adversarial intentions. Semantics notwithstanding, the use of the phrase "most ofthe faculty" clearly implies they are referring to those members of the faculty who are opposed to a unionized workplace. Adding that those members ofthe faculty are part of a cooperative team of teachers, administrators, and parents who are "driven by excelience" intimates that those who are not a part of this select and anti-union group are driven by some other nefarious and adversarial force. This is not only wrong. ft is offensive, adversarial, and arguably libelous. Everybody at Lusher, unionized or not, works tirelessly to maintain and expand upon the exceiience that we as an entire community at Lusher have come to expect. To suggest that a subset of alleged .rigitoiws s not a pail of a team driven by excellence is downright unprofessional and disingenuous, call upon those responsible for this letter to issue another letter that repudiates the divisive message sent out in today's letter. And, this time, let's hlake sure that ail who are a part of our community receive the letter. R is the right thing to do. A community -)metimes disagrees. But; through professionalism, mutual respect, and inclusion, a community can always emerge from disagreement stronger than ever. Sincerely, Hazim Dayeh Lusher Parent On Fri, Apr 29,2016 at 4:38 PM, Lusher Charter wrote: A Letter to the Luther Community As most of you know by now,there is currently an attempt to have the United 'Teachers of New Orleans union WINO)represent some of OW teachers at Lusher. This is an issue that will probably be Cedded by a vote of our teachers in the coming weeks, but it will have an impact not only on teachers but on our entire school, First, we respect the right of any teacher to express their opinion and to act in what they feel is their best interest. As a group of administrators, we have over 200 years of combined oducotional experience—in many union and non-union schools. Because a 1(-., .aofis union will change Lusher in a serious way, we also have the right and the obligation to express our opinion on this matter. We all recognize that Lusher is special: National Blue Ribbon Honors; U.S. News and World Report list of top schools in the ri:;.Apri; the highest performing K-12 program in Louisiana; The Times-Picayurie's Top 40 Workplace in 2015. That is why we, and most of the faculty, are here. We are driven by excellence. Luther gives us the flexibility to respond quickly and creatively withoi.5[ ]avers of: bureaucracy, With the pace of technology and advances in raariing thc.ory, this is a very x 1rtmo in education; bui:so a very ehafienging time. As .....idinotrators we have to make many tough decisions. When the decisions are correct, we build on them. When we make mistakes, and we do: we admit them and learn from them. Luther's accomplishments would indicate many more good decisions than bad. One of the first decisions made by the faculty in 2005 was a difficult one: 92% of the staff voted to voluntarily give up their tenure and affiliation with the UTNO union as part of Lusher's transition to a charter. That decision by teachers was a good one. As proof, Lusher teachers'salary and benefits package is significantly better than those at peer schools and our teacher reiention rate is one of the highest in the oily. There is a rare chemistry and pride at work at Lusher. The Union's history with, and opposition to, charter sohools are especially concerning to us. In our opinion, introducing a union into Lusher will negatively affect direct communication of administration with teachers, add an additional layer of bureaucracy. and f.-4,ec. an adversarial tone that has not previously been part ot the atmosphere at Lusher. The two sided relationship between adr.uinistation and faculty will become a triangle, and the union side has inN:re,,?13 other than the well being of Luther students, like building power through numbers. This will inevitably change the positive relational chemistry between the administration and most faculty members that has proven so a ecessful for our children. Just as the vote in 2005 to become a carter set the course for the decade, the upcoming vote on a union will set the course for the next decade, tnr better or for worse, We wiii keep you informed as we get closer to the election and provide you with any relevant information. Thank you for considering our concerns. We are available to respond to any questions you have. Sincerely, Your Administrative Team Kathy Riedlinger, Lynden Swayze, Israel, CEO CFO Director of Operations VAley Ales., High Schoci Principal Principal Cher ene Hebert, Midd e School Principal Frank Sheila Nelson, Lower School From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . Szthject; RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 29, 2016 at 3:51 PM To; Chunlin Leonhard : ,..R.7.*td.',oyno.em., Andrea Armstrong Cc; Blaine Lecesne i:iiee,:o::i-io;ki-)yrir).ed;j, Barron, Paul L pba non Richard Cortizas 'yar;oc.com, Bickford, Mag mr rnoiinch&j.corn, Carol Whelan -1 i<.;ter;(sii•:zhoe Alysia Loshbaugh .:;110::,hbaoc.i-Ogrnaii.com, Ann K Salzer o edo, Kiki Huston hyrh rç re0000 +.+,1.3, Bryant, Camille Fullmer, Susan Kathy Riedlinger sl irne :?:.';rilcs_nnriy corn Please see Richard's email of 9:41 this morning. I have not engineered anything, as Richard noted we'd already given her the green light to use the argument if she deemed it appropriate. And yes I read that part of her email. Note she says "NLRB setting." Its likely if the argument is pressed we could lose at the NLRB as they are naturally inclined to expand their jurisdiction. But if we were before the Firth Circuit, we may well win and have a good argument. And please note she said: "If the jurisdiction issue was the only think keeping us in a hearing, I would suggest we waive the argument. As it is not, I think we insert it in the position statement. We won't spend a lot of time on it but at this point, the union has nothing to induce a cooperate approach to the hearing. They pushing back on stupid issues such as the times of the election, the rooms for the election and other issues that should be easily agreed." Its obvious she thinks it could have value to include it for trading, pushing back in the process and is not succumbing to some untoward pressure from me to make bad arguments. Those are her words in red font — I am not making her say it or pushing her at all. I think her advice is good, that is all. And there is nothing at odds with the Board's decision not to say whether a union would be bad or good. The assertion is that the NLRB does not have jurisdiction not that a union is a bad or a good thing. In addition, the NLRB's lack of jurisdiction does not preclude a union or other organization of teachers at Lusher. There are many public employers with unions over which the NLRB has no jurisdiction. From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailtodeonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 3:35 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Chunlin Leonhard; Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne; Barron, Paul L; Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; Carol Whelan; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Ann K Salzer; Kiki Huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Rachel: If you read Mag's email carefully, her email states that, I quote,"[Oven the private board and the significant amount of private support of the school, I do not feel an Objection to jurisdiction would be meritorious in the NLRB setting." Her proposed solution (to put the argument in the brief as a place holder) was her attempt to compromise because of the apparent "split" that you engineered by substituting your own persona" opinion as mat 01 Me .110i11.01 tly CfebitMg MIS artmetai. spin tmsteau 01 wutowmg ne Board's express policy of neutralit:0, you put .Mag in this impossible position to preserve an argument that in her professional opinion is not meritorious. If you truly want to honor Mag's sound opinion, you should not be forcing her to adopt a position that she cannot defend and that may potentially compromise her credibility in front of the union. I strongly object to contesting the NLRB jurisdiction. There is no Board authority for taking this position. Contesting the jurisdiction is clearly inconsistent with the expressed policy of neutrality. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigman.com] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 2:04 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard' ;'Andrea Armstrong' Cc:'Blaine Lecesne' ;'Barron, Paul L' ;'Richard Cortizas' ;'Bickford, Mag' ;'Carol Whelan' ; rreuben.teague@prudential.com' ;'Alysia Loshbaugh' ;'Ann K Salzer' ;'Kiki Huston' ;'Kathy Riedlinger' ;'Bryant, Camille' ;'Fullmer, Susan' Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Just to be clear, I meant to say we should follow Mag's advice as per her email sent at 12:53. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 2:00 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard'; Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne; Barron, Paul L; Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; Carol Whelan; reuben.teaguePprudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Ann K Salzer; Kiki Huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I think some of your assertions are not accurate. Leaving that aside, and with all due respect, I think we should follow her sound advice that she related in her email sent at 12:53. She has a lot of experience, knows the actors involved and is in the best position to assess what we should assert and what trade or other value our arguments may have in the process. From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonhard©Loyno.edu] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 1:53 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne; Barron, Paul L; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mag; Carol Whelan; _ . reuben.teacpruaentiai.com; Aiysia Losnbaugn; Ann K saizer; KIKI Huston; Katny Kleatinger; bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege The only person who claims to have stated a position about contesting the NLRB jurisdiction is Rachel's personal opinion that we should contest the NLRB jurisdiction. The other person is Paul who has changed his mind on this issue (implicitly admitting that he had a different opinion). How is that a BOARD decision to authorize Mag to contest the NLRB jurisdiction?! As Rachel has previously emphatically pointed out, personal opinions are NOT the Board's position. As Mag's research and my own research show, there is little authority supporting the position that the NLRB has no jurisdiction over a charter school and there is plenty of authority supporting NLRB jurisdiction over a charter school. Contesting or attempting to contest the jurisdiction violate the Board's policy and damages the credibility of the Board under these circumstances. From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigman.com] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 9:45 AM To: Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne ; Barron, Paul L ; Richard Cortizas ; Chunlin Leonhard ; Bickford, Mag ; Carol Whelan ; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh ; Ann K Salzer ; Kiki Huston ; Kathy Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille ; Fullmer, Susan Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I disagree and I think Mag was given authority to make the argument. Contesting jurisdiction is not anti Union since many unions exist that are not NLRB governed. And as Paul points out making the argument acts as a place holder. We can always abandon it later. And If the union wins the election, having that issue raised and pending, could give us leverage in negotiating a CBA. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:19 AM, Andrea Armstrong wrote: I would strongly urge us to engage in a good-faith strategy towards the union. I recall that we agreed to litigate the bargaining unit, but did not come to an agreement on jurisdiction. It is not clear to me(or at least I don't believe the case has been made)that there is a good faith argument to contest jurisdiction. Moreover, I do think that contesting jurisdiction is at odds with the spirit, if not letter, of our recent consensus to let the teachers decide whether or not a union is in their interests. To preserve a challenge, whose only purpose would be to contest the results of the teachers' vote for the union, seems counterproductive to the goal of letting the teachers decide. Andrea On Apr 29, 2016, at 8:41 AM,Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: And if the NLRB doesn't have jurisdiction, that does not preclude the formation of a union or some other organization of teachers at Lusher. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 8:18 AM To: eblecesneAlgyno.edut; Barron, Paul L Cc: Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teagueqprudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I stated clearly in our initial meeting with Mag that I thought we should challenge jurisdiction. I stated that I did not agree we should voluntarily recognize UM and that an election seemed preferably bec:ause there were many signatures on the petition that should not be counted — I think 15 or 16. I said I needed more time to get and assess information about unions in c:harter schools.. None of what I have found c:onvinces me that a teachers union would do anything to help and most likely would harm Lusher, especially in the long run. I never indicated that I thought we should give up valid legal arguments and have not contradicted myself. From: blecesnelloyno.edu [mailto:blecesnegkyno.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 11:05 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: blecesne_@loyno.edu; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol 5; reuben.teague@_prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers ot New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Paul, Ifthe union wins, contesting jurisdiction directly contradicts what you and others who wanted an election have used to justify an election--that you wanted a clear indication by way of secret election as to the teachers' desire to unionize. You have said repeatedly that if more than 50% wanted a union, you would definitely honor that choice. Rachel, you have said the same. Now you are saying that if UTL wins, you would try to overturn the election with a jurisdictional challenge. How do you reconcile or justify such a contradiction? Blaine > Folks: > Indicating that we will contest jurisdiction is different from actually > doing it. The a decision can be made after the vote given the fact that > the matter ofjurisdiction will be litigated. If the union does not win > then placing this in the brief will be moot. If the union wins, a decision > as to whether going forward with the contesting jurisdiction can be made. > As a result, I would urge us to add it in our brief. > Paul > Paul Barron > The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) > Tulane Law School > 6329 Freret Street > New Orleans, LA 70118 > Voice 504-865-5986 > Fax 504-862-8846 > This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy > all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other > information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not > constitute an electronic signature. > Original Message > From: blecesnealovno.edu rmailto:blecesnealovno.edul > Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 10:19 PM > To: Richard Cortizas > Cc: Chunlin Leonhard <1 i&Q_ .1 _char 1@loyno.edu>; Wisdom, Rachel W. > isc,y1_.o.i.Ln@aanspiginan.com>; Bickford, Mag ; >121goog@lgyno.edu; Barron, Paul L <12.bmgagtamg&du>; Whelan, Carol S > ;reuben.teagn:,Alysia Loshbaugh > ; Andrea Armstrong > ; Salzer, Ann K <0.WzgEgtgsgn_. du>; > kiki huston ; Kathy Riedlinger > ;Bryant, Camille > ; Fullmer, Susan l._/gL@mgglinchey.corn> hi• > Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United > Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege > Please think about what we would be doing. We are already going to spend > $30,000-50,000 on a bitter, divisive election. The union will likely win > that election and we will then spend another $50,000-75,000 on the > collective bargaining process. Now some of us, solely at the CEO's urging, > want to spend another who knows what on a frivolous "hail mary" > jurisdiction contest. We are digging a financial hole that is a waste of > corporate assets, breach of fiduciary duty, and unsound business practice. > On top of all that, this reckless course of action contravenes our clear > policy of neutrality which is only hours old. > Blaine >> I'll defer to Mag, and with all due respect to Paul's opinion..how are >> we different from the other Charters that have been successful on this >> challenge? What authorities have successfully decided jurisdiction >> over Charters? Just curious? Thank you >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 9:42 PM,Chunlin Leonhard >>> wrote: >» >>> We did discuss the jurisdictional issue, but we never came to any >>> conclusion, and I remember Paul expressing serious doubts about the >>> validity of the jurisdictional challenge. I then researched this >>> issue myself and read many of the NLRB cases on its jurisdiction over >>> charter schools and talked to another labor law expert. The weight >>> of the authority favors jurisdiction over charter schools. We will >>> most likely lose the jurisdictional battle and waste hundreds of >>> thousands of dollars in legal fees in the process. >» >>> This position also contradicts the Board resolution that we just >>> adopted today. The Board's official position is neutral. It is >>> anything but neutral for us now to take a position against the NLRB >>> jurisdiction and trying to avoid an election(which, by the way, will >>> not be successful because as Mag pointed out in her email that the >>> Board will not decide the issue until after the election). >» >» >» >>> From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigman.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:16 PM >>> To:'Bickford, Mag' ; Richard Coitizas >>> >>> Cc: blecesne@lgyno.edu; Barron, Paul L ; Chunlin >>> Leonhard ; Whelan, Carol S ; >>> reubenteam@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh >>> ; Andrea Armstrong >>> ; Salzer, Ann K >>> ; kiki huston ; Kathy >>> Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille >>> ; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I recall that we did discuss it and agreed that administraton could >>> follow advice of counsel to contestjurisdiction. I propose we have >>> an executive session meeting to authorize it ifthere is any doubt. >>> Do I have your agreement Richard? And You Blaine, Alysia and Paul? >» >>> From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mcglinchey.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:05 PM >>> To: Richard Cortizas >>> Cc: blecesnegklyno.edu; Wisdom, Rachel W;Barron, Paul L; Chunlin >>> Leonhard; Whelan, Carol S;reuben.teaguggprudential.com; Alysia >>> Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K;kiki huston; Kathy >>> Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I thought so to so I need some clarification. >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 8:57 PM,Richard Cortizas >>> wrote: >» >>> Mag, >>> Thank you so much but I thought we had agreed that we would contest >>> jurisdiction? >» >>> Again,thank you. >» Richard >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 8:30 PM,Bickford, Mag >>> wrote: >» >>> I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events. >>> Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. >» >>> The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election >>> on Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. >>> There were certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's >>> email. As the concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by >>> the Board,I consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we >>> are engaged in interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I >>> also waived a card check because we are certain that the union has >>> over 30 legitimate signatures. >» >>> I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed >>> by the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as >>> potential voters. The unit we propose includes instructional >>> employees with common pay scales and academic year engagement. This >>> unit will be divided into professional members and non-professional >>> members-group A >>> and group B. I will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can >>> work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a >>> stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very >>> helpful and immediately attentive to getting me the information >>> needed for these issues. >» >>> The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to >>> resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief of the >>> bargaining unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contest >>> jurisdiction. If you all are in accordance, I will have to do that >>> as soon as possible as I will have to change my previous >>> representation to the Labor Board. I won't slow down the election as >>> it will probably be ruled on after the vote. It will be a place >>> holder for a later date should we chose to litigate further. >» >>> I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked >>> the Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my >>> request to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too >>> long to wait. I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be >>> moved to Friday. If not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my >>> firm, will step in with Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law >>> clerk before >>> coming to McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also >>> was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that >>> if I can't make it that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan >>> at Adams and Reese for the hearing but I strongly advise against that. >» >>> We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the >>> hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the >>> hearing is not moved. >>> '->"•>'> Trn÷lirir nrir1 T -tricitcvl vcritirs V;irrrienin 11./fil1air ncRilc,r-rtnnorvn Vfiltat- C.1.11%.1. 1. V 113.1.1.A.A./ VV 1141 V 1.1.611Lla i JI 1.1l4V111.1.01.1111.1 ‘01, >>> prominent local pr firm. Kathy has chosen to retain a different >>> agency. I don't know whether she has set an appointment with them >>> yet. >» >>> The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to >>> May 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I >>> hope to confirm this tomorrow. >» >>> Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. >>> I am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email >>> as they shake out. >» >>> Mag >» >» >» >>> Magdalen Blessey Bickford >>> direct: >» fax: >>> email: >>> office: >>>(504)596-2726 >>>(504)910-6944 >>> mbickfordansglinchey.corn >>> 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 New Orleans, LA 70130 >» >>> biolvcardl www.mcglinchey.com I www.cafalawblog com >» >» >» >>> www.mcglinchey.comlwww.CafaLawBlou Corn >>> >>> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, >>> Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey >>> Stafford, LLP in California. >» >>> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >>> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >>> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in >>> error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return >>> the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 >>> Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal >>> Service. >» >>> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and >>> any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not >>> be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an >>> attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately >>> and a replacement will be provided. >» >>> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >>> h- pt ://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer; >>> <4614 001.pdf> From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . Szthject; RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 29, 2016 at 2:03 PM To; Chunlin Leonhard ;ot...:;i:.i..,,Ijiu?,:;u.000, Andrea Armstrong Cc; Blaine Lecesne i:ilee;o::i-io;ki-)yrir).ed;j, Barron, Paul L co Richard Cortizas 'yar;oc.com, Bickford, Mag Carol Whelan -1 i<.;ter:Osiahoe Alysia Loshbaugh .::liehbo.oc.i-Ogrnaii.o.,)n-;, Ann K Selzer o co, Kiki Huston hyrh rç re0000 +.+1.3, Bryant, Camille Kathy Riedlinger Fullmer, Susan sl irne :?:.';rilcs_nnri-.r>;corn Just to be dear, I meant to say we should follow Mag's advice as per her email sent at 12:53. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 2:00 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard'; Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne; Barron, Paul L; Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; Carol Whelan; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Ann K Salzer; Kiki Huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I think some of your assertions are not accurate. Leaving that aside, and with all due respect, I think we should follow her sound advice that she related in her email sent at 12:53. She has a lot of experience, knows the actors involved and is in the best position to assess what we should assert and what trade or other value our arguments may have in the process. From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonharclftyno.edu] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 1:53 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne; Barron, Paul L; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mag; Carol Whelan; reuben.teaaue@n; Alysia Loshbaugh; Ann K Salzer; Kiki Huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege The only person who claims to have stated a position about contesting the NLRB jurisdiction is Rachel's personal opinion that we should contest the NLRB jurisdiction. The other person is Paul who has changed his mind on this issue (implicitly admitting that he had a different opinion). How is that a BOARD decision to authorize Mag to contest the NLRB jurisdiction?! As Rachel has previously emphatically pointed out, personal opinions are NOT the Board's position. As Mag's research and my own research show, there is little authority supporting the position that the NLRB has no jurisdiction over a charter school and there is plenty of authority supporting NLRB jurisdiction over a charter school. Contesting or attempting to contest the jurisdiction violate the Board's policy and damages the credibility of the Board under these circumstances. From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigman.com] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 9:45 AM To: Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne ; Barron, Paul L ; Richard Cortizas ‹rrnri-i7acOvahnn rnm>• chi inlin I Pn n h rri ‹IpnnhArrialnynn Pduu Rirkfnrri Mna •••••• "As •••• • 11.0•./ OW. IP • II •41.1 Y. •• V1.1 • • •• • 11.•11, 10•••VII •••••110 ; Carol Whelan ; reuben.teaguePprudentiaLcom; Alysia Loshbaugh ; Ann K Salzer ; Kiki Huston ; Kathy Ried linger ; Bryant, Camille ; Fullmer, Susan Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I disagree and I think Mag was given authority to make the argument. Contesting jurisdiction is not anti Union since many unions exist that are not NLRB governed. And as Paul points out making the argument acts as a place holder. We can always abandon it later. And If the union wins the election, having that issue raised and pending, could give us leverage in negotiating a CBA. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:19 AM,Andrea Armstrong wrote: I would strongly urge us to engage in a good-faith strategy towards the union. I recall that we agreed to litigate the bargaining unit, but did not come to an agreement on jurisdiction. It is not clear to me(or at least I don't believe the case has been made)that there is a good faith argument to contest jurisdiction. Moreover, I do think that contesting jurisdiction is at odds with the spirit, if not letter, of our recent consensus to let the teachers decide whether or not a union is in their interests. To preserve a challenge, whose only purpose would be to contest the results of the teachers' vote for the union, seems counterproductive to the goal of letting the teachers decide. Andrea On Apr 29,2016,at 8:41 AM,Wisdom, Rachel W wrote: And if the NLRB doesn't have jurisdiction, that does not preclude the formation of a union or some other organization of teachers at Lusher. Crnm• 1A/icrinm Parhal AlI Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 8:18 AM To: iblecesneAlLy:s no.edue; Barron, Paul L Cc: Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teaqueqprudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I stated clearly in our initial meeting with Mag that I thought we should challenge jurisdiction. I stated that I did not agree we should voluntarily recognize UTL and that an election seemed preferably because there were many signatures on the petition that should not be counted — I think 15 or 16. I said I needed more time to get and assess information about unions in charter schools.. None of what I have found convinces me that a teachers union would do anything to help and most likely would harm Lusher, especially in the long run. I never indicated that I thought we should give up valid legal arguments and have not contradicted myself. From: blecesneloyno.edu [mailto:blecesne(aloyno.edul Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 11:05 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: blecesne@loyno.edu; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teague(aprudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Paul, If the union wins, contesting jurisdiction directly contradicts what you and others who wanted an election have used to justify an election--that you wanted a clear indication by way of secret election as to the teachers' desire to unionize. You have said repeatedly that if more than 50% wanted a union, you would definitely honor that choice. Rachel, you have said the same. Now you are saying that if UTL wins, you would try to overturn the election with a jurisdictional challenge. How do you reconcile or justify such a contradiction? Blaine > Folks: > Indicating that we will contest jurisdiction is different from actually rinincr it Ti-ip rippicinn panrnAi aftpr thp cTiArpn thp fapt that 11,5 St.. VIAL. 11.4. V S.,4.A., SV V.I. 1.1.11., , S U.S.! > the matter ofjurisdiction will be litigated. If the union does not win > then placing this in the brief will be moot. If the union wins, a decision > as to whether going forward with the contesting jurisdiction can be made. > As a result, I would urge us to add it in our brief. > Paul > Paul Barron > The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) > Tulane Law School > 6329 Freret Street > New Orleans, LA 70118 > Voice 504-865-5986 > Fax 504-862-8846 > This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy > all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other > information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not > constitute an electronic signature. > Original Message > From: blecesne@luno.edu [mailto:blecesne@Lz no.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 10:19 PM > To: Richard Cortizas > Cc: Chunlin Leonhard ; Wisdom, Rachel W. > ; Bickford, Mag ; > blecesne@Awno.edu; Barron, Paul L ; Whelan, Carol S > ; reuben.teagprudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh > ; Andrea Armstrong > ; Salzer, Ann K ; > kiki huston ; Kathy Riedlinger > ; Bryant, Camille > ; Fullmer, Susan > Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United > Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege > Please think about what we would be doing. We are already going to spend > $30,000-50,000 on a bitter, divisive election. The union will likely win > that election and we will then spend another $50,000-75,000 on the > collective bargaining process. Now some of us, solely at the CEO's urging, > want to spend another who knows what on a frivolous "hail mary" > jurisdiction contest. We are digging a financial hole that is a waste of > corporate assets, breach of fiduciary duty, and unsound business practice. > On top of all that, this reckless course of action contravenes our clear > policy of neutrality which is only hours old. > Blaine >> I'll defer to Mag,and with all due respect to Paul's opinion..how are >> we different from the other Charters that have been successful on this >> challenge? What authorities have successfully decided jurisdiction >> over Charters? Just curious? Thank you >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 9:42 PM,Chunlin Leonhard >>> wrote: >» >>> We did discuss the jurisdictional issue, but we never came to any >>> conclusion, and I remember Paul expressing serious doubts about the >>> validity of the jurisdictional challenge. I then researched this >>> issue myself and read many ofthe NLRB cases on its jurisdiction over >>> charter schools and talked to another labor law expert. The weight >>> of the authority favors jurisdiction over charter schools. We will >>> most likely lose the jurisdictional battle and waste hundreds of >>> thousands of dollars in legal fees in the process. >» >>> This position also contradicts the Board resolution that we just >>> adopted today. The Board's official position is neutral. It is >>> anything but neutral for us now to take a position against the NLRB >>> jurisdiction and trying to avoid an election(which, by the way, will >>> not be successful because as Mag pointed out in her email that the >>> Board will not decide the issue until after the election). >» >» >>> From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stor_jaigman.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:16 PM >>> To:'Bickford, Mag' ; Richard Cortizas >>> >>> Cc: blecesne@Lyo no.edu; Barron, Paul L : Chunlin >» Leonhard ; Whelan, Carol S ; >>> reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh >>> ; Andrea Armstrong >>> ; Salzer, Ann K >>> ; kiki huston ; Kathy >>> Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille >>> ; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I recall that we did discuss it and agreed that administraton could >>> follow advice of counsel to contestjurisdiction. I propose we have >>> an executive session meeting to authorize it ifthere is any doubt. >>> Do I have your agreement Richard? And You Blaine, Alysia and Paul? >» >>> From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@msglinchey.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 9:05 PM >>> To: Richard Cortizas >>> Cc: blecesne@lgyno.edu; Wisdom, Rachel W;Barron, Paul L; Chunlin >>> Leonhard; Whelan, Carol S;reuben.team@prudential.com; Alysia >>> Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K;kiki huston; Kathy >>> Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I thought so to so! need some clarification. >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 8:57 PM,Richard Cortizas >>> wrote: >» >>> Mag, >>> Thank you so much...but I thought we had agreed that we would contest >>> jurisdiction? >» >>> Again,thank you. >» Richard >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 8:30 PM,Bickford, Mag >>> wrote: >» >>> I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events >>> Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. >» >>> The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election >>> on Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. >>> There were certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's >>> email. As the concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by >>> the Board,I consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we >>> are engaged in interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I >>> also waived a card check because we are certain that the union has >>> over 30 legitimate signatures. >» >>> I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed >>> by the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as >>> potential voters. The unit we propose includes instructional >>> employees with common pay scales and academic year engagement. This >>> unit will be divided into professional members and non-professional >>> members-group A >>> and group B. I will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can >>> work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a >>> stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very >>> helpful and immediately attentive to getting me the information >>> needed for these issues. >» >>> The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to >>> resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief of the >>> bargaining unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contest jurisdiction. ir you an are m accordance, i win nave to do mat >>> as soon as possible as I will have to change my previous >>> representation to the Labor Board. I won't slow down the election as >>> it will probably be ruled on after the vote. It will be a place >>> holder for a later date should we chose to litigate further. >». >>> I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked >>> the Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my >>> request to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too >>> long to wait. I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be >>> moved to Friday. If not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my >>> firm, will step in with Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law >>> clerk before >>> coming to McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also >>> was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that >>> if I can't make it that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan >>> at Adams and Reese for the hearing but I strongly advise against that. >». >>> We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the >>> hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the >>> hearing is not moved. >». >>> Kathy and I visited with Virginia Miller of Buermann Miller, a >>> prominent local pr firm. Kathy has chosen to retain a different >>> agency. I don't know whether she has set an appointment with them >>> yet. >». >>> The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to >>> May 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I >>> hope to confirm this tomorrow. >» >>> Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. >>> I am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email >>> as they shake out. >». >>> Mag >» >» >». >>> Magdalen Blessev Bickford >» direct: >» fax: >>> email: >>> office: >>>(504)596-2726 >>>(504)910-6944 >>> mbickford@L_ncglinchey.corn >>> 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 >» >>> bio I vcard I www.mcglinchey.com I www.cafalawblog.com >» >» >» >>> www.mcglinchey.corn I www.CafaLawBlog corn >» >>> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, >>> Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey >>> Stafford, LLP in California. >» >>> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >>> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >>> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in >>> error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return >>> the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor,601 >>> Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal >>> Service. >» >>> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and >>> any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not >>> be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an >>> attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately >>> and a replacement will be provided. >» >>> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >>> h0://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ >>> <4614 001.pdf> From: Wisdom, Rachel W. .i wisclorn@storiapiwrsm.com Subje4t: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 29,2016 at 2:01 PM To; bleoesne Obviously there is a significant split in your Board on the issue. > Camille and I have been looking at the issue closely today. We can find > no cases to support the concept that the NLRB does not have jurisdiction. > The matters in New York and California have followed the original decision > in Chicago, a copy of which is attached hereto. Given the private board ana me signmeant amount or private support or me senool, i ao not reel > an objection to jurisdiction would be meritorious in the NLRB setting. > The NLRB has denied the continuance till Friday. The board agent has > already made assumptions about our positions that are factually incorrect. > I have tried valiantly to effect a stipulation with the union lawyers and > the board to resolve the election issues without a hearing to no avail. > They are sticking with their position and will not negotiate. We will > have to have the hearing on Tuesday. Angie, Camille and I are meeting > with the management team. If the jurisdiction issue was the only think > keeping us in a hearing,I would suggest we waive the argument. As it is > not, I think we insert it in the position statement. We won't spend a lot > oftime on it but at this point, the union has nothing to induce a > cooperate approach to the hearing. They pushing back on stupid issues > such as the times of the election, the rooms for the election and other > issues that should be easily agreed. > I want to apologize to Kathy. I did not realize the Brooke Duncan comment > was long past resolved. The management team,especially Kathy, has been a > great partner in this process. We are meeting with them tomorrow to > prepare for the hearing. > Magdalen Blessey Bickford > direct: > fax: > email: > office: >(504)596-2726 >(504)910-6944 > mbickford@xncglinchey.corn > 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 > [McGlinchey Stafford](r) > bio1 > vcard<1_=://www.mcglinchey.com/professionals/vCard.aspx?attomey=690>1 > www.mcglinchey.com I > www.cafalawblog.com > From: Bickford, Mag > Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 8:30 PM > To: blecesneagyno.edu';'Wisdom, Rachel W.% 'Barron, Paul L';'Chunlin > Leonhard';'Whelan, Carol S'; sreuben.teaggt@prudential.coms;'Alysia > Loshbaugh';'Andrea Armstrong';'Salzer, Ann K'; freortizas@yahoo.comi; > 'kiki huston' > Cc:'Kathy Riedlinger'; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan > Subject: FW: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United > Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege > I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events. > Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. > The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election on > Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. There were > certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's email. As the > concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by the Board,I > consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we are engaged in > interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I also waived a card > check because we are certain that the union has over 30 legitimate > signatures. > I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed by > the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as potential > voters. The unit we propose includes instructional employees with common > pay scales and academic year engagement. This unit will be divided into > professional members and non-professional members-group A and group B. I > will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can work out our > differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a stipulation > agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very helpful and > immediately attentive to getting me the information needed for these > issues. > The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to > resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief of the bargaining > unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contest jurisdiction. If you > all are in accordance, I will have to do that as soon as possible as I > will have to change my previous representation to the Labor Board. I > won't slow down the election as it will probably be ruled on after the > vote. It will be a place holder for a later date should we chose to > litigate further. > I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked the > Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my request > to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too long to wait. 1 > I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be moved to Friday. It > not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my firm, will step in with > Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law clerk before coming to > McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also was a teacher > so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that if I can't make it > that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan at Adams and Reese for > the hearing but I strongly advise against that. > We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the > hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the hearing > is not moved. > Kathy and I visited with Virginia Miller of Buermann Miller, a prominent > local pr firm. Kathy has chosen to retain a different agency. I don't > know whether she has set an appointment with them yet. > The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to May > 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I hope to > confirm this tomorrow. > Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. I > am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email as they > shake out. > Mag > Magdalen Blessey Bickford > direct: > fax: > email: > office: >(504)596-2726 >(504)910-6944 > mbickford@mglinchey.com > 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 > [McGlinchey Stafford]gOD://www.mcglinchey.comi> >(r) > bio1 > vcard1 > www.mcglinchey.com > www.cafalawblog com > www.mcglinchey.corn I www.CafaLawBlog.com > McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New > York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in > California. > Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client > privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the > intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, > immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original > message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New > Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. > We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any > remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed > or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment > containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a > replacement will be provided. > See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy > http://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ From: Wisdom, Rachel W. r4.iscjoilvoritipi9.1.ian.c.oill 'Subject RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 29, 2016 at 1:59 PM To Chunlin Leonhard iecohwa4"!loyno.e.lu, Andrea Armstrong andrei,voraig.afrr;stroilci'Pgn*i.oem C.): Blaine Lecesne iliie.x.:FieitIlyrit..1.edu, Barron, Paul L pbaiione"?.quiane.du, Richard Cortizas rcciFtizavgyahoci.o.ofri, reub:tiri.teaueq:pfigJerizirai Bickford, Mag Offi`...nloOiricy.com, Carol Whelan c; @t ,ton@phoo.c.s>m, roait.com, Ann K Salzer asaizertulan.edu, Kiki Huston KiKii1;,i, Alysia Loshbaugh aloshbaugi. Kathy Riedlinger kathsy:led:i:;y::::,iut,;:i.s.t.).).ofg, Bryant, Camille cbiyant@mq: .iiinc:iley.00m, Fullmer, Susan I think some of your assertions are not accurate. Leaving that aside, and with all due respect, I think we should follow her sound advice that she related in her email sent at 1.2:53. She has a lot of experience, knows the actors involved and is in the best position to assess what we should assert and what trade or other value our arguments may have in the process. From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 1:53 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne; Barron, Paul L; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mag; Carol Whelan; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Ann K Salzer; Kiki Huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege The only person who claims to have stated a position about contesting the NLRB jurisdiction is Rachel's personal opinion that we should contest the NLRB jurisdiction. The other person is Paul who has changed his mind on this issue (implicitly admitting that he had a different opinion). How is that a BOARD decision to authorize Mag to contest the NLRB jurisdiction?! As Rachel has previously emphatically pointed out, personal opinions are NOT the Board's position. As Mag's research and my own research show, there is little authority supporting the position that the NLRB has no jurisdiction over a charter school and there is plenty of authority supporting NLRB jurisdiction over a charter school. Contesting or attempting to contest the jurisdiction violate the Board's policy and damages the credibility of the Board under these circumstances. From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigman.com] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 9:45 AM To: Andrea Armstrong Cc: Blaine Lecesne ; Barron, Paul L ; Richard Cortizas ; Chunlin Leonhard ; Bickford, Mag ; Carol Whelan ; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh ; Ann K Salzer ; Kiki Huston ; Kathy Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille ; Fullmer, Susan Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I disagree and I think Mag was given authority to make the argument. Contesting jurisdiction is not anti Union since many unions exist that are not NLRB governed. And as Paul points out making the argument acts as a place holder. We can always abandon it later. And If the union wins the election, having that issue raised and pending, could give us leverage in negotiating a CBA. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 29,2016, at 9:19 AM,Andrea Armstrong wrote: I would strongly urge us to engage in a good-faith strategy towards the union. I recall that we agreed to litigate the bargaining unit, but did not come to an agreement on jurisdiction. It is not clear to me(or at least I don't believe the case has been made)that there is a good faith argument to contest jurisdiction. Moreover, I do think that contesting jurisdiction is at odds with the spirit, if not letter, of our recent consensus to let the teachers decide whether or not a union is in their interests. To preserve a challenge, whose only purpose would be to contest the results ofthe teachers' vote for the union, seems counterproductive to the goal of letting the teachers decide. Andrea On Apr 29,2016, at 8:41 AM,Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: And if the NLRB doesn't have jurisdiction, that does not 'Preclude the formation of a union or some other organization of teachers at Lusher. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 8:18 AM To:'blecesnePloyno.edut; Barron, Paul L Cc: Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teaguePprudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I stated clearly in our initial meeting with Mag that I thought we should challenge jurisdiction. I stated that I did not agree we should voluntarily recognize UTL arid that an election seemed preferably because there were many signatures on the petition that should not be counted — I think 15 or 16. I said I needed more time to get and assess information about unions in charter schools.. None of what I have found convinces me that a teachers union would do anything to help and most likely would harm Lusher, especially in the long run. I never indicated that I thought we should give up valid legal arguments and have not contradicted myself. From: blecesnePloyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@igyno.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 11:05 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: blecesnefokyno.edu; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teagueta,prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Paul, If the union wins, contesting jurisdiction directly contradicts what you and others who wanted an election have used to justify an election--that you wanted a clear indication by way of secret election as to the teachers' desire to unionize. You have said repeatedly that if more than 50% wanted a union, you would definitely honor that choice. Rachel, you have said the same. Now you are saying that if UTL wins, you would try to overturn the election with a jurisdictional challenge. How do you reconcile or justify such a contradiction? Blaine > Folks: > Indicating that we will contest jurisdiction is different from actually > doing it. The a decision can be made after the vote given the fact that > the matter ofjurisdiction will be litigated. If the union does not win > then placing this in the brief will be moot. If the union wins, a decision > as to whether going forward with the contesting jurisdiction can be made. > As a result, I would urge us to add it in our brief. > Paul > Paul Barron > The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) > Tulane Law School > 6329 Freret Street > New Orleans, LA 70118 > Voice 504-865-5986 > Fax 504-862-8846 > This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy > all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other > information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not > constitute an electronic signature. > Original Message > From: blecesne@kayno.edu [mailto:blecesne@hyno.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 10:19 PM > To: Richard Cortizas > Cc: Chunlin Leonhard ; Wisdom, Rachel W. > ; Bickford, Mag ; > blecesne@kyno.edu; Barron, Paul L ; Whelan, Carol S > ;reuben.teag@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh > ; Andrea Armstrong > ; Salzer, Ann K ; > kiki huston ; Kathy Riedlinger > ; Bryant, Camille > <&wantglinchey.comn>; Fullmer, Susan > Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United > Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege > Please think about what we would be doing. We are already going to spend > $30,000-50,000 on a bitter, divisive election. The union will likely win > that election and we will then spend another $50,000-75,000 on the > collective bargaining process. Now some of us, solely at the CEO's urging, > want to spend another who knows what on a frivolous "hail mary" > jurisdiction contest. We are digging a financial hole that is a waste of > corporate assets, breach offiduciary duty, and unsound business practice. vil top VI 0.11 1-11741, LIIIS 1 GelUGSS cuuist 01 maim c011114NCLIGS OUt LICd1 > policy of neutrality which is only hours old. > Blaine >> I'll defer to Mag,and with all due respect to Paul's opinion..how are >> we different from the other Charters that have been successful on this >> challenge? What authorities have successfully decided jurisdiction >> over Charters? Just curious? Thank you >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 9:42 PM,Chunlin Leonhard >>> wrote: >» >>> We did discuss the jurisdictional issue, but we never came to any >>> conclusion, and I remember Paul expressing serious doubts about the >>> validity of the jurisdictional challenge. I then researched this >>> issue myself and read many of the NLRB cases on its jurisdiction over >>> charter schools and talked to another labor law expert. The weight >>> of the authority favors jurisdiction over charter schools. We will >>> most likely lose the jurisdictional battle and waste hundreds of >>> thousands of dollars in legal fees in the process. >» >>> This position also contradicts the Board resolution that we just >>> adopted today. The Board's official position is neutral. It is >>> anything but neutral for us now to take a position against the NLRB >>> jurisdiction and trying to avoid an election(which, by the way, will >>> not be successful because as Mag pointed out in her email that the >>> Board will not decide the issue until after the election). >» >» >» -oir] >>> From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[m jaladaugitaiging 1 >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:16 PM >>> To:'Bickford, Mag' , Richard Cortizas >>> >>> Cc: blece:Lig@kyno edu; Barron, Paul L Chunlin >>> Leonhard ; Whelan, Carol S ; >>> reuben.teagurg,prudentiatcom; Alysia Loshbaugh >>> ; Andrea Armstrong >>> ; Salzer, Ann K >>> ; kiki huston , Kathy >>> Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille >>> ; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I recall that we did discuss it and agreed that administraton could >>> follow advice of counsel to contestjurisdiction. I propose we have >>> an executive session meeting to authorize it if there is any doubt. >>> Do I have your agreement Richard? And You Blaine, Alysia and Paul? >» >>> From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mglinchey.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:05 PM >>> To: Richard Cortizas >>> Cc: blecesne@lgyno.edu; Wisdom, Rachel W;Barron, Paul L; Chunlin >>> Leonhard; Whelan, Carol S;reuben.teaguggprudential.com; Alysia >>> Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K;kiki huston; Kathy >>> Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I thought so to so I need some clarification. >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28,2016, at 8:57 PM,Richard Cortizas >>> wrote: >» >>> Mag, >>> Thank you so much...but I thought we had agreed that we would contest >>> jurisdiction? >» >>> Again,thank you. >>> Richard >» „ • TI.1 >>> sent trom my trnone >» >>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:30 PM,Bickford, Mag >>> wrote: >» >>> I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events. >>> Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. >» >>> The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election >>> on Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Gamer. >>> There were certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's >>> email. As the concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by >>> the Board,I consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we >>> are engaged in interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I >>> also waived a card check because we are certain that the union has >>> over 30 legitimate signatures. >» >>> I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed >>> by the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as >>> potential voters. The unit we propose includes instructional >>> employees with common pay scales and academic year engagement. This >>> unit will be divided into professional members and non-professional >>> members-group A >>> and group B. I will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can >>> work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a >>> stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very >>> helpful and immediately attentive to getting me the information >>> needed for these issues. >» >>> The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to >>> resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief of the >>> bargaining unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contest >>> jurisdiction. If you all are in accordance, I will have to do that >>> as soon as possible as I will have to change my previous >>> representation to the Labor Board. I won't slow down the election as >>> it will probably be ruled on after the vote. It will be a place >>> holder for a later date should we chose to litigate further. >» >>> I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked >>> the Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my >>> reauest to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too >>> long to wait. I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be >>> moved to Friday. If not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my >>> firm, will step in with Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law >>> clerk before >>> coming to McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also >>> was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that >>> if I can't make it that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan >>> at Adams and Reese for the hearing but I strongly advise against that. >» >>> We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the >>> hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the >>> hearing is not moved. >» >>> Kathy and I visited with Virginia Miller of Buennann Miller, a >>> prominent local pr firm. Kathy has chosen to retain a different >>> agency. I don't know whether she has set an appointment with them >>> yet. >» >>> The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to >>> May 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I >>> hope to confirm this tomorrow. >» >>> Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. >>> I am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email >>> as they shake out. >» >>> Mag >» >» >» >>> Magdalen Blessey Bickford >>> direct: >» fax: >>> email: >>> office: >>>(504)596-2726 >>>(504)910-6944 >>> m i lsfos - 1@mcglinchey.corn >>> 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 >» >>> bio I'card I www.mcglinchey.com I www.catalawblog.com >» >» >» >>> www.mcglinchey.com www.CafaLawBlog corn >» >>> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, >>> Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey >>> Stafford, LLP in California. >» >>> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >>> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >>> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in >>> error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return >>> the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 >>> Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal >>> Service. >» >>> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and >>> any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not >>> be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an >>> attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately >>> and a replacement will be provided. >» >>> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >>> h0://www.mcglinchey.coin/disclaimer/ >>> <4614 001.pdf> From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdorstoxieprian.com Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 29, 2016 at 9:44 AM To: Andrea Armstrong aJArea.oraig.arrestrong(gmail.00rn Co: Blaine Lecesne i.lec,•ezi.s-riel?eloyno.edu, Barron, Paul L pbertonetulane.edu, Richard Cortizas rcortizasqiyahoo.oem, Chunlin Leonhard Iwnhard@loync.)., Li, Bickford, Mag rTibic*loci@fricglinchey corn, Carol Whelan cwheian@tularlesedu, retiben.teague@prudentialcom, Alysia Loshbaugh aloshbaughegmall.com, Ann K Salzer asalzer@fulane.edu, Kiki Huston kikihustonyahoo.corn, Kathy Riedlinger katnyeolingertViushersohool.org, Bryant, Camille obryant@mcglinchey.com, Fullmer, Susan sfulifrier@asqlinc.ney.cxxri I disagree and I think Mag was given authority to make the argument. Contesting jurisdiction is not anti Union since many unions exist that are not NLRB governed. And as Paul points out making the argument acts as a place holder. We can always abandon it later. And If the union wins the election, having that issue raised and pending, could give us leverage in negotiating a CBA. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 29, 2016, at 9:19 AM, Andrea Armstrong wrote: I would strongly urge us to engage in a good-faith strategy towards the union. I recall that we agreed to litigate the bargaining unit, but did not come to an agreement on jurisdiction. it is not dear to me (or at least I don't believe the case has been made)that there is a good faith argument to contest jurisdiction. Moreover, I do think that contesting jurisdiction is at odds With the spirit, if not letter, or our recent consensus to let the teachers decide whether or not a union is in their interests. To preserve a challenge, whose only purpose would be to contest the results of the teachers' vote for the union, seems counterproductive to the goal of letting the teachers decide. Andrea On Apr 29,2016, at 9:41 AM,'Wisdom, Rachel W.41Wistiomestonegigman.com> wrote: And if the NLRB doesn't have jurisdiction, that does not preclude the formation of a union or some other organization of teachers at Lusher. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 8:18 AM To:'blecesne@loypoedie; Barron, Paul L Cc: Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mao; Whelan, Carol 5; reuben.teagugAprudential.corn; Alysia Loshhauoh; Andrea Armstrong; Sa zei; Ann kki hki:ton; Kathy Riedinger; Bryant, Cami le; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and UniL,d Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication i:ubject to privilege I stated clearly in our initial meeting with Mag that I thought we should challenge jurisdiction. stated that I did not agree we should voluntarily recognize UTL and that an election seemed preferably because there were many signatures on the petition that should not be counted — I think 15 or 16. I said I needed more time to get and assess information about unions in charter schools.. None of what I have found convinces me that a teachers union would do anything to help and most likely would harm Lusher, especially in the long run. I never indicated that I thought we should give up valid legal arguments and have not contradicted myself. From: blecesnefakyno.edu mailto:blecesneAlgyno.edui Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 11:05 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc blecesneftyno.eclu: Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W; Bickford, Nag; Whelan, Carol S; reuben,teague(aprudential:com; Alysia Los:hhaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salm-, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Nedlinger, Bryant, Camille; Fullmer; Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Paul, If the union wins, contesting jurisdiction directly contradicts what you and others who wanted an election have used to justify an election—that you wanted a clear indication by way of secret election as to the teachers desire to unionize. You have said repeatedly that if more than 50% wanted a union, you would definitely honor that choice. Rachel, you have said the same. Now you are saying that if LITL wins, you would try to overturn the elec.nan with a jurisdictional challenge. How do you a contradiction? reconcile or Blaine Folks: Indicating that we will contest jurisdiction is different from actually doing it. The a decision can be made after the vote, given the fact that inatter ofjurisdiction will be litigated. If the union does not win then Placing this in the brief will be moot. If the union wins, a decision as to whether going forward with the contesting jurisdiction can be made. As a result. I would urge us to add it in our brief Paul Paul Barron The class of 19:37 Professor of Law (Emeritus) • Tulane School •6329 Froret Street •New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-$986 Fax 504-862-8846 , This communication may be privileged and confidential. if you are not the reclpient, please notif'),the sender by reply e-mail and destroy copies of this communication. The sender's name and other ifbrmation in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. riinE Message-> From: 121ggmnt@1gyno.edu [inailtzligggant@loymathi] > Sent: Thursday. April 28, 2016 10: 9PM > To: Richard Cortizas <:::matizsis@xaboo,cotn> > Cc: C wulin Leonhar( 1gs2Dhard@kyno.edu>: Wisdo.-, Rachc, > 9-wisdom@signmig,i:Bickfor< Paul L ; Whelan, ,reubertteag;Alysia Loshbaugh > <21,Q5112sugh@gmaitcom> Andrea Armstrong -. •..'>; > ; Salzer„knn K > .kiki huston .k • st i .012D.Q.Q.Qm>; Kathy Riedling,er > lighy_riedlingrg>;Bryant, Camille > < vant@=glinchey.com,>: Fu...mer, Susan > Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher)and. United > Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege > Please think about what we would be doing. We are already going to spend > $30,000-50,000 on a bitter, divisive ect. on. The unicm will likely- win > that election and we will then s e.i.td another $50,000-75,000 on the > collective bargaining process. Now some of us, solely at the CEO's urging, > want to spend. another who knows what on a ftivolous "hail mary" > jurisdiction contest. We are digging a finan6a1 hole that is a. waste of > corporate assets, breach of fiduciary duty, and. unsound business practice. > On top of all that, this reckless course of action contravenes our clear > policy of neutrality which is only hours old. > Blaine >> HI defer to Mag, and with all due respect to Paul's opinion..how are >> we different from the other Charters that have been successful on this >> challenge?'What authorities have successfully decided jurisdiction >> over Charters? *Just curious'? Thank you >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 2.201(,, al 9:42 PM, Chun tin Le(mhar -lcsmharAglaymarau> >>> wrote: >» >>> We did discuss the jurisdictional issue, but we never came to any >>> conclusion, and remember Paul expressing serious doubts about the >>> .validity of the jurisdictional challenge. then researched this >>> issue myself and read many of the NLRB eases on its jurisdiction over >>> charter schools and talked to another labor law expert. The weight UI LUC 41.113.1t-s.t. ity It kik £Z.$4.i14.4 it-s.1.1 Vk L..WI MI, --•>> most likely lose the jurisdictional battle and waste hundreds of --•>> thousands of dollars in legal fees in the process. --•>> This position also contradicts th.e Board resolution that we just --•>> adopted today The Board's official position. is neutral. It is --•>> anything but. neutral for us now to take a position against th.e NLRB -•:>> jurisdiction and trying to avoid an election (which, by the way, will --•>> not be successful because as Mag pointed out in her email that the --•>> Board tU not decide the issue .until after the election.). --•>> From: Wisdom, Rachel. W."pailto:RWisdorrigstoneaigman.com --•>> Sent:'Thursday, April 28. 2016 916 PM --•>> To:'Bickford, Mae : Richard Cortizas > Cc: blecesnera)loyno.edu:. Barron, Pau. . Chunlin --•>> eonhat( <:leonhardAloyno.edu>; Whelan, Caro. S : --•>> reuben.teague4prudentia1.com: Alysia Loshbaitg •; Salzer, Ann K --•>> .,Kathy --•>> Riedling,er Aativ_riedlingt,t@lusherschool.org:,. Bryant, Camille --•>> ; Fullmer, Susan. -•:>> Subject.: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based 'Education (....is aer) and nited --•>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Co.mmunication sutl ect to -•:>> privilege --•>> recall. that we did discuss it. and agreed that administraton cou .d ::>> follow advice of counsel,to contestjurisdiction. I propose we have --•>> an. executive session. meeting to authorize it if there is any doubt. --•>> Do have .your agreement Richard? And You Blaine, Alys.ia and Pa --•>> From: Bic.kford, Mat. mailto:mbickford@mcglinchey . -•:>> Sent: Thursday, Apri. 28, 201.6 9:05 I'M --•>> To:'Richard Cortiza:..i -•:>> Cc: blecesne@loyno.edu Wisdom, Rachel W;Barron, Paul. •• Chunlin --•>> Leonhap:; Whelan., Carol S.reuben.teag=gprudential.com ysia --•>> Loshbaugh. Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K;kiki. huston.. Kathy --•>> Riedlinger. Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan -•:>> Subject.: Re: Advocates for Aits-Based Education.(Lusher)and United --•>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Co.mmunication subject to -•:>> privilege --•>> thought so to so I need some clarification. .->> Sent from my iPhone .:'>> On.Apr 28, 2016, at 8:57 PM,Richard Cortizas wrote: yahoc.com:' .:,>> mag, .;,>> Thank you so much...butl thought we had agreed that we would contest >> jurisdiction? .;,>> Again, thank you. .;,>> Richard .:,» Sent from my iPhone .Apr 28, 2016,, at. 8:30 PM.,.Bickford„.Mag > •:,>> wrote: 1_12....c./thrsigmsg,linchey.com> .;,>> 1 wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events. .;,>> Forgive my typos. It has been a long day .;,>> The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election .:'>> on Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. .:'>> There were certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's .:'>> email. As the concept of contesting jurisdiction was not acc,4Aed by .;,>> the Board,1 consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we .:'>> are engaged in, interstate commerce in CXCCS5 of $50.,000 per year. I .;,>> also waived a card check because we are certain that the union has .:,» over 30 . egitimate signatures. .;,>> 1 did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed .:'>> by the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as .;,>> potential voters. The unit we propose includes instructional .:'>> employees witn common pay scales and academic year engagement. Ibis .;,>> unit will be divided into professional members and non-professional .:,» members-group A .:'>> and group B. I. will talk to the union in. the morning to see if we can .:'>> work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a .:'>> stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very .;,>> belpfill. and immediately attentive to getting me the information .;,>> needed for these issues. .;,>> The alior Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to .;,>> reo ye our itirQnces. submitting a brief ofthe bargaining unit Morn ay. Kathy on has also asked me to contest .:'>> .:'>> jurisdiction lLu all are in accordance, I nil have to do that he as 1 will, have to change my previous .:'>> as soon as .;,>> representation to the Labor Board. I. won't. sl &iv,: down the election as .;,>> it will probably be ruled on alter the vote. It will be a. place 11.01(11.a 10.17 a iluer (Rue snowu Wt museto nugzue Tanner. .">>> -,;>> 1. have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked > the Labor Board to continue the hearing till 'Friday. TN-y refused my -,;>> request. to set it the following Monday c aiming that 6 ays was too -,;>> long to wait. I have not beard yet whet.fier tliey wit al ov,' it. to be -,;>> moved to Friday. If not; Angie Christina, a vQteran litigator at ray -,;>> firm, will step in. with. Camille. Angie'was also za o Africk's law -,;>> Clerk before -,>> coming to McGlinchey and knows her way arou .id a court room. She also -,>> was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that -,>> if I. can't make it that. she .s,vould prefer that to hire Broo.ke'Duncan. -,>> at Adams and Reese for the hearing but I. strongly advise against that. -,;>> We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the -,;>> hearing. 1 will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the -,;>> hearing is not moved. -,;>> Kathy and 1 visited with Virginia Miller of.Buermann. Miller, a -,;>> prominent local pr firm. Kathy has chosen,to retain a different. -,;>> agency.. 1 don't know whether she has set an. appointment with them yet, -,>> The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election fro.m May 16th to --•>> May 17th.so that teachers on.the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I -,;>> hope to confirm this tomorrow. -,;>> Let me know if you have any question.s or would like to discuss further. -,>> 1 am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email --•>> as they shake out. -,;>> .Magdalen Blessey Bickford --•>> direct: --•>> email: --•>> office: (504)596-2726 (504)910-6944 inbightud@mgglinchey corn > 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 New Orleans, LA 70130 > 'bio vcard www,mcgliicheysan wwwcafalawblog.corn .->> -•-•;-•>> www.rncglinchey.com www.CafaLawBlog cora ->>> McGlinchey Staffnrd, PLLC in. Alabama, Florida; Louisian.a, --->> Mississippi, NeA.,.: York; Ohio, Te.xas., and Washington DC and McGlinchey --->> Stafford, LLP in California ->>>. Confidentiality Statement: This email may enrita atu....)rney ->>>. privilesedor confidential in.fonnatini. It is for the so.e •Lse of the ->>>. intended recipient(. . If you have .A.ioeived this transmission in ->>>. error, un ne. ec y notify us by telephone at 50.4-.586-1200 and return ->>>. the origina. inez.i.e to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 ->>>. Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,701.30 via the United States Postal ->>>. Service. --->> We t.:Ao steps to remove metadata in atta.ehnhints sent by email, and any remaining rnehtdata should be pr..ani nadvertent and should not >>> or used without our express permission. If you receive an ->>>. attachment containing inetadata., p ease notify the sender immediately --->> and a replacement will be provided. --->> See McGlinch.ey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy ->>>. :fiwww.meglinchey.comidisclaimed ->>> <46 4 00.1..pd.f> From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 29, 2016 at 8:41 AM To; be,c.:eo,?,;, osino.-ecii..i, Barron, Paul L pbarron@tt.ilan€'.ed Cc; Richard Cortizas rcortiz:', oyre, Bickford, Mag , :i. ?yahoo.corn, Chunlin Leonhard Whelan, Carol S Alysia Loshbaugh alohbaugMrag.cf.)rn, Andrea Armstrong andrea.aaig.armatrong@gmail.com, Selzer, Ann K acr ucdu, kiki huston crev.ccm, Fullmer, Susan Kathy Riedlinger kathyrdtnçjr utheschoolog, Bryant, Camille SZthieCt; Ccinl And if the NLRB doesn't have jurisdiction, that does not preclude the formation of a union or some other organization of teachers at Lusher. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 8:18 AM To:'blecesne@loyno.edu'; Barron, Paul L Cc: Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol 5; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I stated clearly in our initial meeting with Mag that I thought we should challenge jurisdiction. I stated that I did not agree we should voluntarily recognize UTL and that an election seemed preferably because there were many signatures on the petition that should not be counted — I think 15 or 16. I said I needed more time to get and assess information about unions in charter schools.. None of what I have found convinces me that a teachers union would do anything to help and most likely would harm Lusher, especially in the long run. I never indicated that I thought we should give up valid legal arguments and have not contradicted myself. From: blecesneakyno.edu [mailto:blecesneakyno.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 11:05 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: blecesneakyno.edu; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol 5; reuben.teagueftrudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Paul, If the union wins, contesting jurisdiction directly contradicts what you and others who wanted an election have used to justify an election--that you wanted a clear indication by way of secret election as to the teachers' desire to unionize. You have said repeatedly that if more than 50% wanted a union, you would definitely honor that choice. Rachel, you have said the same. Now you are saying that if UTL wins, you would try to overturn the election with a jurisdictional challenge. How do you reconcile or justify such a contradiction? Blaine > Folks: > Indicating that we will contestjurisdiction is different from actually > doing it. The a decision can be made after the vote given the fact that > the matter ofjurisdiction will be litigated. If the union does not win > then placing this in the brief will be moot. If the union wins, a decision > as to whether going forward with the contesting jurisdiction can be made. > As a result, I would urge us to add it in our brief. > Paul > Paul Barron > The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) > Tulane Law School > 6329 Freret Street > New Orleans, LA 70118 > Voice 504-865-5986 > Fax 504-862-8846 > This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy > all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other > information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not > constitute an electronic signature. > Original Message > From: illssim1Qyno.edu[m il • .1- - n c I o.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 10:19 PM > To: Richard Cortizas > Cc: Chunlin Leonhard <1g. na_bmclOgyno edu>; Wisdom,Rachel W. > < • • em en pigman.com>; Bickford, Mag ; 1. > blecesne@loyno.edu; Barron, Paul L <4•.n-sn >; Whelan, Carol S > < wh 1 n n ;reuben.teague@prudential com; Alysia Loshbaugh > ; Andrea Armstrong > ; Salzer, Ann K <— z- I_ > kiki huston ; Kathy Riedlinger > ; Bryant, Camille glinchey.com> > ; Fullmer, Susan Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United > Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege > Please think about what we would be doing. We are already going to spend Ark^ L'A rkAr% _ - 1_ •_ _1: :_ : _ _1 _ _ : _ nr.1_ _ :_ :11 i".1 _1 : z...1v,vvv-.)v,vou on a outer, Luyisiye election. inc umon will imely win > that election and we will then spend another $50,000-75,000 on the > collective bargaining process. Now some of us, solely at the CEO's urging, > want to spend another who knows what on a frivolous "hail mary" > jurisdiction contest. We are digging a fmancial hole that is a waste of > corporate assets, breach offiduciary duty, and unsound business practice. > On top of all that, this reckless course of action contravenes our clear > policy of neutrality which is only hours old. > Blaine >> I'll defer to Mag,and with all due respect to Paul's opinion..how are >> we different from the other Charters that have been successful on this >> challenge? What authorities have successfully decided jurisdiction >> over Charters? Just curious? Thank you >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 9:42 PM,Chunlin Leonhard >>> wrote: >» >>> We did discuss the jurisdictional issue, but we never came to any >>> conclusion, and I remember Paul expressing serious doubts about the >>> validity of the jurisdictional challenge. I then researched this >>> issue myself and read many of the NLRB cases on its jurisdiction over >>> charter schools and talked to another labor law expert. The weight >>> of the authority favors jurisdiction over charter schools. We will >>> most likely lose the jurisdictional battle and waste hundreds of >>> thousands of dollars in legal fees in the process. >» >>> This position also contradicts the Board resolution that we just >>> adopted today. The Board's official position is neutral. It is >>> anything but neutral for us now to take a position against the NLRB >>> jurisdiction and trying to avoid an election (which, by the way, will >>> not be successful because as Mag pointed out in her email that the >>> Board will not decide the issue until after the election). >» >» >» >>> From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepig,man.cotu] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:16 PM >>> To:'Bickford, Mae ; Richard Cortizas >>> >>> Cc: blessang@Lyno.edu; Barron, Paul L <1212auga@taantgau>; Chunlin >>> Leonhard ; Whelan, Carol S < >>> reuben teague(ibnrudential.com. Alysia Loshbaugh / .11" >>> ; Andrea Armstrong >>> ; Salzer, Ann K >» ; Kathy >>> Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille >>> ; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I recall that we did discuss it and agreed that administraton could >>> follow advice of counsel to contestjurisdiction. I propose we have >>> an executive session meeting to authorize it if there is any doubt. >>> Do I have your agreement Richard? And You Blaine, Alysia and Paul? >» >>> From: Bickford, Mag[si • II a k a SOH linchey.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:05 PM >>> To: Richard Cortizas >>> Cc: 121x&sjItglgyno.edu; Wisdom,Rachel W;Barron, Paul L; Chunlin >» Leonhard; Whelan, Carol S;reuben.teag;Alysia >>> Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K;kiki huston; Kathy >>> Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I thought so to so I need some clarification. >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:57 PM,Richard Cortizas >>> wrote: >» >>> Mag, >>> Thank you so much...but I thought we had agreed that we would contest >>> jurisdiction? >» >>> Again, thank you. >>> Richard >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:30 PM,Bickford, Mag >>> wrote: >» >>> I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events. >>> Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. >» >>> the Kobem tmn tiled the Petition seekmg recognition and election >>> on Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. >>> There were certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's >>> email. As the concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by >>> the Board,I consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we >>> are engaged in interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I >>> also waived a card check because we are certain that the union has >>> over 30 legitimate signatures. >» >>> I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed >>> by the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as >>> potential voters. The unit we propose includes instructional >>> employees with common pay scales and academic year engagement. This >>> unit will be divided into professional members and non-professional >>> members-group A >>> and group B. I will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can >>> work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a >>> stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very >>> helpful and immediately attentive to getting me the information >>> needed for these issues. >» >>> The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to >>> resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief of the >>> bargaining unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contest >>> jurisdiction. If you all are in accordance, I will have to do that >>> as soon as possible as I will have to change my previous >>> representation to the Labor Board. I won't slow down the election as >>> it will probably be ruled on after the vote. It will be a place >>> holder for a later date should we chose to litigate further. >» >>> I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked >>> the Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my >>> request to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too >>> long to wait. I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be >>> moved to Friday. If not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my >>> firm, will step in with Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law >>> clerk before >>> coming to McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also >>> was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that >>> if I can't make it that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan >>> at Adams and Reese for the hearing but I strongly advise against that. >» >>> We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the >>> hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the >>> hearing is not moved. >» >>> Kathy and I visited with Virginia Miller of Buermann Miller, a >>> nrominent local nr firm Kathy has chosen to retain a different >>> agency. I don't know whether she has set an appointment with them >>> yet. >» >>> The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to >>> May 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I >>> hope to confirm this tomorrow. >» >>> Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. >>> I am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email >>> as they shake out. >» >>> Mag >» >» >» >>> Magdalen Blessey Bickford >>> direct: >>> fax: >>> email: >>> office: >>>(504)596-2726 >>>(504)910-6944 >>> rabiddad@auglinchey.com, >>> 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 >» >>> bio vcard I www.mcglinchey.coin I www.cafalawblog,com >» >» >>> >» www.mcgbachey.corn www.CafaLawBlog,coin >>> >>> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, >>> Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey >>> Stafford, LLP in California. >» >>> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >>> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >>> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in >>> error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return >>> the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 >>> Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal >>> Service. >» >>> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and >>> any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not >>> be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an >>> attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately >>> and a replacement will be provided. >>> >>> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >» hu-12:1125minmglinchey.com/disclaimers >>> <4614_001.pdf> From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisclorn&storiepiorrrartcom Subjeot; RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 29,2016 at 8:17 AM To; bleceone@loyno.edy, Barron, Paul L pbarrort@ttriane.edu Cot Richard Cortizas rcortizasc§yahoo.com, Chunlin Leonhard "..- hardtVioyno.sdu, Bickford, Mag mbickford(§mo:Onohey.00rn, s Whelan, Carol S Alysia Loshbaugh :..t:tlilratrght§gmra0.com, Andrea Armstrong andrea.oraig.armotrortg@grnail.com, Salzer, Ann K asalzergitulano.edu, kiki huston kikihuston@yahoo.com, Kathy Riedlinger katilydedlingerC.Ausherochool.org, Bryant. Camille ddryantl,semoglinchey.00rn, Fullmer, Susan siiiirrier@mogOrlthey corn I stated clearly in our initial meeting with Mag that I thought we should challenge jurisdiction. stated that I did not agree we should voluntarily recognize UTL and that an election seemed preferably because there were many signatures on the petition that should not be counted — I think 1.5 or 16. I said I needed more time to get and assess information about unions in charter schools.. None of what have found convinces me that a teachers union would do anything to help and most likely would harm Lusher, especially in the long run. I never indicated that I thought we should give up valid legal arguments and have not contradicted myself. From: blecesne@loyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@loyno.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 11:05 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: blecesne©loyno.edu; Richard Cortizas; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teague©prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Paul, If the union wins, contesting jurisdiction directly contradicts what you and others who wanted an election have used to justify an election--that you wanted a clear indication by way of secret election as to the teachers' desire to unionize. You have said repeatedly that if more than 50% wanted a union, you would definitely honor that choice. Rachel, you have said the same. Now you are saying that if UTL wins, you would try to overturn the election with ajurisdictional challenge. How do you reconcile or justify such a contradiction? Blaine > Folks: > Indicating that we will contestjurisdiction is different from actually > doing it. The a decision can be made after the vote given the fact that > the matter ofjurisdiction will be litigated. If the union does not win > then placing this in the brief will be moot. If the union wins, a decision > as to whether going forward with the contesting jurisdiction can be made. T - 1 -I AS a result, .1 wowu urge us to auu it in our Drier. > Paul > Paul Barron > The Class of 1937 Professor of Law(Emeritus) > Tulane Law School > 6329 Freret Street > New Orleans, LA 70118 > Voice 504-865-5986 > Fax 504-862-8846 > This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy > all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other > information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not > constitute an electronic signature. > Original Message > From: blecesneagyno.edu [nailto:blecesne@Agyno.eclu] > Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 10:19 PM > To: Richard Cortizas > Cc: Chunlin Leonhard ; Wisdom,Rachel W. > ;Bickford, Mag ; > blecesneagyno.edu; Barron,Paul L ; Whelan, Carol S > ; reuben.teaggt@prudential.corn; Alysia Loshbaugh > ; Andrea Armstrong > ; Salzer, Ann K ; > kiki huston ; Kathy Riedlinger > ; Bryant, Camille > ; Fullmer, Susan > Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United > Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege > Please think about what we would be doing. We are already going to spend > $30,000-50,000 on a bitter, divisive election. The union will likely win > that election and we will then spend another $50,000-75,000 on the > collective bargaining process. Now some of us, solely at the CEO's urging, > want to spend another who knows what on a frivolous "hail mary" > jurisdiction contest. We are digging a fmancial hole that is a waste of > corporate assets, breach offiduciary duty, and unsound business practice. > On top of all that, this reckless course of action contravenes our clear > policy of neutrality which is only hours old. > Blaine >> I'll defer to Mag,and with all due respect to Paul's opinion..how are >> we different from the other Charters that have been successful on this >> challenge? What authorities have successfully decided jurisdiction >> over Charters? Just curious? Thank you >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 9:42 PM,Chunlin Leonhard >>> wrote: >» >>> We did discuss the jurisdictional issue, but we never came to any >>> conclusion, and I remember Paul expressing serious doubts about the >>> validity of the jurisdictional challenge. I then researched this >>> issue myself and read many of the NLRB cases on its jurisdiction over >>> charter schools and talked to another labor law expert. The weight >>> of the authority favors jurisdiction over charter schools. We will >>> most likely lose the jurisdictional battle and waste hundreds of >>> thousands of dollars in legal fees in the process. >» >>> This position also contradicts the Board resolution that we just >>> adopted today. The Board's official position is neutral. It is >>> anything but neutral for us now to take a position against the NLRB >>> jurisdiction and trying to avoid an election(which, by the way, will >>> not be successful because as Mag pointed out in her email that the >>> Board will not decide the issue until after the election). >» >» >» >>> From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigman.corn] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,20169:16 PM >>> To:'Bickford, Mag' ; Richard Cortizas >>> >>> Cc: blecesne@hyno.edu; Barron, Paul L ; Chunlin >>> Leonhard ; Whelan, Carol S ; >>> reuben.teagurudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh >>> ; Andrea Armstrong >>> ; Salzer, Ann K >>> ; kiki huston ; Kathy >>> Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille >>> ; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I recall that we did discuss it and agreed that administraton could >>> follow advice of counsel to contestjurisdiction. I propose we have • >>> an executive session meeting to authorize it it there is any doubt. >>> Do I have your agreement Richard? And You Blame, Alysia and Paul? >» >>> From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@p_c_glinchey.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, April 28,20169:05 PM >» To: Richard Cortizas >>> Cc: blecesneagyno.edu; Wisdom,Rachel W;Barron, Paul L; Chunlin >>> Leonhard; Whelan, Carol S;reuben.teaggaprudentialcom; Alysia >>> Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K;kiki huston; Kathy >>> Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan >>> Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >>> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >>> privilege >» >>> I thought so to so I need some clarification. >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:57 PM,Richard Cortizas >>> wrote: >» >>> Mag, >>> Thank you so much...but I thought we had agreed that we would contest >» jurisdiction? >» >>> Again, thank you. >» Richard >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:30 PM, Bickford, Mag >>> wrote: >» >>> I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events. >>> Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. >» >>> The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election >>> on Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. >>> There were certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's >>> email. As the concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by >>> the Board,I consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we >>> are engaged in interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I >>> also waived a card check because we are certain that the union has >>> over 30 legitimate signatures. >» >>> I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed >>> by the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as >>> notential voters The unit we nronose includes instructional >>> employees with common pay scales and academic year engagement. This >>> unit will be divided into professional members and non-professional >>> members-group A >>> and group B. I will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can >>> work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a >>> stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very >>> helpful and immediately attentive to getting me the information >>> needed for these issues. >» >>> The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to >>> resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief ofthe >>> bargaining unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contest >>> jurisdiction. If you all are in accordance, I will have to do that >>> as soon as possible as I will have to change my previous >>> representation to the Labor Board. I won't slow down the election as >>> it will probably be ruled on after the vote. It will be a place >>> holder for a later date should we chose to litigate further. >» >>> I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked >>> the Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my >>> request to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too >>> long to wait. I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be >>> moved to Friday. If not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my >>> firm, will step in with Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law >>> clerk before >>> coming to McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also >>> was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that >>> if I can't make it that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan >>> at Adams and Reese for the hearing but I strongly advise against that. >» >>> We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the >>> hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, ifthe >>> hearing is not moved. >» >>> Kathy and I visited with Virginia Miller of Buermann Miller, a >>> prominent local pr firm. Kathy has chosen to retain a different >>> agency. I don't know whether she has set an appointment with them >>> yet. >» >>> The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to >>> May 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I >>> hope to confirm this tomorrow. >» >>> Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. >>> I am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email >>> as they shake out. >» >>> Mag >» >» >» >>> Magdnlen Blessey Bickford >>> direct: >» fax: >>> email: >>> office: >»(504)596-2726 >>>(504)910-6944 >>> mbickford@mcglinchey.corn >>> 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 >» >>> biolvcard I www.mcglinchey.com I www.cafalawblog.com >» >» >» >>> wwvv.mcglinchey.com I www.CafaLawBlog.com >» >>> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, >>> Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey >>> Stafford, LLP in California. >» >>> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >>> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >>> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in >>> error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return >>> the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 >>> Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal >>> Service. >» >>> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and >>> any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not >>> be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an >>> attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately >>> and a replacement will be provided. >» >>> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >>> h_V://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ >>> <4614 001.pdf> From: Wisdom, Rachel W. .i wisclorn@storiapiwrsartcom Subject; RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 28,2016 at 10:45 PM To; blebesne(Ployno.eciu, Richard Cortizas rcortizas@yahoc.(.. Barron, Paul L pbarronetuiane.edu, Co; Chunlin Leonhard le)nhardqtkPfno.edu, Bickford, Mag rnt., :::fOrtiti?,eMCgIinchey.CAM, s Alysia Loshbaugh Whelan, Carol S i:mhelanCittufnne.edu, re.uben.teagu ' Andrea Armstrong andrea.craig.arrnatrorig@grnalco, Selzer, Ann K asaizerqkuiane.eciu, kiki huston Kathy Riedlinger kathyriedlingerC.Ausherschool.otg, Bryant, Camille .•:bryarIttliesMCgiii1Chey.00tri, Fullmer, Susan srarner@rnoginthey corn disagree. And it is certainly not frivolous. But if we are going to supplant the decisions of our executives on this, we must have board action and deliberation in a proper manner. Out executive team is authorized to act so I don't see the need for all of this. They can proceed. In any case, It is not other than neutral to say state law applies and not federal.. From: blecesne@loyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@loyno.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 10:19 PM To: Richard Cortizas Cc: Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; blecesne@loyno.edu; Barron, Paul L; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Please think about what we would be doing. We are already going to spend $30,000-50,000 on a bitter, divisive election. The union will likely win that election and we will then spend another $50,000-75,000 on the collective bargaining process. Now some of us, solely at the CEO's urging, want to spend another who knows what on a frivolous "hail mary" jurisdiction contest. We are digging a financial hole that is a waste of corporate assets, breach offiduciary duty, and unsound business practice. On top of all that, this reckless course of action contravenes our clear policy of neutrality which is only hours old. Blaine > I'll defer to Mag,and with all due respect to Paul's opinion..how are we > different from the other Charters that have been successful on this > challenge? What authorities have successfully decided jurisdiction over > Charters? Just curious? Thank you > Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 28, 2016, at 9:42 PM,Chunlin Leonhard >> wrote: >> We did discuss the jurisdictional issue, but we never came to any >> conclusion, and I remember Paul expressing serious doubts about the vatunty ot me junswetionat enanenge.1 men researeneu tms issue >> myself and read many of the NLRB cases on its jurisdiction over charter >> schools and talked to another labor law expert. The weight ofthe >> authority favors jurisdiction over charter schools. We will most likely >> lose the jurisdictional battle and waste hundreds ofthousands of >> dollars in legal fees in the process. >> This position also contradicts the Board resolution that we just adopted >> today. The Board's official position is neutral. It is anything but >> neutral for us now to take a position against the NLRB jurisdiction and >> trying to avoid an election(which, by the way, will not be successful >> because as Mag pointed out in her email that the Board will not decide >> the issue until after the election). >> From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigtnan.coml >> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:16 PM >> To:'Bickford, Mag'; Richard Cortizas >> >> Cc: blecesneagyno.edu; Barron, Paul L ; Chunlin >> Leonhard ; Whelan, Carol S ; >> reuben.team@prudential.corn; Alysia Loshbaugh ; >> Andrea Armstrong ; Salzer, Ann K >> ; kiki huston ; Kathy >> Riedlinger ; Bryant, Camille >> ; Fullmer, Susan >> Subject: RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >> privilege >> I recall that we did discuss it and agreed that adtninistraton could >> follow advice of counsel to contestjurisdiction. I propose we have >> an executive session meeting to authorize it if there is any doubt. >> Do I have your agreement Richard? And You Blaine, Alysia and Paul? >> From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@tncglinchey.com] >> Sent: Thursday, April 28,2016 9:05 PM >> To: Richard Cortizas >> Cc: blecesneagyno.edu; Wisdom,Rachel W.; Barron, Paul L; Chunlin >> Leonhard; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teagtit@prudential.com; Alysia >> Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K;kiki huston; Kathy >> Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan >> Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher)and United >> Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to >> privilege >> I thought so to so I need some clarification. >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:57 PM,Richard Cortizas >> wrote: >> Mag, >> Thank you so much...but I thought we had agreed that we would contest >> jurisdiction? >> Again, thank you. >> Richard >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:30 PM,Bickford, Mag >> wrote: >> I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events >> Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. >> The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election on >> Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. There were >> certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's email. As the >> concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by the Board,I >> consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we are engaged in >> interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I also waived a card >> check because we are certain that the union has over 30 legitimate >> signatures. >> I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed by >> the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as >> potential voters. The unit we propose includes instructional employees >> with common pay scales and academic year engagement. This unit will be >> divided into professional members and non-professional members-group A >> and group B. I will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can >> work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a >> stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very >> helpful and immediately attentive to getting me the information needed >> for these issues. >> The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to >> resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief ofthe bargaining >> unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contestjurisdiction. If >> you all are in accordance, I will have to do that as soon as possible as >> I will have to change my previous representation to the Labor Board. I >> won't slow down the election as it will probably be ruled on after the •41 • • 1 1 ▪ 1 >> vote. It will be a place holder tor a later date should we chose to >> litigate further. >> I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked the >> Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my >> request to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too long >> to wait. I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be moved to >> Friday. If not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my firm, will >> step in with Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law clerk before >> coming to McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also >> was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that if I >> can't make it that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan at >> Adams and Reese for the hearing but I strongly advise against that. >> We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the >> hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the hearing >> is not moved. >> Kathy and I visited with Virginia Miller of Buermann Miller, a prominent >> local pr firm. Kathy has chosen to retain a different agency. I >> don't know whether she has set an appointment with them yet. >> The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to May >> 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I hope >> to confirm this tomorrow. >> Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. >> I am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email as >> they shake out. >> Mag >> Magdalen Blessey Bickford >> direct: >> fax: >> email: >> office: >>(504)596-2726 >>(504)910-6944 >> mbickford@mglinchey.corn >> 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 >> >® >> bio I vcard I www.mc litg_adigy.com I www.cafalawblog.com >> wwwmcglinchey.corn I www.CafaLawBlog.com >> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, >> New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in >> California. >> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, >> immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the >> original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor,601 Poydras >> Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. >> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any >> remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be >> viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an >> attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and >> a replacement will be provided. >> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >> http://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ >> <4614_001.pdf From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . SZthieCA; RE: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege Date: April 28, 2016 at 9:15 PM To; Bickford, Mag nibickford,?,;3-ncgli3-lci-v:y.,.c, Richard Cortizas Cc; "..:yi10.$,K.k.t, Barron, Paul L Chunlin Leonhard Whelan, Carol S Alysia Loshbaugh Andrea Armstrong -1..i<.1tor;(siwoo.,x., , Kathy Riedlinger andrea.c.i.clici.ormtrongmaii.corn, Selzer, Ann K kiki huston kathy_riediinger@iu$hemhool.rxg, Bryant, Camille Fullmer, Susan I recall that we did discuss it and agreed that administraton could follow advice of counsel to contest jurisdiction. I propose we have an executive session meeting to authorize it if there is any doubt. Do I have your agreement Richard? And You Blaine, Alysia and Paul? From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mcglinchey.com] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 9:05 PM To: Richard Cortizas Cc: blecesne@loyno.edu; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Barron, Paul L; Chunlin Leonhard; Whelan, Carol S; reuben.teague@prudential.com; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong; Salzer, Ann K; kiki huston; Kathy Riedlinger; Bryant, Camille; Fullmer, Susan Subject: Re: Advocates for Arts-Based Education (Lusher) and United Teachers of New Orleans Attorney Client Communication subject to privilege I thought so to so I need some clarification. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:57 PM, Richard Cortizas wrote: Mag, Thank you so much...but I thought we had agreed that we would contest jurisdiction? Again, thank you. Richard Sent from my iPhone On Apr 28, 2016, at 8:30 PM, Bickford, Mag wrote: I wanted to share with you my letter to the NLRB and recent events. Forgive my typos. It has been a long day. The Robein firm filed the Petition seeking recognition and election on Monday. We have been assigned to Board agent Jordan Garner. There were certain issues to be considered as outlined in Jordan's email. As the concept of contesting jurisdiction was not accepted by the Board, I consented to jurisdiction. We also stipulated that we are engaged in interstate commerce in excess of $50,000 per year. I also waived a card check because we are certain that the union has over 30 legitimate signatures. I did apprise Jordan that we did contest the bargaining unit proposed by the Union and submitted a schematic with highlighted members as potential voters. The unit we propose includes instructional employees with common pay scales and academic year engagement. This unit will be divided into professional members and non-professional members-group A and group B. I will talk to the union in the morning to see if we can work out our differences. If we can, we can avoid a hearing via a stipulation agreement. Kathy and the management team have been very helpful and immediately attentive to getting me the information needed for these issues. The Labor Board has scheduled this hearing on Tuesday at 9:00 am to resolve our differences. We will be submitting a brief of the bargaining unit on Monday. Kathy has also asked me to contest jurisdiction. If you all are in accordance, I will have to do that as soon as possible as I will have to change my previous representation to the Labor Board. I won't slow down the election as it will probably be ruled on after the vote. It will be a place holder for a later date should we chose to litigate further. I have rearranged my flight from Omaha to Thursday night and asked the Labor Board to continue the hearing till Friday. They refused my request to set it the following Monday claiming that 6 days was too long to wait. I have not heard yet whether they will allow it to be moved to Friday. If not, Angie Christina, a veteran litigator at my firm, will step in with Camille. Angie was also Judge Africk's law clerk before coming to McGlinchey and knows her way around a court room. She also was a teacher so she knows that side as well. Kathy mentioned that if I can't make it that she would prefer that to hire Brooke Duncan at Adams and Reese for the hearing but I strongly advise against that. We are planning to meet with the staff on Saturday to prepare for the hearing. I will be there with Camille and Angie as well, if the hearing is not moved. Kathy and I visited with Virginia Miller of Buermann Miller, a prominent local pr firm. Kathy has chosen to retain a different agency. I don't know whether she has set an appointment with them yet. The Labor Board has tentatively moved the election from May 16th to May 17th so that teachers on the Senior Trip will be back to vote. I hope to confirm this tomorrow. Let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. I am sure many things will happen tomorrow and I will send an email as they shake out. Mag Magdalen Blessey Bickford direct: (504) 5962726 fax: (504)910-6944 email: mbickfordftmcglinchey.com office: 601 Roydras St, Ste 1200 j fiew Orieans, LA 70130 No vcard witiw.mcqiinche.-.corn www,caala.0:')Ioc.corn www.mcglinchey.com I www.CafalawBlog.com McGlinchey Stafford, Pl..I..0 in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mssippi. New York, Ohio:'Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in California. Confide.ntiality Statement: This email may contain attomey-client privileged or confidential information. it is for the scileu of the intended reciplent(s). if you have reoeived this transmission in ;MT0r, irrimediateiy notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor. 601 Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA, 70130 via the United States Postal Service. We take steps to remove friatadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining meta/ate should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment containing metadata. please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. See Mcf.:.11inchey St-afford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy <4614_001.pdf> p://w.mcqlinchey.com/disclaimer/ From: VVIsdom, Rachel W. wisdorn @storiepnasan.c•om Subject: Re: Direction for Mag Dote; April 29,2016 at 10:33 AM To: Cortizas, Richard rconizas@jorieswalkor corn Cc: 'Barron, Paul L'(pbarron@tulane.edu) pbarron@tulane.edu, Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) aloshbaugh@gmail.com , Alysai Kravita-Loshbaugh (loshbaugh@gmailcom) loshbaught3:Nmall.com Ok. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 29, 2016, at 10:17 AM, Cortizas, Richard wrote: think the 5 of us should meet and discuss a few things first....our meeting would not violate the open meetings laws and we would not be taking any action. I am happy to host or travel to wherever it is convenient. Thank you. From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepidman.coml Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 9:08 AM To:'Barron, Paul L'(pbarron@tulane.edu); Cortizas, Richard; Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaughi@gmail.com); Alysai Kravita-Loshbaugh (loshbaugh@gmail.com) Subject: Direction for Mag Do you think we should call an executive committee meeting? Rachel. W. Wisdom. Ston.e Pigman'Walther Wittmann L.L.C. 546 Caron.delet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication. is from a law firm. an.d may be privileged,and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and. destroy all. copies of this communication.. The sender's name an.d other information in this e-mail. are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures From: VVIsdom, Rachel W. rwisdorn@stonepEcfnen.con/ Subject: Direction for Mag Date; April 29,2016 at 9:07 AM To: 'Barron, Paul U (pbarronetulane.edu) pbarrona,tulane.eciu, rcortizaejone.sm.3,R.;...;r11, Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaughegmail.com) aloshbaugh@gmall.corn, Alysai Kravita-Loshbaugh (loshbaughtagmail.com) 1or3hbatvhc'ggrnaiicom Do you think we should call an executive committee meeting? Rachel W Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittrnarm L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures Prom: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwissiorn@stonepionsen.com Subjeot: [Lusher] Union activity Dote; April 27,2016 at 7:28 PM To: lustier-board-anri-t, Thought I'd pass this along in case you hadn't seen it yet.... http://www.theneworleansadvocate.corn/news/15618403-37/another-new-orleans-charter-schoolseeks-unionization-bringing-the-tally-to-4 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to toter-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@ggogleg. To post to this group,send email to Jusher-board-and-administrators@goglearoups.com. For more options, visit tiltualgmmaggje.com/d/opteALL From: Subject: Date; To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdorrIztoriopEorrian.c.c.)m Re:[Lusher] Revised Board Resolution re Petition 2016-1 (3).DOCX April 27, 2016 at 4:20 PM Bickford, Mag ludfla-bde.f.1-tincl-acirrinit.ai.c14.Vegoogie5.1roups corn No you don't need to be there. And it's not too late for changes. Please make changes and send to the group plus me and Chunlin. I may not make it back to the office today and don't have a printer at home. So Chunlin, Will you please print the revised resolution that Mag sends? Thanks Sent from my iPhone On Apr 27, 2016, at 4:08 PM, Bickford, Mag wrote: have some changes if it is not too late. Do you want me or Camille there tomorrow? www.mcglinchey.com www.CafaLawBlog.com tgGlinotny Staffsid. PLLC in Aiabarris, Flodd3, Louisiana. Mississimi. New York. Ohio, Texas. and Washington DC and McGlimhey Stafford, LLP in California. Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-dent privileged or confidential information. it is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s), if you have received this tansmission in error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original message to us at McGiirichey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street New Orleans, LA. 70130 via the United States Postal Service. We take steps to remove antedate in attachments sent by email, and any remaining antedate should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. if you receive an attachment containing antedate, please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided, See W.:Glint...hey Stafford DisciaimeriPrivacy Policy rittp://Www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@g91egroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@qp2gItgroups.com. For more options, visit littps://groups.q29,gle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdornz&5.1.o,riepEcorian.corn Subjeot: [Lusher] Revised Board Resolution re Petition 2016-1.DOCX Dote: April 27, 2016 at 1:07 PM To: , gnoty ..„,:q.ip.corn, Bickford, Mag Bryant, Camille (cbryant@mcglinchey.com) obryant@mcgiinohey.00m Mag - I know you've got other work but would you please look this over and let me know ASAP if its ok or whether you think we should revise, etc? Fellow board members and administrators: This is exactly the same as the revised one I proposed yesterday except(1) I removed the yellow highlight;(2) I added "1" after 2016 at the top because I number our resolutions by year followed by the number and this is our first one this year (I think) and (4) I added "and views" in the paragraph about what we authorize the administration to share so that no one gets bogged down in the future about whether information is only facts and data, or whether it includes opinion and perceptions. I will print multiple copies and bring it with me to the meeting tomorrow morning, Just let me know if anyone has any questions. Thanks, You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. tir To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving ennails from it, send an email to To post to this group,send email to • • r . • For more options, visit • From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rs .....:dorna,storiepioasan.com Subject RE: Fwd: Re: PM'T] Date: April 27, 2016 at 12:01 PM To: ' lusher-i.".;oard-orsly@gootjle.3rOups3.c.4.:m lii Blaine. If you like, I can ask the firm's IT personnel to look at the email and let me know what they think. We get lots of scam and phishing emails sent to firm personnel. From: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne©loyno.edu Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 11:27 AM To: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com Subject: [Fwd: Re: PMT] Please see below. Original Message Subject: Re: PMT From: "Kathy Riedlinger" Date: Wed, April 27,2016 10:57 am To: blecesneagyno.edu Cc: "Lynden Swayze" "Mert Saygin" "Mag Bickford" Blaine, I have received them, also. I'll check on who else has. I started getting these months ago. Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 27, 2016, at 10:28 AM,blecesne oyno edu wrote: > Lynden, > I do not believe this is the typical scam email. Such emails never say > they "will give you a call within the hour regarding this." This is > plainly an attempted entrapment and it is consistent with an orchestrated > series of personal attacks against me arising out ofthe union issue. > Given the seriousness ofthis attempted set-up, I need, and intend, to > report it as such to the appropriate federal and state law enforcement > authorities. > Blaine >> Another scam e-mail! >> Blaine, I know that you did not send this! >> If I had replied, my e-mail would have gone to >> Blaine LeCesne Forwarded message >> From: Blaine LeCesne >> Date: Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:33 AM >> Subject: PMT >> To: lynden swayzt@lusherschool.org >> Lynden, >> Find enclosed vendor banking instructions for a payment of $48,200. I need >> you to process this today. >> Any required paperwork will be available later. >> I will give you a call within the hour regarding this. >> Regards, >> Blaine >> Sent from my iPhone » >> *Lynden Clay Swayze, CPA* >> *Chief Financial Officer*Lusher Charter School >> Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corp >> 5624 Freret Street, Room 201B >> New Orleans, Louisiana 70115 >> 504-324-7307 >> Fax: 504-861-1839 it Mn A eves ely-s. revs r•-sea;--0 ,11•14,evre.ea,es"1 ewe," ity tiut.A1 vv ay (91 LLJ1 ICA d1uU1.Ui You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@g,000learoups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlx@googleg,roups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hrips://groups.google.com/cilmsgidllusher-board- only/2ba7170da77d065f228c9ff5f72c36c1.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://aroups.opoole.com/dioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qps_gitgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googigagos.com. To view this discussion on the web visit 11ps://grouago_ggle.com/d/mscjidAusher-board10nly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED 1715BC%40SPEXCH.stonepig man.com. For more options, visit t.Aps://groups.q.92gle.com/d/optout. wrsaoml noenel w. RE rtusner} Revised Notioe 0t Meellng win new lamtmn Aprll 26. 2015 a| a io cnunlln Leonhard Thankyou, Chunlln. work with Pat. But someone will need to post a nonce Loyola law school mo. Can you do that? If not I will pass by mere tonight with a copy and tape it somewhere near the door. lam on another break from my OSHA work, and have an idea now to address Richam's objections and suggestion, you please call me on my direct dial at 50475937091] so i ran explain? it will save me time. From: Chunlin Leonhard sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2015 3:55 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel 'Chunlln Leonhard'; Subject: Revised Notlce of Meeting new location Dear Rachel, I appleclate your concern about Creatlng any dlsruption on Lusher campus durlng time. To avmd that problem, I have reserved a classroom in the College of Law building located at 526 Pine street, have attached the revrsed notice the new location ror your posting The classroom is located on the first iioor of the law school on the loo side arter you walk past the elevators. Please call me on my cell phone--if you have trouble finding the room, Rachel, since you are the person who interacts with Pat to have the notice posted, can you please ask Pat to post it by 8:30 am. tomorrow morning? It you are too busy to take care of it, I am happy to post the meeting myself by 3:30 am. tomorrow morning. lwon't be able to post it on the website since I have no access, but am happy to send the notice to the Uptown messenger and/or other media outlet if necessary, Please let me know by 9 pm, tonight that Pat Will post the meeting notice by 8.30 am. tomorrow, Best regards, Chunlin From: 353mm majors On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 10:49 AM To: 'Chunlin Leonhard' mammals;ny u?h?rrmargjrangragmh 952 Subject: RE: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 23 special meeting minute break and may not be able to reply again nl ihrseyoning because we marl] Hnrnimh 1,0," t VW W., IA LS 1,00 1.• I don't think the request follows the bylaws, but we can waive objections if the all of the board members want to waive them and can to meet as proposed. I have heard from more people who cannot make than can, and haven't hear from others. Kiki cannot re-arrange at all. She will be setting up her booth. It will be really hard for me, but I can't say definitely yet. I did look into getting meeting space in case. It is testing week and the cafeteria is probably the only place available because of that. I am very concerned about having a public meeting on school day during testing week. I think it could draw a crowd and be very disruptive. And II don't want to publish a notice for a meeting tomorrow if I don't know we have a quorum However, if you insist, I will unless there are objections from the other board members. I haven't been able to really study what you and Andrea have circulated, but maybe we can just ask Kathy and Mag to put something together to post some place that states something along those lines? Like we normally do -- e.g., letters Blaine gets out when there are tight time restraints From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonhardcallgyno.edu] Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:00 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Chunlin Leonhard; lusher-board-and-administrators@googiegroups,com Subject: RE: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, I have called for a special meeting consistent with our By-laws. I think that it is important for us to get together to clarify the Board's position in light of the vote last Saturday and the petition filed with the National Labor Relations Board today. I am not sure where you get the information to form the belief that we may not have a quorum. I understand that without a quorum,the board may not be able to take any action. That, however, is not a reason not to have the meeting, because we won't know if there is a quorum until we start the meeting. Best regards, Chunlin From: lusher-board-and-administrators algooglegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-andadministratorsSpgooglegroups.coml On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 8:26 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard' ; lusher-board-and-administrators(alg(212gkgroiips.com Subject:[Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Leaving aside all other issues, do not believe we have a quorum for this proposed meeting. From: lusher-F)oard-and-dministraWAgooglegroups,corn [mailtp:100?r-hwrd-andadministratorskgooglagil On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 12:03 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: h rmini r.t.rc—:_gagglagroups, om Subject: [Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, Please see the attached notice and agenda for the special meeting. Best regards, Chunlin Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leonhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: http:assrn.comjauthor=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardand-administrators+unsubseribe@gaQgkgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@gaQgitgroups,com. For more options, visit .https://(2.roups.gilQgle.corrildloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardand-adrninistrators+1,111SUbscribe&a.Qgitgroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to ]usher-board-and-administrators@gmgitgroups,com. For more options, visit .https:11(2.roups.gQpgle.cornidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board211(14)(1n)in istrai-nrs+rmsa hscri heiii)goofit egronly: corn To post to this group, send email to jusher-board-auckadministratorsPgatatgroups.coni. For more options, visit bj12L/Igammaximg1esconifdloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lushet-board-andgslainigrAig.r.atargialmalgtgasategnanspm. To post to this group,send email to lusher-boarci-and-administratorsglecugps,,com. For more options, visit targ://gfoup.goji.e comidloptout,. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdom@voripEw'ian.corn Subjeot; FW: RE:[Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting OW:A?: April 26, 2016 at 3:43 PM To: 'Barron, Paul L (pbarron@tulane.edu) Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) I still need Richard to object to protect us, but this is a very good sign From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 3:40 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Subject: RE: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, Thank you very much for the proposed amendment. I am willing to accept your amendment. Please note that I did not copy anyone else on this email because I don't want to engage in a discussion of this by email. Best regards, Chunlin From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom@stonepigman.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 1:41 PM To: ileonhard@zmail.loyno.edui ; asalzer@tulane.edu; Chunlin Leonhard ; lusher-board-and-administrators@g(22gLegroups,com Subject: RE:[Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Hi all. I am still trying to arrange things so I can be there. I just read the proposed resolution that Chunlin sent this morning. I recall and email exchange between Paul and Reuben yesterday about allowing the administrators to provide information. I have revised the proposed resolution to reflect that exchange, which I believe is consistent with Reuben's statements and addresses Paul's concerns. Chunlin, Will you please accept this as a friendly amendment to your proposed resolution? Thank you. Rachel Wisdom From: leonhardPzmail.loyno.edu [mailto:leonharck@zmail.loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 1:03 PM To: asalzeratulane.edu; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-andadministrators(agooglegroups.com Subject: Re: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Hi, Ann, Five of us(Andrea, Reuben, Carol, Blaine and I)called the meeting. Rachel made a good point about potential disruption on a school day. I'm working on an alternative location right now and will circulate the information as soon as I finalize it. Thanks for being so flexible. With the petition already filed, we feel that it's necessary to meet. Best, Chunlin T-Mobile. America's First Nationwide 4G Network. Original message From: Salzer, Ann K Date: Tue, Apr 26,2016 12:45 PM To: Chunlin Leonhard;Wisdom, Rachel W.Jusher-board-and-administrators@googkgrmaum; Subject:Re: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Hello Everyone, If I recall correctly, 4 people have to call for a special meeting. Are there 4 people calling for this meeting during regular work hours? This is a burden for me but if it's necessary I will miss a scheduled commencement meeting and request some personal time from the Provost. Ann Ann Salzer Assistant Provost Tulane University asalzer@tulane.edu 504-314-2816 From: Chunlin Leonhard < eonhard@loyno.edu> Date: Monday, April 25, 2016 at 9:59 PM To: Rachel Wisdom , Chunlin Leonhard < eonhard@loyno.edu>, "lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com" Subject: RE:[Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting 2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}@font-face font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2224 3 24;}@font-face {fontfamily:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 44 2 4;}@font-face {font-family:"@SimSun"; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}/* Style Definitions */p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:Oin; margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.Opt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:#0563C1;text-decoration:underline;}a:visited, wan.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-priority:99; color:#954F72;text-decoration:underline;}p {mso-style-priority:99; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:Oin; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:Oin; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;)span.EmailStyle18 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; colorwindowtext;}span.EmailStyle19 Imso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:#1F497D;Ispan.EmailStyle20 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:#1F497D;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; font-size:10.0pt;}@page WordSectionl {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}div.WordSectionl {page:WordSection1;}--> Dear Rachel, I have called for a special meeting consistent with our By-laws. I think that it is important for us to get together to clarify the Board's position in light of the vote last Saturday and the petition filed with the National Labor Relations Board today. I am not sure where you get the information to form the belief that we may not have a quorum. I understand that without a quorum, the board may not be able to take any action. That, however, is not a reason not to have the meeting, because we won't know if there is a quorum until we start the meeting. Best regards, Chunlin From: lusher-board-and-administrators@gmgl&groups.corn [mailto:lusher-board-andadministrators@gmgLegmllps.com]On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Monday,April 25,2016 8:26 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard' ;lusher-board-andadministrators@gmgLegmlips.com Subject:[Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting 'Leaving aside all other issues, I do not believe we have a quorum for this proposed meeting. From:lusher-board-and-administratorsgoogroups.corn [mailto:lusher-board-andadministrators©googlegroups.com]On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 12:03 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: lusher-board-and-administrators©googlegroups.com Subject: [Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, Please see the attached notice and agenda for the special meeting. Best regards, Chunlin Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leonhard@loyno.edu -1615756 You can access my papers on SSRN at: http://ssrn com/authorYou received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email tolusher-boarcland-administrators+unsubscribe@gg_wkstaupason. To post to this group, send email to lusher-hoard-and-administrators@go_oglegumps,com. For more options, visit Littps://gimpasoogle com/d•optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email tolusher-boardand-adm inistators-Funsubscribe@ggggls. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@go_oglestollps,com. For more options, visit haps://group_s_so.ogle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email tolusher-boardand-administrators+unsubscribe@googkg. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@go_ogesamps,com. For more options, visit hitialLgr_042,5,ggQ.1e.comidioptout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisclorn&stonopiorrsartcom Subject RE: RE:[Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Date: April 26,2016 at 1:40 PM To: i9Orl rd@zrnall.loyrso.edU, asezerqesnulane..ecill, Chunlin Leonhard leonherd@ioyno etht, lusher-board-and-administrators@peglevoups.com Hiatt. am still trying to arrange things so can be there. I just read the proposed resolution that Chunlin sent this morning. I recall and email exchange between Paul and Reuben yesterday about allowing the administrators to provide information. I have revised the proposed resolution to reflect that exchange, which believe is consistent with Reuben's statements and addresses Paul's concerns. Chunlin, Will you please accept this as a friendly amendment to your proposed resolution? Thank you. Rachel Wisdom From: leonhard©zmail.loyno.edu [mailto:leonhard@zmail.loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 1:03 PM To: asalzer©tulane.edu; Chunlin Leonhard; Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-andad m in istrators@goog leg rou ps.com Subject: Re: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Hi, Ann, Five of us(Andrea, Reuben, Carol, Blaine and I)called the meeting. Rachel made a good point about potential disruption on a school day. I'm working on an alternative location right now and will circulate the information as soon as I finalize it. Thanks for being so flexible. With the petition already filed, we feel that its necessary to meet Best, Chunlin T-Mobile. America's First Nationwide 4G Network. Original message From: Salzer, Ann K Date: Tue, Apr 26,2016 12:45 PM To: Chunlin Leonhard;Wisdom, Rachel W.Jusher-board-and-administrators@googlsgro Subject:Re: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Hello Everyone, If I recall correctly, 4 people have to call for a special meeting. Are there 4 people calling for this meeting during regular work hours? This is a burden for me but if it's necessary I will miss a scheduled commencement meeting and request some personal time from the Provost. Ann Ann Salzer Assistant Provost Tulane University asalzer@tulane.edu 504-314-2816 From: Chunlin Leonhard Date: Monday, April 25, 2016 at 9:59 PM To: Rachel Wisdom , Chunlin Leonhard , "lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com" Subject: RE:[Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting 2 1 60 3 1 1 1 1 1;1@font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 46 3 2 4;}@font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2224 3 24;1@font-face {fontfamily:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 643 54424;}@font-face {font-family:"@SimSun"; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}/* Style Definitions */p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal fmargin:Oin; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serit1a:link, spmMaoHyperlink fmso-style-priority:99; color:#0563C1; text-decoration:underline;la:visited, spmMaoHyperlinkFollowed fmso-style-priority:99; color#954F72;text-decoration:underline;lp Imso-style-priority:99; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:Oin; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:Oin; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman",seritIspan.EmailStyle18 fmso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibre,sans-serif; colorwindowtext;1spanEmailStyle19 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibre,sans-serif; color:#1F497D;}span.EmailStyle20 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:#1F497D;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; font-size:10.0pt;}@page WordSectionl {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}div.WordSectionl {page:WordSection1;}--> Dear Rachel, I have called for a special meeting consistent with our By-laws. I think that it is important for us to get together to clarify the Board's position in light of the vote last Saturday and the petition filed with the National Labor Relations Board today. I am not sure where you get the information to form the belief that we may not have a quorum. I understand that without a quorum,the board may not be able to take any action. That, however, is not a reason not to have the meeting, because we won't know if there is a quorum until we start the meeting. Best regards, Chunlin From: lusher-board-and-administrators@gagglesimps.com [mailto:lusher-board-andadministratQl@r gg_Qgiggiaups com]On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Monday, April 25,2016 8:26 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard' <1 i_e_o2L4_sil r @I.Qyno.edu>;lusher-board-andadministrators@gaggigsmilps.corn Subject:[Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Leaving aside all other issues, I do not believe we have a quorum for this proposed meeting. From:lusher-board-and-administrators@googte_groups.com [mailto:lusher-board -and administrators©_googlegroups.com]On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 12:03 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: lusher-boa rd-and-admin istrators(a_googlegrou ps.com Subject: [Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, Please see the attached notice and agenda for the special meeting. Best regards, Chunlin Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel. MO 861-5854 leonhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: 1.2.0://ssm.com/author=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email tolusher-hoardand-ach-ninistrators+unsubscribe@gpsgiggro. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googkgroups.com. For more options, visit ht_tpLZgrsLimggsale.com idloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email tolusher-boardand-administrators+unsubscribe@gmkgr_ms.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googligroups.com. For more options, visit ht_imilgroup_asp_ggle.corn idloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email tolusher-boardand-administrators+unsubscribe@g2gglsgrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googlsgrslpi s.com. For more options, visit hDs://grot_umg000le.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribegiloodeqroups.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-and-administratorsgaoocturoups corn For more options, visit tilpt s://groups.goocile.comid/optout From: Subject: Date; To: Wisdom, Rachel W. ivisflorn&stonepinasan.c.,om FW:[Lusher] draft board statement April 26,2016 at 2:34 PM Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) alo5.Mbatgpacimaikx)m, Alysai Kravita-Loshbaugh (loshbaugh@gmailcom) This is the one i meant, its good because it means no conflict among us. I hope it is true. From: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-andadministrators©googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of reuben.teague©prudential.com Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 7:19 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: Andrea Armstrong; lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com; Mag Bickford; cbryant@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re:[Lusher] draft board statement PaulWhy do you think this disenfranchises the administration? As a statement of the board, I think it leaves the individual or collective views of the administrators as a separate matter. That's how I read it, anyway. I would sign it as written. Best, Reuben Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 25, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Barron, Paul L wrote: > Andrea: > I've read carefully your suggested statement. I agree with all ofthe points other than the last one. It effectively disfranchises our administration. As a result I would not be able to sign this draft. > Paul > Paul Barron > The Class of 1937 Professor of Law(Emeritus) > Tulane Law School > 6329 Freret Street > New Orleans, LA 70118 > Voice 504-865-5986 > Fax 504-862-8846 Thic nntnninninatinn maw 11P nrilrilpapel anti nnryfrionti.al If,rii arr. tint .1....1.60 V .I.J.\de, 11.411\IL 1.,/.1.1.16.11.4.4.• is J Jt.1, 4.44. 41.1.%, intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies ofthis communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. > Original Message > From: lusher-board-and-administrators@googjggr [mailtolusher-board-and-administrators@googn On Behalf Of Andrea Armstrong > Sent: Monday, April 25,2016 4:03 PM > To: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlgg > Cc: Mag Bickford ;ghw@my.com > Subject: [Lusher] draft board statement > Hi folks > Pursuant to Chunlin's notice for a special meeting and my request for a limited meeting, please find attached a draft statement by the board on the pending election. I take no pride in authorship and tried to keep it simple. I hope that we can unanimously agree to this(or something along these lines). > Because of open meetings law,I would prefer that we not deliberate or discuss this proposal via email. But rather I wanted to be transparent and at least have a starting point for our meeting this Thursday. > Mag and Camille - please let me know if you have any legal concerns about the attached statement. > All the best, > Andrea >-> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlearsivs.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@m_ogiggroun. > For more options, visit liVs://grol_z1g2_og1e.com/d/optout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlearsivs.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@gglegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.gpsIgle.com/d/optout You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardand-administrators+unsubscribe@ggig) Legroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com For more options, visit https://grmgasm) le.com/d/optout. From Mariam. Rachel w. 3mm Fw Public Hemvds Request on: Apui 26: 2015 an 57 PM to mow, Mug (73 ldon't know who this woman is or why she is contacting me, except for what she states. But don't want to respond and 1 need io get back to work on an OSHA matter that lS fairly urgent, so i am forwarding this to you. Thanks. From: Sophia Ryan Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2015 12:57 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Subject: Fwd: Public Records Request Ms. Wisdom, because you are the secretary for the Board and someone who seems trustworthy to me, I am forwarding you the emails below 1 know you already have seen my request for the records because you were copied on that request Please make sure that Lusher provides the records from its servers to me as requested I also want you to see the unprofessional and discouneous exchanges I had With Mr Lecesne I don 't trust Mr Lecesne to provide all information I requested Also, 1 am asking that all documents be made available to me at Lusher's business address, not the home of Mr Lescene as he has suggested. I feel he was trying to intimidate me and 1 don't think it's appropriate for me to be ordered to appear at his home for the copies let him know that 1 am going to appear at Lusher for the copies unless you have another business address in mind for the Board or Lusher If there are any charges for copies, I will draft a check payable to the Board not personally to Mr Lecesne I believe the charges should be 25 per copy for the first 10 pages and 10 thereafter. If I'm not correct, please advise Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions for me Sophia Ryan -- Begin forwarded message From: blecesne@loyno.edu Subject: Re: Public Records Request Date: April 25, 2016 at 11:39:49 PM CDT To: "sophia ryan" 1 got your points, which 1 View as threats and which I Will have my attorney deal with separately In the meantime, I will produce the records you have requested You can retrieve hard copies at my residence located at 17 Fairway Oaks Drive, New Orleans, LA 70131 They will be available this Friday at 5:30 The copying fee Will be twenty-five cents per page Blaine LeCesne Please excuse the typos. But I believe you get my points. On Apr 25,2016, at 9:01 PM,sophia ryan wrote: It is your obligation to and these records available. You absolutely cannot charge for your time. If I am not given the opportunity to view all records in your possession which respond to my request by close of business on the third day (this Thursday),I will engage the courts and seek attorney fees and penalties in addition to the records from you. I will also engage the Louisiana ethics board, Louisiana disciplinary counsel, and attorney general in this arbitrary and capricious denial of my tights as s public citizen. On Apr 25,2016, at 8:43 PM,blecesneguno.edu wrote: You have my response. I believe it's an ethics violation for you to attempt to seek compensation for your duties as a public servant. I will view them in person. Please tell me where to view them within the next 3 days. On Apr 25,2016, at 8:33 PM,blecesneguno.edu wrote: You can research it youself. Please point me to the legal authority under which you are attempting to collect compensation for your time. 1 don't believe you may do so as a public servant. On Apr 25,2016, at 7:31 PM,blecesne@loyno.edu wrote: Ms. Ryan, This is my response to your public records request. Your request requires me to conduct 17 separate searches of my phone and computer records to determine whether I am in possesion of the documents requested. Since I have three separate email accounts, I will have to search each of those, bringing the number of searches to 51. Since I have two computers with different servers, I will have to conduct these searches on each computer bringing the total number of computer searches to 102. I am a law professor and solo practioner with no clerical employees. Therefore, I will have to do these searches personally on my own time. I believe that under the public records law, I am entitled to the reasonable value of the time necessary to search and compile records in response to a public records request. Assuming that each of the 102 computer searches will take an average of six minutes to complete, the total number of minutes would be 612 minutes, or 10.2 hours. And this doesn't even include the phone searches. I believe that a flat fee of$750.00 would be reasonable under the circumstances to respond to a request that will take me a full day and a half to complete. I will waive any copying costs. Please let me know if you wish to proceed under these terms. In the event you decide to proceed, I will require payment in advance. If any public records responsive to your requests are found, you may retrieve hard copies from my residence in English Turn. Blaine LeCesne Sophia B. Ryan 850 S. Clearview Pkwy New Orleans, LA 70123 April 25,2016 Dear Custodian of Records for Einstein Charter Schools, Loyola University School of Law as the custodian of public record emails Blame Lecesne, Lusher Charter School, Einstein Charter School, and Board of Directors for the Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher School Board): Please produce within three(3)days as required by the Public Record Act, La. Rev. Stat. 44.1, et seq., a copy of each public record in your possession which is responsive to these search terms. Please include any text or written communications, whether stored or maintained in physical format or electronic format on public or private phone or computer devices, or on public servers or private servers between these parties: 1. Charles Grenier or charles arenier(clusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Chen-ie Lecesne (tiffanv_cherrie einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesnegliwno.edu) 2. Bonnie Thiel, Bonnie Bowler, Bonnie Thiel@lusherschool onz, or Bonnie lnyler hishei_ .mliool.org to/from Tiffany Lecesne Itiffarnr rhArriPaPinetpirtrhartrzrerlInnic ewer ariel U s./.1.1%/11 .../1 OVA SS-IS-ISO. WA5 tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesneagyno.edu) 3. Jerome White or Jerome lusl -g to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesneggyno.edu) 4. Julie Sanders or Ju_jig_bnders ,lusheig to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesneglgyno.edu) 5. Rachel Tabak or Eachglk lusheig to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesneagyno.edu) 6. Sara Slaughter or Sara Slaugam@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne(jgyno.edu) 7. Geraldine Boesch or Geraldine Boesch@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesneglgyno.edu) 8. Teny Marek or Terry lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesneagyno.edu) 9. Allison Bellmont or Allison Bellmont@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesnegLoyno.edu) 10. Beth Rota or Beth Rota@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesneagyno.edu) 11. Matt Owen or Matt Owen@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Chen-ie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany chenie@lusherschool.org)or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne@hyno.edu) 12. Bonnie Greco or Bonnie Greco@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Chen-ie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany chenie@lusherschool.org)or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne(kyo no.edu) 13. Larisa Gray or Larisa Gray_@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Chen-ie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany chenie@lusherschool.org)or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne@Lyo no.edu) 14. Brad Richard or Brad Richard@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Chen-ie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne@loyno.edu) 15. Any member, affiliate, agent, or employee of UTNO,UT Lusher, or other union to/from Tiffany Chenie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany chenie@lusherschool.org)or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne@kyo no.edu) 16. Mary Prevost or Mary Prevost@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Chen-ie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschooLorg)or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne@kyo no.edu) 17. From or to any of the above parties containing the search term .union,,,UTNO,,or,UT Lusher,anywhere in the email or text All of these documents are public records, wherever stored, they, nevertheless, are public records documents evidencing the conduct of public business. I admonish Loyola University that it is the custodian of Blaine Lecesne.s email records even though Loyola itself is not subject to the Public Records Act. I further ask that all such materials, whether released to me under this public records request or not, be maintained, kept, and preserved by all records custodians of same as litigation should be anticipated and federal and state laws require the preservation of these records when litigation is anticipated. These records may be sent to me at a phia.iyar_agmail.com. If there are any objections, please provide specific arguments, citing legal authority for withholding these public documents, and the appropriate appeal process. Sincerely, Sophia B Ryan You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoogIggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googiNroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit Lalps://groups.google.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonlv/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED16F71B%40SPEXCH.stonepjaman.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. From. Subjeot; OW:A?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. i.wisdorn&VoriEvE9friarl.corn RE: 1204963_1.docx April 26, 2016 at 1:32 PM Alysia Loshbaugh ghgalcom No -- am going to do it. Thank you, I am sorry to bother you. I hope my email to the rest will be received well, From: Alysia Loshbaugh [mailto:aloshbaugh@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 1:31 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Subject: Re: 1204963_1.docx Just listened to your VM. I didn't see any email exchange between Paul and Reuben. Did you still want me to propose the amended version? Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On Apr 26, 2016, at 1:27 PM,Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: Never mind this and my voice mail. I have to do something about this so they don't gag the administrators. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 1:18 PM To: Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaughOgmail.com) Subject: 1204963_1.docx « File: 1204963_1.docx >> the last one had an error. Sorry From: Sut.A.nt MIN?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssci.om'.§voripEc,irnan.c.x..lin RE: 1204963_1.docx April 26, 2016 at 1:26 PM Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) alo5..1.1braughc,m1 Never mind this and my voice mail, administrators, ,,,,,, have to do something about this so they don't gag the From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 1:18 PM To: Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) Subject: 1204963_1.docx « File: 1204963_1.docx » the last one had an error. Sorry From: Subject; Date; To: Wisdom, Rachel W. r,,s,isdom@storiepg.tataft.com dt? 1204963_1.docx April 26, 2016 at 1:17 PM Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) aloVlbaugh&tmaikx,Irn the last one had an error. Sorry From: Subject; Date; To: Wisdom, Rachel W. n.svisdorri@storiepiorrsan.com g 1204963_1.docx April 26, 2016 at 1:15 PM Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) alosttbaughOomaikx)m Calling you now. 1204963_1.docx From: Sut.A.nt kTate: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoi.n...voritipi9.1.ian...oill RE: RE:[Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting April 26, 2016 at 10:48 AM Chunlin Leonhard hrd.kyPo , vf ) 4 e.c. •v • Hi -- at the end of a 15 minute break and may not be able to reply again til this evening because we plan to work through lunch. I don't think the request follows the bylaws, but we can waive objections if the all of the board members want to waive them and can to meet as proposed. I have heard from more people who cannot make than can, and haven't hear from others. Kiki cannot re-arrange at all. She will be setting up her booth. It will be really hard for me, but I can't say definitely yet. I did look into getting meeting space in case. It is testing week and the cafeteria is probably the only place available because of that. I am very concerned about having a public meeting on school day during testing week. I think it could draw a crowd and be very disruptive. And II don't want to publish a notice for a meeting tomorrow if I don't know we have a quorum However, if you insist, I will unless there are objections from the other board members. I haven't been able to really study what you and Andrea have circulated, but maybe we can just ask Kathy and Mag to put something together to post some place that states something along those lines? Like we normally do -- e.g., letters Blaine gets out when there are tight time restraints From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailtodeonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:00 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Chunlin Leonhard; lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, I have called for a special meeting consistent with our By-laws. I think that it is important for us to get together to clarify the Board's position in light of the vote last Saturday and the petition filed with the National Labor Relations Board today. I am not sure where you get the information to form the belief that we may not have a quorum. I understand that without a quorum, the board may not be able to take any action. That, however, is not a reason not to have the meeting, because we won't know if there is a quorum until we start the meeting. Best regards, Chunlin From: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com [mail-to:lusher-board-andadministrators@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 8:26 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard' ; lusher-board-and-administratorsPsoogiegroups.com Subject:[Lusher] RE: Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Leaving aside all other issues, l do not believe we have a quorum for this proposed meeting. From: lusher-board-and-administrators(a)gogleproupsxam [mailto:lusher-board-andadministrators(i)pooglegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 12:03 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: iusher-board-and-administrators@.g.00glegroups.com Subject: [Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, Please see the attached notice and agenda for the special meeting. Best regards, Chunlin Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leenhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: http:/./ssrn.comiauthor=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To =subscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 1 usher-boardand-administrators+umAibscribe@googlegroups.com.. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administratorsggooglegroups.com. For more options, visit Nips://groups.google.comidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 1 usher-boardand-adm in istrators+unsubscribe@googlegroups corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-acim inistrators@googlegroups COM. rut mut e Op1.1011S, V IS11 t..n ft kV VfAidiat. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators'. group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boar -and • adrninir-ArtA ors+unsubsoribeggooglearo.upt4.corn. To post to this group, send email to itishet-boatd-and-admirastrators@gooaLagroups.corn. For more options, visit bbps://groups.000cile.comidioptout. From: Sut.A.nt kTate: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssci.c)i.n.,:toritipi9.1.ian...oill RE:[Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting April 25, 2016 at 8:25 PM Chunlin Leonhard :,-.4.i‘-,•d(?;-'oyN.., • s".• Leaving aside all other issues, do not believe we have a quorum for this proposed meeting. From: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-andadministrators@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 12:03 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com Subject: [Lusher] Notice of Meeting and Agenda for the April 28 special meeting Dear Rachel, Please see the attached notice and agenda for the special meeting. Best regards, Chunlin Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leonhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: httpljssm,comiauthor=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardand-administrators+unsubscribeaQoogiemups.00m. To post to this group, send email to lusber-board-and-administrators@goo0eQroups.com. For more options, visit littps://groups.Qoogie.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lustm-board-andadministrator 4unsubscil e@googleciroups.00rn. To post to this group, send email to iusher-board-anci-aciministrators@googiegrour.*.com. For more options, visit ilttp:I/gfoupigoogie comicitoptout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sut.A.nt RE:[Fwd: Public Records Request] Date: April 26, 2016 at 8:22 AM nlcordVrnogiirichey.corn Hi. I am unable to assist with this due to my schedule. Will you please forward to whoever normally handles public records requests for the school? Mag needs to be focused on getting ready for the NLRB briefing and hearing. Thank you. Sent from my iPhone From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 11:00 PM To: blecesne@loyno.edut; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: RE:[Fwd: Public Records Request] Ugh. What do we do? I don't believe I am "the custodian[] of records." I'm tied up all day tomorrow, but if there is an emergency call my office. From: lusher-board-only@gcaglagroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@g_ogiegt blecesne@kyno.edu Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:15 PM To: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject:[Fwd: Public Records Request] Below is a public records request sent to my wife's employer and my employer, the President of Loyola. This is the second one 1 have received. The first was directed to me individually and 1 responded to it. This one goes much further by involving my, and my wife's, employer. This is clearly intended to harass and intimidate, it is equally clear that it is being orchestrated, given the teachers' names that appear on the requests. Blaine Original Message Siihiect• Public Records Recniest On Behalf Of From: "Sophia Ryan" Date: Mon, April 25, 2016 6:32 pm To: ixti@kyjaQs,thl 4 _ • / I - II FterS • BELss_01 agitompigman.corn .tiffany_cherrie einsteincharterschools.ore Sophia B. Ryan 8505. Clearview Pkwy New Orleans, LA 70123 April 25,2016 Dear Custodian of Records for Einstein Charter Schools, Loyola University School of Law as the custodian of public record emails Blaine Lecesne, Lusher Charter School, Einstein Charter School, and Board of Directors for the Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher School Board): Please produce within three(3)days as required by the Public Record Act, La. Rev. Stat. 44.1, et seq., a copy of each public record in your possession which is responsive to these search terms. Please include any text or written communications, whether stored or maintained in physical format or electronic format on public or private phone or computer devices, or on public servers or private servers between these parties: Is 1. Charles Grenier or I• 11 - 11 / I )to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffway_cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and s - it. • )or Blaine Lecesne(121.essmt@IQyno.edu) tiffany I - • 2. Bonnie Thiel, Bonnie Bowler, •s I - / ersc••• • or Bonnie_Bowler@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Lecesne (tiffany_ uer - • - I -i •• 11 - is. 11 • and 1 • It. •)or Blaine Lecesne( ec1215jat(li2yno.edu) liffany_ 3. Jerome White or ID-Dniejliiirglushasdicylsag to/from Tiffany Cherrie - I - I1•11 i- i ools. g and Lecesne (tiffany_ It. • tiffany_ s tr. I)or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@lQyno.edu) 4. Julie Sanders or IS ers III, I• to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne alffway_cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and or Blame Lecesne(blecesnegigyno.edu) tiffany 5. Rachel Tabak or g to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne giffany_cherriea g and .e.) or Blaine Lecesne(Utggant@lQyno.edtj) tiffany 6. Sara Slaughter or Sara_Slaughter@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffajay_cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and I•11 • .)or Blaine Lecesne (Ugcsaat@lQyno.edtA) tiffany_ I - • s $ is 7. Geraldine Boesch or f . • • - :•- • # to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_cherrie@einsteincbarterschools,org and tiffany_cherrieglusherschool,org) or Blaine Lecesne(blccesne@kyno.edu) 8. Terry Marek or Ten-y_tt • (& -is.. • g to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_ -* • - •• •• .g and tiffany_cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesnegloyno.edu) 1 1 I -1 9. Allison Bellmont or • g to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_cherrle@einsteincbarterschools.org and tiffany_cherriegusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@lyno.edu) 10. Beth Rota or Beth_Rota@lusbersehooLorg to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_ • •i •••.. • gand sorg) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) tiffany_cherrie@lusherschool 11. Matt Owen or Matt_Owengusherschool,org to/from Tiffany Cherrie A. Lecesne (tiffany_ i't 'I " .0 e• • and tiffany_cherrie@lusherschool,org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@LQyno.edu) 12. Bonnie Greco or Bonnie_Greco@lusherschool,org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_ ••• g and -* - - • • tiffany_cherriegusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(httosnc@kyno.edu) 13. Larisa Gray or Larisa_Gray@lusherschooLorg to/from Tiffany Cherrie 110„ Lecesne (tiffany_ g and -* • - is e's tiffany_cherrie@lusherschool,org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@kyno.edu) 14. Brad Richard or Brad_Richard@Jusherschool,org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_cherrie@einsteinebarterschools.org and tiffany_cherrie@lusherschooLorg) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 15. Any member, affiliate, agent, or employee of UTNO,UT Lusher, or other union to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_cherrie@einsteincharterscbools.org and tiffany_cherrie@lusherschool,org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesnegloyno.edu) 16. Mary Prevost or Mary_Prevostglusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany_cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany_cherrie@lusherschool.org)a Blaine Lecesne(2ketane@loyno,edu) 17. From or to any ofthe above parties containing the search term .union,4040UTN0,40 or•UT Lusher$ anywhere in the email or text All ofthese documents are public records, wherever stored, they, nevertheless, are public records documents evidencing the conduct of public business. I admonish Loyola University that it is the custodian of Blaine LecesneOs email records even though Loyola itself is not subject to the Public Records Act. I further ask that all such materials, whether released to me under this public records request or not, be maintained, kept, and preserved by all records custodians of same as litigation should be anticipated and federal and state laws require the preservation of these records when litigation is anticipated. These records may be sent to me at 5.Qphia.rym@gmail.com. If there are any objections, please provide specific arguments, citing legal authority for withholding these public documents, and the appropriate appeal pr mess. Sincerely, Sophia B Ryan You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board +unsubscribegaggkgQps.com To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onty@gmgiggraups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hilasilgrQualgag2gle.comildimsgidlusher-boardmly/b061e2d8bf3e58a83a0d39332f9d21 cd.squirrel%40secure.loymYedu. For more options, visit littps://gEgmaLgaggle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@cmglDroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@g2291Droups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://ciroupLgoocile.com/d/msqid/lusher-boardonlv/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED16E77F%40SPEXCH.stoneRtgman.com. For more options, visit ht_lps://groups.gooqle.com/d/optout. Prom: Subject: Date; To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisciore@storiepEomaasom RE:[Fwd: Public Records Request] April 25,2016 at 10:59 PM blecemeeloyno.ecie, lusher-heerd-ersly@goegleorceos.som mhicittord@mcglinchey.com Ugh. What do we do? I don't believe I am "the custodian[) of records." I'm tied up all day tomorrow, but if there is an emergency call my office. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.conn [nnailtodusher-board-only@googlegroups.conn] On Behalf Of blecesne@loyno.edu Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:15 PM To: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject:[Fwd: Public Records Request] Below is a public records request sent to my wife's employer and my employer,the President of Loyola. This is the second one I have received The first was directed to me individually and I responded to it. This one goes much further by involving my, and my wife's, employer. This is clearly intended to harass and intimidate. It is equally clear that it is being orchestrated, given the teachers' names that appear on the requests. Blaine Original Message Subject: Public Records Request From: "Sophia Ryan" Date: Mon, April 25, 2016 6:32 pm To: pres@loyno.edu daniel davis@einsteincharterschools.org RWisdom@stonepigman.com blecesne@loyno.edu tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org Sophia B. Ryan 850 S. Clearview Pkwy New Orleans, LA 70123 A 1G 11-11 114/1.11 J, Lk/ 1 Dear Custodian of Records for Einstein Charter Schools, Loyola University School of Law as the custodian of public record emails Blaine Lecesne, Lusher Charter School, Einstein Charter School, and Board of Directors for the Advocates for Arts-Based Education(Lusher School Board): Please produce within three(3)days as required by the Public Record Act, La. Rev. Stat. 44.1, et seq., a copy of each public record in your possession which is responsive to these search terms. Please include any text or written communications, whether stored or maintained in physical format or electronic format on public or private phone or computer devices, or on public servers or private servers between these parties: 1. Charles Grenier or charles grenier@lusherschooLorg to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or BlaMe Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 2. Bonnie Thiel, Bonnie Bowler, Bonnie T1.1Wiffs6()d..oT,or 13.orlushei_acl.:Iool.org to/from Tiffany Lecesne (ti.ffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 3. Jerome White or lerotite lusheool..org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 4. Julie Sanders or anders lusherschool.or to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 5. Rachel Tabak or lusheiIclagisig to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 6. Sara Slaughter or Sara Slaughter@lusherschooLorg to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@ein stei ncharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 7. Geraldine Boesch or Geraldine_Boesch@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 8. Terry Marek or Terry Marek@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 9. Allison Belhnont or Allison Bellmont@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschooLorg)or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 10. Beth Rota or Beth Rota@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 11. Matt Owen or Matt Owen@lusherschooLorg to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 12. Bonnie Greco or Bonn 1u to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschooLorg) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne(jgyno.edu) 13. Larisa Gray or Larisa Gray_gusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschooLorg) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesneggyno.edu) 14. Brad Richard or Brad_Richard@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschool.org) or Blaine Lecesne (blecesne@joyno.edu) 15. Any member, affiliate, agent, or employee of UTNO,UT Lusher, or other union to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherne@lusherschooLorg) or Blaine Lecesne(blecesne@loyno.edu) 16. Mary Prevost or Mary Prevost@lusherschool.org to/from Tiffany Cherrie Lecesne (tiffany cherrie@einsteincharterschools.org and tiffany cherrie@lusherschooLorg)or Blaine Lecesne(blecesneggyno.edu) 17. From or to any of the above parties containing the search term 40union,..UTN0,40 or•UT Lusher anywhere in the email or text All of these documents are public records, wherever stored, they, nevertheless, are public records documents evidencing the conduct of public business. I admonish Loyola University that it is the custodian of Blaine Lecesne.s email records even though Loyola itself is not subject to the Public Records Act. I further ask that all such materials, whether released to me under this public records request or not, be maintained, kept, and preserved by all records custodians of same as litigation should be anticipated and federal and state laws require the preservation of these records when litigation is anticipated. These records may be sent to me at sophia.ryan@gmail.com. If there are any objections, please provide specific arguments, citing legal authority for withholding these public documents, and the appropriate appeal process. Sincerely, Sophia B Ryan You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googkgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onli@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hUps://grpt s.google.com/d/msgidilusher-boardonly/b061e2d8bf3e58a83a0d39332f9d2lcd.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit fMps://gr.pi s.000gle.comidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Iusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googjgjps.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@aoogjggroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit lips:/kiroup,_t_google.com/d/msqidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED16D ACO%40SPE XCH.stonepigma n.com. For more options, visit hilps://group_uoogle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwiSdorn@sto.nepioasan.com Subject: [Lusher] UTL Petition Dote; April 24,2016 at 7:10 PM To: Bickford, Mag robialord@rneWirscheycom Cc: lusher-board-and-administrators@googiegroups.com Hi Mag. When leaving the meeting Saturday, Audra made stated to me that she had sent a revised petition. I looked through my email and could not find any email transmitting that. Will you please forward it? Thank you. Rachel W Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmann L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scIrmoiswitors+unstftotibe@f.gagiggsaips.of)Erk. To post to this group,send email to 1;,,t,orj,,,,, .•••••kdrfliNstrators wrote: I have never "adamantly stated that it is [my] preierence not to have a union." What I have stated is that, hypothetically, in a perfect world, it would be preferable to maintain autonomy assuming fair, reasonable, and healthy workplace conditions. Ours is far from a perferct world and we have a very unhealthy workplace, as confirmed by the meetings with UTL teachers. I have said time and again that I believe there is deep-seeded low morale on both campuses and that we have a teacher retention and satisfaction problem. I do not think I am alone on the Board in that assesment. Had the administration followed Spencer's advice two years ago on how to avoid union activity, we might not be in this position. It is now too late and our choices are much more limited. I made frty preference clear on Saturday given the reality we are facing, and that is to voluntarily recognize UTL. Blaine > Dear Chunlin: > I don't agree that there is any conflict. > The Board , as I understand it anyway, has not decided whether it is in > favor of having a unionized faculty or not. Although five voted to > accept the petition, the reasons given were mostly that the costs were too > great to resist the request for voluntary recognition. We are past that > point now. > Blaine, in pas, has adamantly stated that it is his preference not to > have a union. I don't recall you, Andrea. Carol or Reuben stating one > way or another. I am trying to gather information on my own to make up > my own mind, but do start with a bias against it because of my own > experiences. My hope is that there is a way to star neutral and stiil > create a vehicle for the administrators to voice their positions. > Because the board did not vote about opposing or not opposing > unionization in the election process, there is no board position heie in > conflict with those of the administration. There may be disagreement > between board members but we don't even know that yet. > You may personally have a conflict with the administration because of your > views. But your views are not mine and not the beards. > I want to hear from the administrators when we are discussing these issues > with Meg and see no reason to exclude them from the discussion. I do > not want The executive sessions to serve as a means to air opinions that > differ from the administrators or to make assertions about them, while > precluding their contemporaneous response. At least not in the absence > of compelling reason. > We may agree with them or disagree with them. I don't know. But I > don't think we should be afraid to disagree With them to their face or > afraid to confront. In fact, I believe that is what is most productive > and fair. Discussing opposing views openly and respectively can lead to el-m What is most important to me, is that they be allowed to express their > views at board meetings and in communications with the board. That is > not happening. Their voices are being stifled. And it is damaging > their morale when they most need our encouragement and support. > Finally, with all due respect, Paul and I did not create the "wedge." > Excluding them continuously without explanation and without encouragement > and reassurance, and failing to listen to them on this subject has. > I hope you will reconsider your positions, espiet.ialiy your assumption that > your views are the boards. I hope to talk to Meg tomorrow to try to >find sound resolutions for the problems we are facing. > Sincerely, > Rachel > From: Chunlin Leonhard imailto:le.onhard@loyne.edul > Sent: Sunday, April 24,2016 2:53 PM > To: ebarron@tulane.edu; Wisdom, Rachel W.: > lusher•board•onlyAgoogiertalips.com > Co:'Bickford, Meg' > Subject: Continued Opposition to Board's ability to consult with its > Attorney without administrators' presence > Dear Paul, Rachel and other Board members, > I am writing about the continued o?..?..osirion to my good faith request for > an opportunity for the Board to seek its attorneys advice without the > presence of the administrators. I am deeply troubled and offended by the > continued opposition. I thought that this was a settled issue after the > last round of discussions in front of the administrators on this issue and > repeated statements by the board's attorney about the need to allow the > board to seek legal advir.x3 without the administrators' presence. > Obviously not. To avoid escalating the issue in such a public manner, I > refrained from answering Paul's pointed question for me to explain the > need lot my request during the executive session yesterday. Let me > respond to Paul's question now (for the second time). > My request is necessitated by the unique issues raised by the union > petition and the upcoming election. Our duty as a board member is to act > in the best interest of Lusher. In most situations, the Board and the > administrators do not have conilict oi interest. However, the union > petition, by its very nature, is one of those matters, like CEO > compensation, where the interest of the Board and that of the > administrators do not necessarily coincide. As yesterday's Board vote > indicated, five of us believed the best interest of Lusher is to > voluntarily recognize the union as a collective bargaining unit instead of > spending financial resources, exposing ourselves to unpredictable legal > risks, and being damaged in the eyes of the public. A majority of six > board members believed the best interest of Lusher is not to voluntarily > recognize the union immediately and to have an election to give all > teachers a chance to vote whether or not they wish to be represented by > the union. As it stands now, the board has not taken a position in favor > or against the union In fact, I heard Paul say that repeatedly. > However, Kathy indicated during the executive session the administrators > will oppose the union efforts,"a little more than that" to quote her own > words Therefore, the board's position is not the same as that of the > administrators who are opposed to recognizing the union as a collective > bargaining unit and who will attempt to influence Lusher teachers to vote > against the union. This presents a conflict between the views of the > Board and the views of administrators and creates the need for the Board >to seek legal advice on this issue from its attorney. > As you have heard from our own attorney, it is routine and good practice >for a governing board to meet with its attorney on its own - and also for > the administrators to meet with the b;.)aid`s.t attorney on their own. > Paul and Rachel; I find your opposition difficult to understand because > Rachel is an experienced attorney and Paul is a labor law expert. It > should not have been necessary for me to justify myself again and again. > Your multiple attempts to oppose my request in front of the administrators > are especially damaging because they suggest to the administrators that I > am acting improperly while portraying yourselves as supporting the > administrators. This has already resulted in your driving a wedge between > me and the administrators. > I especially resent this because I have spent incredible amount of time on >this issue despite my full time job and multiple other obligations. I > advocated for a position that I strongly believed (and still do)is in the > best interest of Luther in good faith and based on my best professional > judgment. I am merely trying to fulfill my fiduciary duty as a board > member to act in the best interest of Lusher, even though it was a > difficult decision. I had hoped that fair minded people would be able to > see my position as a good faith difference in opinion in how to best serve > Lusher. My request for an opportunity to consult the board's attorney is > by no means a request to exclude the administrators from all > deliberations. I therefore ask that you stop portraying my request to > secure legal counsel as an attempt to exclude the administrators, so as > not to further damage my relationship with the administrators by setting > me up as the "bad guy." > I am going to assume good faith intentions on your part so far instead of > inferring that you cannot distinguish your fiduciary duty as a board > member and your loyalty to the administrator. I hope that this is the > last time I have to write on this topic and it will be a matter of routine >for the board to consult its attorney on the union issue without the > presence of the administrators if necessary. > By the way, Rachel, your observation that the Board has never had to have > separate attorney discussions for the last decade or so is because this is > the first time that Lusher has faced the union issue. It is no proof that > my request was unusual or improper. My request was perceived as improper > in the eyes of the administrators because you and Paul opposed it multiple > times. > Sincerely, > Chunlin Leonhard > Associate Professor of Law > Director, LL.M. Programs > Loyola University New Orleans College of Law > Tel.(504) 861-5854 > leon iard@loyno.edu > You can access my papers on SSRN at: > littpltsrn.corniauthor.1515756 partid.1615756&corid.43 4.702Lkurk-, > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@dooawoumcom. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onivg000giedrouos.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > IntpsAgroups.googje.comidims,githlus ier-boardan I viFE94FE8E1 F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED 6F.,1 DB%40SPEXC',1-1.stonepig m an.com > For more options, visit httos:/kIrouos.gooctio.00nlid 4-v%!t. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to igftbr-tlagi`d-oni,y.t.tangsg=iiI#32go.g.kgr.glinzat. Iiier•Vo4ird-onN@gw.negm. , To post to this group,send email to ki:, To view this discussion on the web visit titios;ampsgoo0e.of,:adOhnsoldilushor-board-or€10AC.4209. 1.-A91A-4B.?..9-B013arPAMILIEF7N40§.W/Mig','"n For more options, visit Frrn Subjeot; iTak?: To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. . .;.,.-n@VorifpEofrian.corn RE: Continued Opposition to Board's ability to consult with its Attorney without administrators' presence April 24, 2016 at 5:33 PM iLishr-Ociarci-orilygoogiegoupo.c.:()rn Chunlin Leonhard Bickford, Mag Dear Chunlin: I don't agree that there is any conflict. The Board, as I understand it anyway, has not decided whether it is in favor of having a unionized faculty or not. Although five voted to accept the petition, the reasons given were mostly that the costs were too great to resist the request for voluntary recognition. We are past that point now. Blaine, in pas, has adamantly stated that it is his preference not to have a union. I don't recall you, Andrea, Carol or Reuben stating one way or another. I am trying to gather information on my own to make up my own mind, but do start with a bias against it because of my own experiences. My hope is that there is a way to star neutral and still create a vehicle for the administrators to voice their positions. Because the board did not vote about opposing or not opposing unionization in the election process, there is no board position here in conflict with those of the administration. There may be disagreement between board members but we don't even know that yet. You may personally have a conflict with the administration because of your views. But your views are not mine and not the boards. I want to hear from the administrators when we are discussing these issues with Mag and see no reason to exclude them from the discussion. I do not want the executive sessions to serve as a means to air opinions that differ from the administrators or to make assertions about them, while precluding their contemporaneous response. At least not in the absence of compelling reason. We may agree with them or disagree with them. I don't know. But I don't think we should be afraid to disagree with them to their fac:e or afraid to confront. In fact, I believe that is what is most productive and fair. Discussing opposing views openly and respectively can lead to consensus or at least better decision-making. What is most important to me, is that they be allowed to express their views at board meetings and in communications with the board. That is not happening. Their voices are being stifled. And it is damaging their morale when they most need our encouragement and support. Finally, with all clue respect, Paul and I did not create the "wedge." Exc:luding them c:ontinuously without explanation and without encouragement and reassurance, and failing to listen to them on this subject has. I hope you will reconsider your positions, especially your assumption that your views are the boards. I hope to talk to Meg tomorrow to try to find sound resolutions for the problems we are facing. Sincerely, Rachel From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2016 2:53 PM To: pbarron@tulane.edu; Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Cc: 'Bickford, Mag' Subject: Continued Opposition to Board's ability to consult with its Attorney without administrators' presence Dear Paul, Rachel and other Board members, I am writing about the continued opposition to my good faith request for an opportunity for the Board to seek its attorney's advice without the presence of the administrators. I am deeply troubled and offended by the continued opposition. I thought that this was a settled issue after the last round of discussions in front of the administrators on this issue and repeated statements by the board's attorney about the need to allow the board to seek legal advice without the administrators' presence. Obviously not. To avoid escalating the issue in such a public manner, I refrained from answering Paul's pointed question for me to explain the need for my request during the executive session yesterday. Let me respond to Paul's question now (for the second time). My request is necessitated by the unique issues raised by the union petition and the upcoming election. Our duty as a board member is to act in the best interest of Lusher. In most situations, the Board and the administrators do not have conflict of interest. However, the union petition, by its very nature, is one of those matters, like CEO compensation, where the interest of the Board and that of the administrators do not necessarily coincide. As yesterday's Board vote indicated, five of us believed the best interest of Lusher is to voluntarily recognize the union as a collective bargaining unit instead of spending financial resources, exposing ourselves to unpredictable legal risks, and being damaged in the eyes of the public. A majority of six board members believed the best interest of Lusher is not to voluntarily recognize the union immediately and to have an election to give all teachers a chance to vote whether or not they wish to be represented by the union. As it stands now,the board has not taken a position in favor or against the union. In fact, I heard Paul say that repeatedly. However, Kathy indicated during the executive session the administrators will oppose the union efforts, "a little more than that" to quote her own words. Therefore, the board's position is not the same as that of the administrators who are opposed to recognizing the union as a collective bargaining unit and who will attempt to influence Lusher teachers to vote against the union. This presents a conflict between the views of the Board and the views of administrators and creates the need for the Board to seek legal advice on this issue from its attorney. As you have heard from our own attorney, it is routine and good practice for a governing board to meet with its attorney on its own - and also for the administrators to meet with the board's attorney on their own. Paul and Rachel, I find your opposition difficult to understand because Rachel is an experienced attorney and Paul is a labor law expert. It should not have been necessary for me to justify myself again and again. Your multiple attempts to oppose my request in front of the administrators are especially damaging because they suggest to the administrators that I am acting improperly while portraying yourselves as supporting the administrators. This has already resulted in your driving a wedge between me and the administrators. I especially resent this because I have spent incredible amount of time on this issue despite my full time job and multiple other obligations. I advocated for a position that I strongly believed (and still do)is in the best interest of Lusher in good faith and based on my best professional judgment. I am merely trying to fulfill my fiduciary duty as a board member to act in the best interest of Lusher, even though it was a difficult decision. I had hoped that fair minded people would be able to see my position as a good faith difference in opinion in how to best serve Lusher. My request for an opportunity to consult the board's attorney is by no means a request to exclude the administrators from all deliberations. I therefore ask that you stop portraying my request to secure legal counsel as an attempt to exclude the administrators, so as not to further damage my relationship with the administrators by setting me up as the "bad guy." I am going to assume good faith intentions on your part so far instead of inferring that you cannot distinguish your fiduciary duty as a board member and your loyalty to the administrator. I hope that this is the last time I have to write on this topic and it will be a matter of routine for the board to consult its attorney on the union issue without the presence of the administrators if necessary. By the way, Rachel, your observation that the Board has never had to have separate attorney discussions for the last decade or so is because this is the first time that Lusher has faced the union issue. It is no proof that my request was unusual or improper. My request was perceived as improper in the eyes of the administrators because you and Paul opposed it multiple times. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leonhard@loyno,edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: http://ssm,comiauthor=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only.unsubscribe@qcogleciroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to iusher-board-oniyoodegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit httosligroup;:;.w.x)WesamrE dirnsgici usher- )oardoniv/FE94FESE-IFO4F744BCD6D9A5E43M242ED1661DB%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit https://arougmooqie.com/d/optout. From: StMject: Date; To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. fwisdorm§storiopEgmartcom RE: Fwd:[Lusher] Incident at Board Meeting April 24,2016 at 10:53 AM rouberttesguepudeniAl.cc,fri, blecesno@loyno.edu Kathy Riedlinger kathy_riedlinger@lusherwhool.org, lusher-board-and-admirtistrators@googlegrotips.00m, Mag Bickford mbickford@mcglinchey.com Sorry all — never mind .. I had missed it. From: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com [mailtodusher-board-andadministrators@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of reuben.teague@prudential.com Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 8:03 PM To: blecesne@loyno.edu Cc: Kathy Riedlinger; lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com; Mag Bickford Subject: Re:[Lusher] Fwd: Incident at Board Meeting Whatever the facts of the matter may be,two things are clear: 1. There are likely to be more reports as we move forward, and the board is not the right entity to resolve them,though I think keeping us informed is good.Mag, can you advise the administration on how best to deal with these things, keeping in mind: 2. The administration need to be able to maintain order and sanity for the sake of the kids. It can't be that their hands are completely tied with respect to faculty behavior. Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 23, 2016, at 8:44 PM,blecesnea.gyno.edu wrote: > Kathy, > This is not an "incident." This is a one-sided portrayal of an encounter > between two people. Unless you hear the other version of this encounter, > instantaneously accepting one version over the other could be construed as > taking sides. Apart from the pettiness of this complaint, the > administartion needs to stay above these kinds of accusations. There will > be many more on both sides of the issue. It looks bad for the > administration to so quickly(27 minutes)report this without even > verifying its accuracy. > Blaine >> FYI >> Sent from my iPhone >> Begin forwarded message: >>> From: Casey Hurstell >>> Date: April 23, 2016 at 6:50:20 PM CDT >>> To: Kathy Riedlinger >>> Subject: Incident at Board Meeting >>> I am writing to inform you of an incident that occurred between myself > and a teacher, who I later learned to be named Larissa Gray. >>> As I entered the library this morning around 7:40,1 noticed I was the > only person who had arrived who was not wearing a UTL button. There > were >>> about 5-10 people there already spread out, standing up and talking. I > said hello and made my way to the second row. The seat on the aisle was > taken(someone had put their keys on it), so I started to sit down at > the next seat As I was sitting down, Ms. Gray body checked me,using > her hips to push me into another seat. She put her arm around my back, > pressed her hips and legs against my own, and put her face within 2 > inches of mine and said, "There's going to be a lot of us coming." > Shocked and completely at a loss for words at being pushed out ofthe > way so forcefully, all I could manage to say was,"This is weird." > Still >>> shoving her face in my own, she replied, "There's been a lot of weird > things happening lately." >>> My hands were literally shaking. I have never felt so unwelcome or so > unsafe at Lusher in my 5 years here. >>> Ms. Gray finally left the seat next to me once Erica Hahne entered the > room and seemed to be going for the front row. Ms. Gray leapt up and > sprawled herself across the front row. >>> I felt you should be made aware of this incident. If there is anyone > else you feel should also be made aware, please let me know. >>> Best, >>> Casey >» >>>. **************************************************************** > Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic > message may be PRIVILEGED and confidential information intended only > for >>> the use of the individual entity or entities named as recipient or > recipients. If the reader is not the intended recipient, be hereby > notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this >>> communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > communication in error, please notify me immediately by electronic mail > or by telephone and permanently delete this message from your computer > system. Also please note that emails are not encrypted and that > servers >>> have unlimited and direct access to all emails that go through them. > Thank you. » >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Uoogle > Groups >> "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an >> email to lusher-board-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlemapi s.corn. > To post to this group, send email to >> lusher-board-and-administrators@googleoulpi s.corn. >> For more options, visit ht s://oroups.google.comldloptout. > -.> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-and-adrninistrators+unsubscribe@googleoroups.corn. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit 12oroups.google.comldloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardand-administrators-FunsubscribegooglegrsLpi s.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googleoroups.com. For more options, visit httpsilgroups.000gie.comidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@googiggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@qooqlearoups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.qoocile.com/d/optout. From: Subjeet Dete: To: ; Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoi.n...voritipi9.1.ian.c.oill RE: Fwd:[Lusher] Incident at Board Meeting April 24, 2016 at 10:51 AM c çrtrn i ixm, Kiki Huston kikifiLiS;on yahoo.coin Andrea Armstrong ri Kathy Riedlinger rieidialgeir4i; , Blaine Lecesne r-board-a rid-ad m i nisn .o On Apr 24, 2016, at 7:40 AM, huston' via Lusher Charter Board and Administrators wrote: > I would like to be notified of such incidents. > Kiki > Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 23, 2016, at 10:34 PM,Kathy Riedlinger wrote: >> I'm done on this issue. Mag asked me to report these types of incidents. I will continue to do so, but only to her. There are many more. If anyone else wants to know them,I'll share. >> Kathy >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 23, 2016, at 9:41 PM,blecesnegt_yo no.edu wrote: >» >» >>> This is the last thing I'll say on the matter. It has nothing to do with >>> your hiring your niece, nothing whatsoever. So please don't make it about >>> that. It has to do with reporting an unsubstantiated, purported infraction >>> by a UTL member and not disclosing your relationship to the complainant. >>> If all you report are allegations on one side, especially ones as facially >>> suspect as this, that's problematic. Doing so raises a potential ULP. >» >>> Blaine >» >» >>>> Casey is my niece, a talented, well-respected staff member. What are you >>>> implying? >>» >>>> Kathy >>» >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>» >>>>> On Apr 23, 2016, at 8:02 PM,blecesne(c-i),loyno.edu wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Kathy, >>>>> The person reporting this to you appears to be a relative of yours. >>>>> Isn't >>>>> she your niece? If that is the case, it compounds the problem I alluded >>>>> to >>>>> in my previous email. >>>» >>>>> Blaine >>>» >>>» >>>» >>>» >>>>>> FYI >>>>» >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>» • >>>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>» >>>>>>> From: Casey Hurstell >>>>>>> Date: April 23, 2016 at 6:50:20 PM CDT >>>>>>> To: Kathy Riedlinger >>>>>>> Subject: Incident at Board Meeting >>>>>» >>>>>>> I am writing to inform you of an incident that occurred between myself >>>>>>> and a teacher, who I later learned to be named Larissa Gray. >>>>>» >>>>>>> As I entered the library this morning around 7:40,1 noticed I was the >>>>>>> only person who had arrived who was not wearing a UTL button. There >>>>>>> were >>>>>>> about 5-10 people there already spread out, standing up and talking. I >>>>>>> said hello and made my way to the second row. The seat on the aisle >>>>>» was >>>>>>> taken(someone had put their keys on it), so I started to sit down at >>>>>>> the next seat. As I was sitting down, Ms. Gray body checked me, using >>>>>>> her hips to push me into another seat. She put her arm around my back, >>>>>>> pressed her hips and legs against my own,and put her face within 2 >>>>>>> inches of mine and said, "There's going to be a lot of us coming." >>>>>» >>>>>>> Shocked and completely at a loss for words at being pushed out of the >>>>>>> way so forcefully, all I could manage to say was,"This is weird." >>>>>>> Still >>>>>>> shoving her face in my own, she replied, "There's been a lot of weird >>>>>>> things happening lately." >>>>>>> My hands were literally shaking. I have never felt so unwelcome or so >>>>>>> unsafe at Lusher in my 5 years here. >>>>>» >>>>>>> Ms. Gray finally left the seat next to me once Erica Hahne entered the >>>>>>> room and seemed to be going for the front row. Ms. Gray leapt up and >>>>>>> sprawled herself across the front row. >>>>>» >>>>>>> I felt you should be made aware of this incident. If there is anyone >>>>>>> else you feel should also be made aware, please let me know. >>>>>» >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> Casey >>>>>» >>>>>» ->>>>>» >>>>>>> **************************************************************** >>>>>>> Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic >>>>>>> message may be PRIVILEGED and confidential information intended only >>>»» for >>>>>>> the use of the individual entity or entities named as recinient or >>>>>>> >>>>>>> recipients. If the reader is not the intended recipient, be hereby >>>>>>> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy ofthis >>>>>>> communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >>>>>>> communication in error, please notify me immediately by electronic >>>>>» mail >>>>>>> or by telephone and permanently delete this message from your computer >>>>>>> system. Also please note that emails are not encrypted and that >>>>>>> servers >>>>>>> have unlimited and direct access to all emails that go through them. >>>>>>> Thank you. >>>>» >>>>» ->>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups >>>>>> "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>» an >>>>>> email to lusher-board-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlegroups corn >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>> lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlegoups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit 1. groups.google.coin/d/optout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlegoups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googkgroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.corn/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardand-administrators+unsubscribe@googkgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googkgroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. IU LIIISUUSCilue HUM MIS group aria stop receiving ern-ails itorn it, sena an email to iusner-ouaro-arioadministrators+unsubscribe@qoogiggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googiggroups.com. For more options, visit bitps://groups.gg.ggle.com/d/optout. From: Subjeot; Date; To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdorn&vortapiorttart.opth Re: Fwd:[Lusher] Incident at Board Meeting April 24,2016 at 7:18 AM Kathy Riedlinger kathyfiediingef blecesne wrote: I'm done on this issue. Mag asked me to report these types of incidents. I will continue to de so, but only to her. There are many more. If anyone else wants to know them, share. Kathy Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 23,2016, at 9:41 PM biecesne@loyno.edu wrote: > This is the last thing I'll say on the matter. It has nothing to do with > your hiring your niece, nothing whatsoever. $o please don't make it about >that. It has to do with reporting an unsubstantiated, purported infraction > by a irn. member and not disclosing your relationship to the complainant. > If all you report are allegations on one side, especially ones as facially > suspect as this, that's problematic. Doing so raises a potential ULP. > Blaine ▪ >> Casey is my niece, a talented, well-respected staff member. What are you » implying? » Kathy » Sent from my iPhone >» On Apr 23,2016, at 8:02 PM, le. esi ec§ eyno.ettu wrote: >>> >» Kathy, >» The person reporting this to you appears to be a relative of yours. >» Isn't ;-..» she your niece? If that is the case, it compounds the problem i alluded >» to >» in my previous email. >>> >» Blaine >» >» >>> >>> »» FYI >>» »» Sent from my iPhone >>» >»> Begin forwarded message: >>» >»» From: Casey Hurstell >»» Date: April 23, 2016 at 6:50:20 PM CDT >»» To: Kathy Riedlinger >>>» Subject: Incident at Board Meeting >>>» >»» I am writing to inform you of an incident that occurred between myself >»» and a teacher, who I later learned to be named Larissa Gray. >>>» Act eantorail tiles lihrorts thk rrnmintt ::$re‘tinet 7.4n Irsestielbil I 'gam ilta >»» only person who had arrived who was not wearing a UTL button. There >>>» were »»> about 5-10 people there already spread out, standing up and talking. I >»» said hello and made my way to the second row. The seat on the aisle >>>» was >»» taken (someone had put their keys on it), so I started to sit down at >»» the next seat. As I was sitting down, Ms. Gray body checked me, using >»» her hips to pustt me into another seat. She put her arm around rIly back, >»» pressed her hips and legs against my own, and put her face within 2 >»>> inches of mine and said,"There's going to be a lot of us coming." >>>» >»» Shocked and completely at a loss for words at being pushed out of the >>>» way so forcefully, all I could manage to say was,"This is weird." >»» Still >»» shoving her face in my own, she replied,"There's been a lot of weird >»» things happening lately." >>>» >»» My hands were literally shaking. I have never felt so unwelcome or so >»» unsafe at Lusher in my 5 years here. >>>» >»» Ms. Gray finally left the seat next to me once Erica Hahne entered the >»» room and seemed to be going for the front row. Ms. Gray leapt up and >>>» sprawled herself across the front row. >>>» >»» I felt you should be made aware of this incident. If there is anyone >»» else you feel should also be made aware, piease let me ielow. >>>» >»» Best, >»» Casey >>>» >>>» >>>» >»» Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic >»» message may be PRIVILEGED and confidentiai information intended only >>>» for >>>» the use of the individual entity or entities named as recipient or >»» recipients If the reader is not the intended recipient, be hereby >»» notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this >»» communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >»» communication in error, please notify me immediately by electronic >»» maii >»» or by telephone and permanently delete this message from your computer >»» system. Also please note that emails are not encrypted and that >»» servers >»» have unlimited and direct access to all emails that go through them. >»» Thank you. >>» >>» -»» You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google »» Groups >»> "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. »» To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving entails from it, send >>» an »» email to lushe;•••board-and•adminiszrators+unsubscribe@googloroubs.com. >>» To post to this gfoup, send emaii to »» lusher-hoard-and-adiTiini.3trators000lups.00m. >»> For more options, visit ritips://groupz.000ciie.comidioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups"Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to iusner-board-and• adminitie .f.)e,'+iA,ISEJt)scrib ggentAertroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-Ward-and-administrators@goocgmroups.com. For more options, visit agps:figroups.googie.comidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher. sdiiiinistmtorS+wisuh::0.ibee,fMgAtju," .ips•oorri. To post to this group,send email to jusbeLbpArg.:mg:adr&„igLatafaggggiNrAtArgAgin. gq,cale.comkuro/2/Qmt For more options, visit From: Subject: Date: To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdorn@stonepionsen.com RE:[Lusher] Fear of intimidation April 24, 2016 at 10:52 AM biecerle.:c.)yrlo.eciti, n-10jokford@rricglinchay.00m lusher-boad-..rd.:adr14 ,;,trator.ssiggooglegroups,com HI Blaine. Who is that email you forwarded from? it has no sender information. I received a lovely one from Jerome White addressed to all the board. From: lusher-board-and-administrators©googlegroups.com [mailtolusher-board-andadministrators©googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne©loyno.edu Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2016 9:47 AM To: mbickford©mcglinchey.com Cc: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com Subject: [Lusher] Fear of intimidation Mag, I, along with those Board members who voted to recognize UTL,have started receiving emails from a few UTL members thanking us for our support. That is an expected and normal response to yesterday's meeting. I only mention it in the interest offull disclosure and so that these innocent thank you's are not misconstrued given the false rumors of pre-existing Board support that have been circulating. The other reason I mention it is because at least one of these emails echoes a sentiment that was expressed by one of yesterday's speakers regarding fear of intimidation if we have an election. Below is the verbatim text of one such email I received from a UTL teacher. I do not know if the other pro-recognition Board members received it as well. I left the sender's name offfor obvious reasons. Blaine "We knew the path wouldn't be easy. With fear appearing to be the only thing preventing some of our colleagues from getting on board with United Teachers of Lusher, we knew the numbers would not accurately reflect how much a majority offaculty wants a little more voice,transparency, and security. I hope that the Lusher teachers who felt compelled to stay quiet through all this will feel free to vote with their true desires in a few weeks. However I do fear that those with power will fmd ways to influence the outcome(Not like this concern is new to democracy). Regardless,I personally thank you for being such a strong supporter of IT,,e..nfl CT ev.4- 4-1,even e,•-et. ^4,ewe. T,A," ....news"vim;.-ses 4, -% resb -on eves A aLtu importance of what we're doing will help motivate us to continue pushing for a stronger Lusher." ULU C11tn.1Z. I:N.11U W1116 LIAM UICIC dIV ULLIZIJWIIU 1CLA)61114C LUC V &MC Sincerely, You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardand-administrators+unsubscribe@gg_ggkgrsgps.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-adtninistrators@goodtgriapi s.com. For more options, visit litgAligrot_amgsgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribeeclooalegmsi s.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@doodlegroups.com. For more options, visit ht_lps://ciroups.doodle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdornz&5.1.o,riepEcxrian.coni Subject Re:[Lusher] REvised April 23 AABE special meeting agenda.doc Date: April 22, 2016 at 3:40 AM To oups.corn Hi Pat. Just a reminder to please post the notice ASAP and that it must be posted before 9 am this morning. Thanks! Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2016, at 3:52 PM, Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: Pat — this is okay to post. Thank you! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to i.$i'ver•to,w;d:.„Kid:: To post to this group, send email to iciher-bro-qx, .:-administratore wrote: It is fine with me. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2016, at 2:14 PM, Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: Does anyone object? I don't mean to be a pest but the agenda has to be finalized before the notice is posted. The notice must be posted before 9 am tomorrow. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 11:12 AM To: 'Bickford, Mag' Cc: Alysia Loshbaugh; lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION We certainly may if no board member opposes doing so. If anyone does, I will have to check the Bylaws to see. If we do, we have to be extra careful about the session. We do not want to give the impression we are using it deliberate. We have to deliberate in open session. From: lusher-board-onlyggooglegroups.com [mailtodusher-boardonlyggooglegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bickford, Mag Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 9:59 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Alysia Loshbaugh; lusher-board-onlyffgoogroups.com Subject: Re: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION May we schedule an executive session after comments? Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2016, at 9:38 AM,Wisdom, Rachel W wrote: ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION I talked with Mag and Blaine about this. Mag says we shouldn't limit "per side" because of ULP issues, but we can limit the time for each speaker and require them to submit a card in advance to speak. Based on input from Blaine and Mag, here is what I propose: When we start the meeting we announce that all who want to speak must full out a card and, due to the number of people, each person will get 2 minutes or I minute to speak. We require that that all cards must be submitted by 9:30, and that the allotted time is per person and cannot be ceded from one person to another. We announce that the only topic for comment is responding to the UTL petition. If any speaker tries to use the time to attack or complain about any individual, we interrupt and state that we will not allow that. We will have to ask administration to have a person or persons there to assist with the cards and do the time-keeping. Is this plan okay with you all? If so, should we do 2 minutes or 1? Does anyone want to add or change anything proposed? From: lusher-board-onlyffgooglegroups.com [mailtodusher-boardonly_gg_mlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:17 PM To: lusher-board-onlyagooglegroups.com Subject: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? ? Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers (like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period oftime? What is the "reasonable time period"? Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as Pm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardszlly+unsubscribe@g(x)gkgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardszlly_@gsmgkgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardA A/ nr)4..X% TA T1 T TT...A OTT 12pupt....tv/oLty-ry VI/ ;yew 1-1 yv I um;look .liswort- il mail.corn. For more options, visit httimilgrsumsgslgle.comrdroptout,. OsLvvryn www.mcgjinchey.com i www.CafaLawBlog corn McGiinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabwna, Florida, Louisiana: Mississippi: New York, Ohio, Texas: and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in California. Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client privileged or oonfidential information. it is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-556-1200 and return the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor. BM Poydres Street, New Orleans, IA, 701.50 via the United States Postal Service. We take steps to remove matadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. if you receive an attachment containing metadata: please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. See MeGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy ltp://WWW.mcglinchey.comidisclaimerf You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmgitg. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardpnly_@gmglegunips.COM. To view this discussion on the web visit h1tpilLgtoups.gaQg1e.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/5CB8A2E6-D4F04076-8D2A-09B28487CD70/040mcglinehey.com. For more options, visit Lapa21.groupasmgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmglegiu. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardQnly_@gmglegrQups.COM. To view this discussion on the web visit jatumiZgtolps,gQQ(Ile comIlmsgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1 F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED16349B%40SPEX • stonepigrnan.corn. For more options, visit latipsligroupaxglosie.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegrsaps.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googkgr_s_liw. s.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hftwaroups.google.comfd/m stzid usherboard-on1y/243487C5-2E98-4837-A950-C6A25BA37C7F%40tulane.edu. For more ontions. visit httos://arouns.2oogle.com/d/ontout. Una-mgr} From: Sut.A.nt MIN?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoill...storiopi9.1.ian...oill RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION April 21, 2016 at 2:59 PM rc;hyn:, Alysia Loshbaugh mcs.thbcaugh@;'grilta.com Bickford, Mag mc.d Barron, Paul L lo:>her•board•or3Iy0,googlocirot,ip.00m, Riedlinger, Kathy Kathy...RiedlingerPitiilef,hooi.ofg Fine with me, Mag. I don't see any attachment to your email. From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mcglinchey.com] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 2:53 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; 'Alysia Loshbaugh' Cc: Barron, Paul L; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; Riedlinger, Kathy Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION On further reflection, I think we should avoid any accusations of bias by using a member of administration, teacher, parent or other person. I would suggest that we take Alysia up on her offer to do it. Also, attached please find a summary of recommended behaviors for now through bargaining. This may be shared with the senior management team but reinforce that they may not give this document to anyone else under any circumstances whatsoever. Magdalen Blessey Bickford direct: (504)596-2726 (5(4)910-6944 fax: mbickfordftmcglinchey.com office: 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 New Orleans, LA 70130 SFrAF poRD ' IA°I vcard www.mcglinchey.com I www.cafalawbloq,com From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdomastonepigman.com] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 1:35 PM To: 'Alysia Loshbaugh'; Bickford, Mag Cc: Barron, Paul L; lusher-board-onlyffgazlegroups.com; Riedlinger, Kathy Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION I think that a school staff person should receive the cards and make sure to keep them in the order received. If that person is comfortable with reading the rules for proceeding, I would prefer that that person do it. From: lusher-board-only_ggooglegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegmps.com] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 12:09 PM To: bicktora, mag Cc: Barron, Paul L; Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-onlyikgmkgmozarz Riedlinger, Kathy Subject: Re: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION Does it need to be a member of the Board? If so, I'm happy to volunteer. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2016, at 11:54 AM,Bickford, Mag wrote: I agree with Paul on both. I would suggest the individual announce but who will the individual be? Magdalen Blessey Bickford direct: fax: email: office: (504) 596..2726 (504)910-6944 mbickford@mailinchey.com 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 New Orleans, LA 70130 Er.P bo vcard I www.mcglinchey.com I www.cafalawhloq.com From: Barron, Paul L [mailto:obarrontulane.edul Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 10:37 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; 'Alysia Loshbaugh'; lusher-boardonly@gooakgroups.com• Bickford, Mag Cc: Riedlinger, Kathy Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION Folks: 1 have a few thoughts regarding the process on Saturday. The person who will receive the cards should be very visible to everyone there. -I. think that people who want to speak should be allowed to do so in the order in which the cards are received. I do not know whether the people's names should be called out by that individual or by Blaine. I think Mae should tell us what she thinks about that. As to Rachel's question about time, I favor two minutes. While it would incrence the lenoth of the meeting it SPPITIN hard to me for a person to say their name, on which side they are on if any and say what they want to say. I think that cannot be done in one minute. Paul Pea &nog. The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862.-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: lusher-board-only@googiwoups.com [mailtodusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 9:39 AM To:'Alysia Loshbaugh' ; lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com;'Bickford, Mag' Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION I talked with Mag and Blaine about this. Mag says we shouldn't limit "per side" because of ULP issues, but we can limit the time for each speaker and require them to submit a card in advance to speak. Based on input from Blaine and Mag, here is what I propose: When we start the meeting we announce that all who want to speak must full out a card and, due to the number of people, each person will get 2 minutes orl minute to speak. We require that that all cards must be submitted by 9:30, and that the allotted time is per person and cannot be ceded from one person to another. We announce that the only topic for comment is responding to the UTL petition. If any speaker tries to use the time to attack or complain about any individual, we interrupt and state that we will not allow that. We will have to ask administration to have a person or persons there to assist with the cards and do the time-keeping. Is this plan okay with you all? If so, should we do 2 minutes or 1? Does anyone want to add or change anything proposed? From: lusher-board-onlyAgagglegroups.com [mailto:lusher-boardonlyff_googkgroun] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:17 PM To: lusher-board-only_@_gggaglamilo&gm Subject: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers(like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period oftime? What is the "reasonable time period"? Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonly@gizogl_tgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit httplilsroup&gp.Qg1e.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/CA%2B4yWd5CTxpeufHW1UubcjoBo4g 8HOsLvvryU6prdH7oEuw%40mail.gmail.corn. For more options, visit httpilistolaszlQgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googleg.roups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonly@goagLtgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit httplilsroup&gpQg1e.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED1627E6%40SPE XCH,stonepigman.corn. For more options, visit bitpListimaszo_Qgle.com/d/optout. www.mcctinchey.com www.CafaLawBlog.com MeGlinchey Stafford. PLLC Alabama; Florido, Louisiana; Mississippi; New York, Ohio, Texas; and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in California, Conildentiality Statement. This e.asail may contain attorney cent privileged or c.,onfideritial infoanation. it is for the soie use of the intended redpient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, immediateiy notify us by telephone at 504-5864200 and return the originai message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postai Service. We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadata should be presumed inadve.aent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a replacement wit be provided. See McGilrichey Stafford Diw:lairnerPrEvacy Policy littp://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-only+unsubscribe@gg_Qglegmps.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gg_ggiggran. To view this discussion on the web visit ht_Imilsroupaxaggle.com/d/msgid/1usher-boardonly/97451322-663F-417B-997E-A C7D DC28CC15%40gmail.com. For more options, visit litwAill.grsamg000le.com/d/optout From: Sut.A.nt MIN?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoi.n...voritipi9.1.ian...oill RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION April 21, 2016 at 2:14 PM Bickford, Mag mbicl,rioffinloglinchey.com Alysia Loshbaugh aloshbaugh@gpmii.00m, 1i,K,Ziler-bmrd-coiy(§googiegroup6.c0r0 Does anyone object? I don't mean to be a pest but the agenda has to be finalized before the notice is posted. The notice must be posted before 9 am tomorrow. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 11:12 AM To:'Bickford, Mag' Cc: Alysia Loshbaugh; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION We certainly may if no board member opposes doing so. If anyone does, I will have to check the Bylaws to see. If we do, we have to be extra careful about the session. We do not want to give the impression we are using it deliberate. We have to deliberate in open session. From: lusher-board-only_@googkgroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only_@_gaQgkgin On Behalf Of Bickford, Mag Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 9:59 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Alysia Loshbaugh; lusher-board-only_@_gmglagrups.com Subject: Re: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION May we schedule an executive session after comments? Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2016, at 9:38 AM,Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION I talked with Mag and Blaine about this. Mag says we shouldn't limit "per side" because of ULP issues, but we can limit the time for each speaker and require them to submit a card in advance to speak. Based on input from Blaine and Mag, here is what I propose: When we start the meeting we announce that all who want to speak must full out a card and,due to the number of people, each person will get 2 minutes or I minute to speak. We require that that all cards must be submitted by 9:30, and that the allotted time is per person and cannot be ceded from one person to another. We announce that the only topic for comment is responding to the UTL petition. If any speaker tries to use the time to attack or complain about any individual, we interrupt and state that we will not allow that. We will have to ask administration to have a person or persons there to assist with the cards and do the time-keeping. Is this plan okay with you all? If so, should we do 2 minutes or 1? Does anyone want to add or change anything proposed? From: lusher-board-onlyff_gg_Qglegroups.com [mailtolusher-board-onlyff_googleoroups.corn] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:17 PM To: lusher-board-onlyff_mglegroups.com Subject: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? ? Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers(like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period oftime? What is the "reasonable time period"? Do we limit the number of people who can speak,like 10 people on the prounion side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. to unsubscribe trom this group and stop receivmg mans trom it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe®googLegr_oups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_®googLegr_oups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit litpa-ligtoilimgo_ogle.com/d/msgidllusherboard-only/CA%2B4yWd5CTxpeufHW1U ubcjoBo4g%/8HOsLvvryU6prdH7oEuw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit thipaltgLoialgg_ogle.comid/optout, www.mcolinchey.com www.CafaLawBloci.com McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC n Aiabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, P in California Confidentiality Statement: This email may oontain attorne.y.clie.nt privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). if you have received this transmission in error, imine.diate.ly nc.,,tify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the ornal tT16$6.. -iga to us at McGlinohey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA, 70130 via the United States Postai Seivif.:e. We take steps to remove rnetadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining matadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. if you receive an attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy flp://w.mcqnchey.com/disclaimer/ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe®glagjggr. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googkgr. To view this discussion on the web visit hais://groupAsoogle.comid/msgiclilusher-boardonly/5CB8A2E6-D4F0-4076-8D2A-09B28487CD7E%40mcglinchey.com. For more options, visit hDs://grot_augggle.com/d/optout. From: Subjeot; Dek?: To: Cv; Wisdom, Rachel W. . RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION April 21, 2016 at 1:35 PM Alysia Loshbaugh aio$3nboughgrnaiftom, Bickford, Mag n-a**...kford.&rncOnoiwy.onm Barron, Paul L pnarron@ttilane.edu, Riedlinger, Kathy wrote: I agree with Paul on both. I would suggest the individual announce but who will the individual be? Magdalen Blessey Bickford direct: fax: email: office: (504)596.2726 (SO4' 910-6944 mbickfordOmcglinchey.com 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 I New Orleans, LA 70130 0 bio vcard www.mcglinchey.com www.cafalawbloo.com From: Barron, Paul L [mailtox•barron(atulane.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 10:37 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; 'Alysia Loshbaugh'; lusher-board-onlygmglagrups.com; Bickford, Mag Cc: Riedlinger, Kathy Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION Folks: I have a few thoughts regarding the process on Saturday. The person who will receive the cards should be very visible to everyone there. I think that people who want to speak should be allowed to do so in the order in which the cards are received. I do not know whether the people's names should be called out by that individual or by Blaine. I think Mag should tell us what she thinks about that. As to Rachel's question about time, I favor two minutes. While it would increase the length of the meeting, it seems hard to me for a person to say their name, on which side they are on if any and say what they want to say. I think that cannot be done in one minute. Paul Pad Smoot The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-boardonlyffgooglegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 9:39 AM To:'Alysia Loshbaughr ; lusher-boardonlyAgooglegroups.com;'Bickford, Mag Subject: RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION I talked with Mag and Blaine about this. Mag says we shouldn't limit "per side" because of ULP issues, but we can limit the time for each speaker and require them to submit a card in advance to speak. uasect on input trom Waffle and mag, nere is wnat I propose: When we start the meeting we announce that all who want to speak must full out a card and, due to the number of people, each person will get 2 minutes or I minute to speak. We require that that all cards must be submitted by 9:30, and that the allotted time is per person and cannot be ceded from one person to another. We announce that the only topic for comment is responding to the LITL petition. If any speaker tries to use the time to attack or complain about any individual, we interrupt and state that we will not allow that. We will have to ask administration to have a person or persons there to assist with the cards and do the time-keeping. Is this plan okay with you all? If so, should we do 2 minutes or 1? Does anyone want to add or change anything proposed? From: lusher-board-only_@goockgroups.com [mailto:lusher-boardonly_@goodlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:17 PM To: lusher-board-onlagooglegroups.com Subject: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers(like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period of time? What is the "reasonable time period"? Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue (though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an corn. email to To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@mgkgron. To view this discussion on the web visit 11_0_xoogle.com/d/msgidilusher-boardp_rly/CA%2B4yWd5CTxpeufHW1UubcjoBo4g%/8HOsLvvryprdH7oEuw%40mail.gmail.corn. For more options, visit https://gcsumgoogle com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gagglegrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gmgkgrn. To view this discussion on the web visit ht_tasrmpi,google.com/dimsgidilusher-boardoly1 /FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED1627E6%40SPEXCH.st ote.p.i.gman.corn. For more options, visit https://groz_m&google.com/d/optout. www.mcglinchey.com vAvvi.CafaLawBlog.com McGI ncrey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Fie,M(la, Louisiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and svAdashington DC and McGI ncney Stafford, LLP in California. Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client privileged or confidential information, It is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). if you have received this transmission in error. immediately notify us by telephone at 504.580. 1200 and return the original message to us at MoGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Pcyclras Street, New Orleans, LA: 70130 via the United Slates Postal Service. We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and< should not be viewed or used without our express permission. if you receive an attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. See rvicGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy http://www.mailinchey.com/disclaimed You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardaily+unsubscribe@gimglgsumpamm. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gogkgraups.cotn. To view this discussion on the web visit littgal1gammg,mg1e.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonlv/97451322-663F-417B-997E-AC7DDC28CC15%40gmail.coin.. F01: more optiens, visit Wisdom, Rachel W. . RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION OW:.e: April 21, 2016 at 11:11 AM To: Bickford, Mag Cv; Alysia Loshbaugh lustier-hoard-oniy@googiegroups.com From: Subjeot; We certainly may if no board member opposes doing so. If anyone does, I will have to check the Bylaws to see. If we do, we have to be extra careful about the session. We do not want to give the impression we are using it deliberate. We have to deliberate in open session. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bickford, Mag Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 9:59 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Alysia Loshbaugh; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION May we schedule an executive session after comments? Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2016, at 9:38 AM,Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION I talked with Mag and Blaine about this. Mag says we shouldn't limit "per side" because of ULP issues, but we can limit the time for each speaker and require them to submit a card in advance to speak. Based on input from Blaine and Mag, here is what I propose: When we start the meeting we announce that all who want to speak must full out a card and, due to the number of people, each person will get 2 minutes or 1 minute to speak. We require that that all cards must be submitted by 9:30, and that the allotted time is per person and cannot be ceded from one person to another We announce that the only topic for comment is responding to the UTL. petition. If any speaker tries to use the time to attack or complain about any individual, we interrupt and state that we will not allow that. We will have to ask administration to have a person or persons there to assist with the cards and do the time-keeping. Is this plan okay with you all? If so, should we do 2 minutes or 1? Does anyone want to add or change anything proposed? From: lusher-board-only(agooglearoups.com [mailto: usher-board-onlyffgooglegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:17 PM To: usher-board-onlyff_googlegroups.com Subject: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? ? Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers (like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period of time? What is the "reasonable time period"? Do we limit the number of people who can speak,like 10 people on the prounion side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlsgr. To view this discussion on the web visit https://grot_algoogle.comidimsgiclAusherboard-only/CA%2B4yWd5CTxpeufFIW 1 UubcjoBo4g0y8H OsLvvryU6prd H 7oEuw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit hOs://grs:Lpu s.gas) le.corn/d/optout. www.mcglinchey.com www.CafaLawBlog.com McGlinchey Stafiord, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio: Texas, and Washington DC and MoGiinchey Stafford, LLP in California. Conf dentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-cent privileged or confidential information. ff is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s), if you have received this transmission n error; immediate y notify us by telephone at 504-S86-1200 and return the original me.ssegs to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New Orle.ans, LA, 70130 via the United States Pastel Service. We take steps to remove metadela in attachments sent by email. and any remaining rnetadata sncuid be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. if you receive an attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a replacement wilt be provieloci. See McGiinthey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Po/icy Itp://www.mcglinchey.comidisclaimer/ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gaIglegaws.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit haps://groups.google.com/dim sgid/lusher-boardonly/5CB8A2E6-D4F0-4076-8D2A-09B28487CD7E%40mcglinchey.com. For more options, visit https://groupLgoogle.com/d/optout. From: Sut.A.nt MIN?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoi.n...voritipi9.1.ian...oill RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting -- ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION April 21, 2016 at 9:38 AM ug m ;J;.'iimr-board-oniy@:.:vc.Niegrouin.corfl, Bickford, Mag hay. Alysia Loshbaugh io ATTORNEY -CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION talked with Mag and Blaine about this. Mag says we shouldn't limit "per side" because of ULP issues, but we can limit the time for each speaker and require them to submit. a card in advance to speak. Based on input from Blaine and Mag„ here is what I propose: When we start the meeting we announce that all who want to speak must full out a card and, due to the number of people, each person will get 2 minutes or I minute to speak. We require that that all cards must be submitted by 9:30, and that the allotted time is per person and cannot be ceded from one person to another. We announce that the only topic for comment is responding to the UTL petition. If any speaker tries to use the time to attack or complain about any individual, we interrupt and state that we will not allow that. We will have to ask administration to have a person or persons there to assist with the cards and do the time-keeping. Is this plan okay with you all? If so, should we do 2 minutes or 1? Does anyone want to add or change anything proposed? From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:17 PM To: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? • Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers (like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? • Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period of time? What is the "reasonable time period"? • Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardDay+unsubscribe@gmgLeamilps.com . To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_.@gmglggraups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hisgsjigriagitsmgle corn/dim gid/lusher-boardQay/CA%2B4yWd5CTx,peufH W 1 I. Jubcjaaa4gcb,f8HQsLyyLyllf2prdfl7oFuw9/040mail.omail.com. For more options, visit atips://gEQup&omale.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Jusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gggglegmusam. To post to this group, send email to Jusher-board-only@gogegmmom. To view this discussion on the web visit iltimllgisumaQsagle.comid/msgidAusher-boardgnly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED1627E6%40SPEXCH.stonepignigamn. For more options, visit litipaSgrwmggs2g1e.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. i.s.:ci.ofn::':!..torif.pEw'ian.c.;oril FW:[Lusher] Emailing: April 23 AABE special meeting agenda.doc °ate: April 21, 2016 at 12:50 PM Pat: Please stand by for posting. We may be amending the agenda to include an executive session. Original Message From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 9:45 AM To: lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com Subject: Emailing: April 23 AABE special meeting agenda.doc Here is a revised Notice with agenda for the meeting Saturday. Please note that Room 300 is designated and the meeting time is 9 rather than 10. VVill room 300 be available? Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: April 23 AABE special meeting agenda.doc Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . s.,;.,.ntorifpEwIan.corn ',-s.,:i.thject: [Lusher] Emailing: April 23 AABE special meeting agenda.doc °ate: April 20, 2016 at 9:44 AM Here is a revised Notice with agenda for the meeting Saturday. Please note that Room 300 is designated and the meeting time is 9 rather than 10. Will room 300 be available? Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: April 23 AABE special meeting agenda.doc Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. April 23 AABE special meeting agenda.doc mm Ruchel w. RE Oueslions re Public Comment Period at upeemmg Meemng April 21' 2015 a| a 02 AM in Bickierd, Mug 0e Alysia Lostibaugri Sure That's my cell BTW, Tracie Washington somehow obtained my cell phone number 1051 week and sent me a text. The (ex! wasn't mean or threaterilrig. And, although we are not friends, we have many friends in common. So its quite possibly meaningless that she somehow obtained it. But it bothers me. it also really bothers me that UTL gave out my home address. Bryant. Camille a. mm a sw- me' Bicktord, Mag Sent. Thursday, April 21, 2016 7:56 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Alysia Lushbaugh; Bryant, Camille Subject: . Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting May I call you about 8 30'7 At City Hall from 9-11 What number should I use'7 Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 10.05 PM, Wisdom, Rachel ggm> wrote Hi Mag. Please call me in the am about. this Thanks Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 9:22 PM, Bickford, Mag wrote I agree there needs to be options to limit, Let me look at some Options. Sent. from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 3 17 PM, Alysia Loshbaugh wrote Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, 1 have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as have no experience with something of this nature Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled'7 - Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers (like at a deli/7") beforehand so we have an order of who will speak'.7 I Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable penoct ot time? Wtiat is the "reasonable time period"? • Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardpigy+unsubscribe@gp_u_cg) s.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardpigy_@gg_ggls.groucsm. To view this discussion on the web visit hUmilgr_Qups.google.com/d/msgicl/lusher-boardgly/CA%2B4yWd5CTxpeufHW1UubcjasAgW8HOsLvvryjI§_prdH7oEuw%40mail.gmail.corn. For more options, visit Itt_V_Ligrot_ go_Qgle.com/d/optout. www.mcalincheymin www.Cafa Law6log.com fvloGlinchey Stafford, PLLC iri Alabama, Florida, Lou.Nlississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and ik,goGlinchey Stafford,"P in Caiilbrnia. Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attomay-client privileged or confidentiai information. it is for the sole use ofthe intended recipient(s). if you have received this transmission in -error, immediateiy notify us by teiephone at W4-586-1200 and return the original message to us at MoGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor:801 Poydras Stmet, New Oriaarts, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Seivioa. ‘Ale take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining me data should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. if you receivs an attachrnent mntaining metadata. please notify the sender immediately and a repi•acemeni will be provided. See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy latpt ://vvww.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving em ails from it, send an email to jusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmglegiu. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardglay_@gQ.(1)1tgasips.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hLLgtuzggle.com/d!msgidt1usher-board-on1y/S9A9892D-F43A4C3C-A 12D-D28E81CC4DC7%40mcglinch Cy.COM. For more options, visit https://groupisaosle,corn 'd/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Jusher-board-onlyi-unsubscribeegoogjeg. To post to this group,send email to Jusher-board-only@googlegmagm. To view this discussion on the web visit taluSgmumggole.com/d/msgjdAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F74413CD609A5E438A242ED16103B%40$PEXCH.stonepiaman.com. For more options, visit blips://groupsmoodie.com/d/o1201. From: Subject: Dote; To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisclorn@stonopioasan.com RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting April 21,2016 at 7:56 AM Bickford, Mag robic*imiernoarsciloycm, bieoesneloym.:.eciu retten.teague@prudentialoom, Alysia Loshbaugh aloshbaughegmaii.00rn, lusher-board-onlyegooglegrotips.00m, Bryant, Camille obryantOrdcgiinchey.com Mag — I do not understand your email. What are you referencing? From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mcglinchey.com] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 7:54 AM To: blecesne©loyno.edu Cc: reuben.teague©prudential.com; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Alysia Loshbaugh; lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com; Bryant, Camille Subject: Re: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting I got a call last night from Audra. Now that PTSA have an email announcement on website with server access. I said no,of course. It is routine for parent organization to have school address and this does not mean we facilitated. Camille is going to look for opinions today but I expect ULP will be filed. Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 21, 2016, at 7:50 AM,"blecesnegono.edu" wrote: > None of it is accurate. The meeting was scheduled in strict compliance > with our bylaws. The letter simply references our bylaws but does not say > how they were not followed. Even more troubling is that we have a parent > raising this issue purporting to do so under the auspices of the PTSA. > Blaine >> Rachel>> >> Any thoughts on the ptsa letter regarding the meeting? I'm stumped as to >> whether any of it is accurate. >> Best, >> Reuben >> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Apr 20, 2016, at 11:11 PM,Wisdom, Rachel W >>> wrote: >» >>> Hi Mag. Please call me in the am about this. Thanks. >» >>> Sent from my iPhone >» >>> On Apr 20, 2016, at 9:22 PM,Bickford, Mag >>> wrote: >» >>>> I agree there needs to be options to limit. Let me look at some >>>> options. >>» >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>» >>>> On Apr 20, 2016, at 8:17 PM,Alysia Loshbaugh >>>> wrote: >>» >>>>> Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, >>>>> I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the >>>>> upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this >>>>> nature. >>>» >>>>> Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? >>>>> Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers(like at a >>>>> deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? >>>>> Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a >>>>> reasonable period oftime? What is the "reasonable time period"? >>>>> Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the >>>>> pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the >>>>> City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and >>>>> that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue >>>>>(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) >>>» >>>>> I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong >>>>> way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to >>>>> keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent >>>>> chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks >>>>> will want to speak about this issue. >>>» >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Alysia >>>» >>>» >>>» >>>» ->>>>> "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good >>>>> example." >>>>> --Mark Twain >>>» ->>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe(ajgoogIggislips.com. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>> lusher-board-only_@gmglsgrsipi s.corn. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>12=5://grot_Lp.,Igoogle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/CA%2B4yWd5CTxpeufHW1UubcjoBo4gW8HOsLyvryiLdH7oEuw%40mail.grnail.com. >>>>> For more options, visit fittps://grs_lpi s.g000le.com/d/optout. >>» >>» >>>> wwwmcglinchey.corn I www.CafaLawBlog.com >>» >>>> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, >>>> New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP >>» in California. >>» >>>> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >>>> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >>>> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, >>>> immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the >>>> original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor,601 Poydras >>>> Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. >>» >>>> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any >>>> remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be >>>> viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an >>>> attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately >>>> and a replacement will be provided. >>» >>>> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >>>> 1=2,://www.mcglinchey.corn/disclaimer! >>» ->>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmglegrmps.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>> lusher-board-only_@gmgleatapi s.com. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> h_Vs://grot_Lp. s.ggle.com/dJmsgid!lusher-board-on1y'89A9892D-F43A-4C3C-Al2DD28E81CC4DC7%40mcg&i_cley.com. >>>> For more options, visitl=ampi s.g000le.com/d/optout. >» ->>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@golgiggtops.com. >>> To nost to this grout, send email to lusher-hoard-onlvOgooglegroims corn >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-onlv/ABEF0463-7BFE-43E8-BB83BBCA2EABO9C7%40stonepigman.corn. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.comid optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@g000legoups.corn. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gkgroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/OF02163BED.70108ABDON85257F9C.0044F7B9-1461241998587%40prudential.com. >> For more options, visitroups.google.com/d/optout. www.mcglinchey.com WWW.CafaLawBlog corn McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in California. Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use ofthe intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy 1=)://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ From: Sut.A.nt MIN?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoi.n...voritipi9.1.ian...oill RE: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting April 21, 2016 at 7:53 AM muben.te;.;:guadpudeni.2i.corri Bickford, Mag rc Alysia Loshbaugh alC4hbaugh(cgrnail.com, Bryant, Camille vsxyant@fricOniey.conl I don't think outsiders can require us to adhere to our By-Laws. don't have time to do it before the meeting. But I have not researched that and I think Chunlin has been studying them and encourage everyone &se to do so. Everyone has the notices I sent and determine whether the assertions in the letter are correct. I haven't checked. From: reuben.teague@prudential.com [mailto:reuben.teague@prudential.com] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 7:33 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Bickford, Mag; Alysia Loshbaugh; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; Bryant, Camille Subject: Re: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting RachelAny thoughts on the ptsa letter regarding the meeting? I'm stumped as to whether any of it is accurate. Best, Reuben Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 11:11 PM, Wisdom, Rachel W. wrote: Hi Mag. Please call me in the am about this. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 9:22 PM,Bickford, Mag wrote: I agree there needs to be options to limit. Let me look at some options. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 8:17 PM, Alysia Loshbaugh wrote: Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something of this nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? • Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers(like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? • Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period oftime? What is the "reasonable time period"? • Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and if there is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos, as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board+unsubscribe@ggsal_gg. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardpL.1 yl _@ggagl_tgr(...api s.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit hthm://gmps.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardor_ily/CA%2B4yWd5C.TxpeufHW 1 CubcjoBo4gW8HOsLvvryt_AprciH7oEuw%40mail.gmail.corn. For more options, visit hws://grsiipasmgle.comidloptout. www.mcglinchey.com www.CafaLawBI g.com rvicGlinche.y Stafford. par.; n Alabama, Florida, Loana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio. Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in California. Confidentiality Statement: This email racy contain attorney-client privileged or confidential information. it is for the sole use of the intended fecent(s). if you have received this trarisEllitiSiOn in error, immediately notify us by telephone. at 504.0N-1200 and return the original ri essage. to us at McGlinchey Stafford. 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA, 70130 via the United States Postal Service. We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadeta should he presumed inas.ivertent and should not be viewed or used without our express perinissk.m. if you receive an attachment containing metadata: please notify the sender immediately and a replacement will be provided. See McGlirictiey Stafford DisdaimerPriyacy Policy tittp://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimed You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googIcgmumgon. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardatIlly_@gMgle.gratipasan. To view this discussion on the web visit idtpalLgroualgoogle.com/d/msgidilusher-board-only/89A9892D-F43A4C3C-Al2D-D28E81CC4DC7%40mcglinchey_com. For more options, visit htips://groupismgle.cornidioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googiggr. To view this discussion on the web visit 1=52Zgrmplgoogle.com/d/msgidilusherboard-only/ABEF0463-7BFE-43E8-BB83-BBCA2EABO9C7%40stonepigman.corn. For more options, visit 1=52groi._jpasalgle.com/d/optout. From: Subject: Date; To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdornastoriepigirian.a.mt Re: Questions re: Public Comment Period at Upcoming Meeting April 20,2016 at 10:05 PM Bickford, Mag rribicidordernogilrtcheyami Alysia Loshbaugh aloshbaugh@grnailoom, lusher-board-only@googlegroups.corn, Bryant. Camille cbryant@mcglinchey.com Hi Mag. Please call me in the am about this. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 9:22 PM, Bickford, Mag wrote: agree there needs to be options to limit. Let me look at some options. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 8:17 PM, Alysia Lostibaugh wrote: Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting. as I have no experience with something ofthis nature. Once we open the floor for public comments, how will this be handled? • Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers(like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? • Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period oftime? What is the "reasonable time period"? • Do we limit the number of people who can speak,like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue (though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance,and ifthere is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? Fm hoping we can try and prevent chaos,as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." Mark Twain yo„ because you are subscribed to the Googie Groups"Lusher Board Only" group. uristibriciitis from this group and stop receiving ernaiis from it, send an email to iustier-board-oniy+kmftotioae.laggtaglaups..;N.m. To post to ttiv group, send email to johiff.:tgarst.gr;fygg.g.ggkgr.g.mp,1„.ggrg, To view this discussion on the web visit I tlaixiAgg,gmcigggie.certitclimsgidriqsher-Pokrd• .00III. only/0A%2B wrote: Dear Mag and Fellow Board Members, I have some questions about the mechanics and procedures at the upcoming board meeting, as I have no experience with something ofthis nature. Once we open the floor for public comments,how will this be handled? • Should we have people who want to speak pick numbers(like at a deli???) beforehand so we have an order of who will speak? • Do we have someone act as timekeeper to keep the comments within a reasonable period oftime? What is the "reasonable time period"? • Do we limit the number of people who can speak, like 10 people on the pro-union side and 10 people on the no-union side? I've heard the City Council limits the number of people who are allowed to speak and that it has to be equal numbers of people on both sides of an issue(though that could be incorrect, I'm just repeating what I've heard.) I would appreciate some guidance, and ifthere is no right or wrong way to do this, would it be prudent of us to have a plan in place to keep things as orderly as possible? I'm hoping we can try and prevent chaos,as I'm sure the meeting will be well attended and lots offolks will want to speak about this issue. Thanks, Alysia. "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." --Mark Twain You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups"Lusher Board Only' group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to iqsnet-bowd•olfv-t-tinstibsotibeekaggk,oroupstotrt. (.41.100gleximp$3,c,ora. TO post to this group, send email to lust To view this discussion on the web visit flt0119.1P.W.S.,g0gilit.:OrrlicitrilniciLlib.01.:bP.8.q:atteckaapAy.wszaigniftlyaumbWal40.01±. C)svvryprdif:/oEuw Q40maiLcpil corn. For more options, visit lAttmivrcuzzip,ggiesxmlidioptout. From: Sut.A.nt MIN?: To: ; Wisdom, Rachel W. RE: changing the forum April 20, 2016 at 5:13 PM Reuben Teague MCi‹.fOrd mogiirichey.corn group:, If there is any way to do it, it would be helpful if we can share as much as possible of our communication on the UTL issues with Kathy and the other administrators. With the rumors that are flying around and their continued exclusion from most if not all of the dialogue, there is ripe ground for suspicion and fear. If they are included, I think those fears and suspicions will be lessened. We could still have some board-only communications, when needed. I hope I do not offend by raising this again. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Reuben Teague Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 4:50 PM To: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: changing the forum I would like to move our conversation back over to this list. I think we ought to be acting as though all of the emails we write could end up on the front page of the TimesPic and behave accordingly. That's not a legal reason, it's a prudent one. Please, everyone, take a second before you write and consider that. Mag - can you comment/advise on the privilege question(s) raised by the emails this afternoon? Reuben Teague Director, Impact Investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teague@prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: httpAobs.prudential.com/job-description.php?jobReqNo=CR-00017 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@g000leoroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgidiusher-boardonly/OFOE3FC106.6F71457B-0N85257F9B.0070FCCA85257F9B.0077F3F0%40prudential.corn. For more options, visit https://groups.0000le.com/dioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoogkgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googiNroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit latIps://groups.google.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonlv/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED160E11%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. Cro. rronr,n nr•dinn, tic if 1,11,sc• /Jew".sne• ,r.nrrolc. nror,Id Ints+e, st c. Kuhn?F .,etoripEcrnan.corn From: Wisdom, Rachel W. r,,s,isdoEmij; Sut.Aee,t RE: changing the forum MIN?: April 20, 2016 at 5:03 PM To: Alysia Loshbaugh nieenbeughsarne.E.f>:)m, Reuben Teague n....uben.teegue,@;-pRidentiei.oern ; iusher.bord..0.nly,pcioogiegroups.01)m, mbiokfofd(&mcgtinolley.wM No objection here. Please do add her. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alysia Loshbaugh Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 5:01 PM To: Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: changing the forum Mag--I think your emails sent to the Listserve are not going through because you are not a member of the Listserve and the security would prevent it. If there are no objections, I can add you to the Listserve later this evening. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On Apr 20, 2016, at 4:50 PM,Reuben Teague wrote: I would like to move our conversation back over to this list. I think we ought to be acting as though all of the emails we write could end up on the front page of the Times-Pic and behave accordingly. That's not a legal reason, it's a prudent one. Please, everyone, take a second before you write and consider that. Mag - can you comment/advise on the privilege question(s) raised by the emails this afternoon? Reuben Teague Director, Impact Investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teague@prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: http://jobs.prudential.com/job-description.php? jobReqNo=CR-00017 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only-funsubscribe@Qooglegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_*zooglearoups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://arsltps.Qoog1e.comidlmsgidllusherboard-only/OFOE3FC106.6F71457B-0N85257F9B.0070FCCAQ c'7170T1 V...14..1 11 1 11 ...11 / ti-TVIAL V1-011.1. For more options, visit https://groups.google com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@ggaglegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hals://group_Lgoogle.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/16EC360B-FBCF-4080-B2BB-2E894769A280%40gmail.com. For more options, visit http_sillgroupLgoogle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . FW:[Lusher] Reminder: Financial Disclosure Documents due May 15 °ate: April 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM To: cupv Hi All. For some reason, Lynden's email to the group would not go through. So I am .forwarding see below. From: Lynden Swayze [mailto:lynden_swayze@lusherschool.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 8:25 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Kathy Riedlinger Subject: Fwd: Reminder: Financial Disclosure Documents due May 15 This needs to be disseminated to the Board. My e-mail to the group would not go through. Forwarded message From: Lynden Swayze Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:21 AM Subject: Fwd: Reminder: Financial Disclosure Documents due May 15 To: "1usher-charter-boardr400g1egaws.com" Patricia Dover From: Louisiana Association of Public Charter Schools (mailto:sbairdOlacharterschools.org] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Sarah Baird 504-274-3651 sbairthi,lacharteischools.org Reminder: Financial Disclosure Documents due May 15 Dear Charter Board Members, In 2010, the Louisiana legislature passed a law requiring all Charter School Board members to file Tier 3 Personal Financial Disclosure Statements with the Louisiana Board of Ethics. These statements require board members to disclose any income generated from the state, political subdivisions and/or gaming interests for the calendar year 2011. Everyone is required to file the statement, even if you do not do business with the state. The final deadline for the disclosure form is Tuesday, May 15, 2012. Please click here to complete the form. Please review the answers below to some of the most frequently asked questions, which may be helpful as you finish and submit your form by the May 15 deadline. Question: Who is required to file a Tier 3 personal financial disclosure form? Answer: The following are required to file a Tier 3 personal financial disclosure form: • Each person holding a public office who represents a voting district having a population of five thousand or less persons. • Candidates for public office who represents a voting district having a population of less than five thousand persons. • Each member of the governing authority or management board of a charter school created pursuant to Chapter 42 of Title 17. An individual only needs to file one (1) report, with that report being for the highest Tier under which the individual meets the requirements with Tier 1 being the highest and Tier 3 being the lowest. Board members should disclose membership in the charter board on any higher level form. Any income received from a state or political subdivision retirement system (including TRSL, LASERS, etc.) is reportable if such income is subject to taxation. This income should be reported on Schedule A. Question: Where does the personal financial disclosure form need to be filed and how may it be filed? Answer:The personal financial disclosure statement must be filed with the Louisiana Board of Ethics. It may be: Faxed to:(225) 381-7271 Mailed to: Louisiana Board of Ethics P.O. Box 4368 Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Hand delivered to: Louisiana Board of Ethics 617 North Third Street Rm #1036 Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Question: When is my personal financial disclosure statement considered timely filed? Answer: Your personal financial disclosure statement will be considered timely filed if postmarked by May 15th or on receipt by the Board of Ethics on May 15th. If your personal financial disclosure statement is not received timely, it will be your burden to prove that your personal financial disclosure statement was mailed timely. Proof of timely mailing is by postmark from the U.S. Post Office, receipt from the U.S. Post Office, or receipt from a commercial delivery service. If you have any questions about the filing process, please contact Sarah Vanderqriff, LAPCS Legal/Policy Director. Forward this email ,:•ar if atet5MtalegWe This email was sent to rpeterson(()slc-cino.org by sbaird(fplacharterschools.orq Update Profile/Email Address 1 Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe" Privacy Policy. Louisiana Association of Public Charter Schools 5500 Prylania Street # 126 New Orleans LA 70115 Lynden Clay Swayze, CPA Chief Financial Officer Lusher Charter School Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corp 5624 Freret Street, Room 201B New Orleans, Louisiana 70115 504-324-7307 Fax: 504-861-1839 lynden swayze@lusherschool.org Lynden Clay Swayze, CPA Chief Financial Officer Lusher Charter School Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corp 5624 Freret Street, Room 201B New Orleans, Louisiana 70115 504-324-7307 Fax: 504-861-1839 lynden swayze@lusherschool.org You received this message because you are subscribed to the Googie Groups"Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and Stop receiving smallsfrom it, send an email to JuRher-bOard-and-administrators+un.ubscrits@ogggiowoups corn. To post to this group, send email to fusher•board•and-administrators@cliedroups.com. For more options, visit fatps://oroups.coodle.comIdloptoul. From: St,Mject: Date; To: Cc: VVIsdom, Rachel W. wisdorn @stonepE9frsan.com RE: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. April 19,2016 at 9:09 PM Mecesro.I.Vioyrio.odu, Chunlin Leonhard leorthrarcgiPloyno.odu Chunlin Leonhard leonhard@loyno.edu, reuben.teague@prodential.com, rwhelan@tularm.edti, Bickford, Meg Mbickford@mcglinchey.com, lusheriboardionlyOgoogiegroups.com For the record, I do not agree with your characterization of the past actions of the board. We have never voted to set meetings or to cancel or postpone them,and schedule changes were not always because of routine conflicts. The fixing of a meeting date is a ministerial task, not board action. And it isn't board action now. Hiring counsel has always been a CEO function. The board has never done it before April 16, 2016. All of that is academic, however. Please see the email I sent. to Chunlin. Thank you, From: blecesne@loyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 8:52 PM To: Chunlin Leonhard Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teague@prudential.com; cwhelan@tulane.edu; Blaine Lecesne; Bickford, Mag; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. The cancellations in the past have always been because of routine scheduling conflicts, usually involving the CEO. They were non-substantive and thus informal cancellations that were not in strict conformance with the By-laws normally would not be objectionable to anyone. This, however, is different. The cancellation proposal is substantive in that it is based on opposing views of whether we should meet to discuss a major policy issue with which the Board is confronted. Since the Board is almost equally divided on this substantive, quintessential policy decision, the appropriate and fairest way to resolve it is to just follow the neutral By-laws, not some arbitrary informal cancellation practice to obtain a desired result. We cannot have selective enforcement of the By-laws. Just last week the By-laws were invoked twice with respect to the procedure to hire counsel. Disregarding the By-laws in favor of ad hoc procedures that support the proponent's substantive position is not acceptable corporate practice. It is chaos. Blaine > Dear Rachel, > I understand that we have never before voted to set dates and/or cancel > Board meetings. That does not mean that the cancellations were done > pursuant to a proper procedure. In those situations, the cancellations > were > done without any member objecting to them. Anyone who fails to object is > deemed to have waived the objection and can't complain about the > validity of > the actions taken in those meetings later. To that extent, the meetings > held or noticed had legal effect(or to use your words, were supported by > law)because any objections to them were waived.(See Section E. Waiver of > Notice ofthe By-Laws). That, however, does not mean that the > cancellations > were proper under our By-laws. > The By-Laws states that the meeting shall be "at such time as shall be > determined by the board." However,the Board can only take action in a > properly noticed public meeting (unless of course when no one objects and > waives his/her right to do so). A group of board members is not the same > as > the Board. Nowhere does the By-Laws allow the Board to take action > without > a properly noticed meeting. The Louisiana open meeting laws clearly > require > that our Board comply with the open meeting laws for any action (that > would > include an action to cancel a regularly scheduled meeting)to have any > legal > effect. > In this particular case, I am objecting to the cancellation of a regularly > scheduled meeting. The April 23 meeting was scheduled with an agenda > circulated. In order for its cancellation to have legal effect, the Board > has to comply with our By-laws and the Louisiana open meeting laws. > Therefore, no board member alone or with a few other members has the > authority to cancel the meeting at this point. > If you prefer, as an alternative, I have called for a special meeting > pursuant to Section C of our By-laws, supported by three fellow members as > set forth in my written request. Please let me know your position on > this. > We will need to provide public notice no later than 24 hours before the > meeting. It means we will have to post or disseminate the notice no later > than 9 a.m. Friday. > I believe that it is important that we have the meeting on Saturday as > scheduled, respond to the petition by the United Teachers of Lusher, > debate > the pros and cons publicly, and reach a reasoned conclusion to the best of > our abilities. > Best regards, > Chunlin > From: lusher-board-only_@ggig) legrsaps.com > [mailto:lusher-board-only_@googkgr_ops.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W > Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 5:30 PM > To:'Chunlin Leonhard' > Cc: reuben.teagu_s@prudential.com; cwhelan@tulane.edu; Blaine Lecesne > ;'Bickford, Mag' ; > lusher-board-only_@gmglegrsaps.com > Subject: RE: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. > Dear Chunlin: > I did not attempt to cancel the meeting. I did request postponement of > it > because I believe 5 of us want that, maybe 6,and I thought that at > least > some of the others might agree. > We have never voted about setting meeting dates, or cancelling/postponing > them and I sincerely believe that that practice is supported by law as > well > as our Bylaws, and is in accord with common corporate practice. > I too would like us to work together as a Board and for us to appear "in > public, as a clam rational, deliberative body." I am trying to figure > out > how to get us there since it appears we have differing views on many > issues > relating to the petition. I hope we can find a path. >R > From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailtoleonhard@loyno.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 3:06 PM > To: Wisdom, Rachel W > Cc: reuben.teague@prudential.com ; > cwhelan@tulane.edu ;Blaine Lecesne; > 'Bickford, > Mag';lusher-board-only_@googlegoups.com > > Subject: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. > Dear Rachel, > I still strongly believe that no one has the authority to cancel a > regularly > scheduled public Board meeting without a valid Board action in a properly > noticed public meeting consistent with our By-laws. I understand that you > believe our By-Laws somehow gives a few members the authority to do so. I > disagree with your position and hope that you will reconsider any attempt > to > cancel a regularly scheduled Board meeting (scheduled without any > objection > of irregularity from any Board members)without proper legal authority. > In case you insist on this line ofreasoning, please consider this email my > written request to call for a special meeting pursuant to Section C of our > By-Laws as an alternative. Under Section C,"[s]pecial meetings of the > Board of Directors for any purpose may be called at any time by . . . any > group of Directors comprising at least one-third [1/3] of the Board of > Directors then serving" at least four days before the desired meeting. > Board members Reuben, Carol, and Blaine join me in the call for this > special > meeting to respond to the UTL petition. I have attached a notice which > sets > forth the agenda, the purpose of the meeting, as well as the time and > place. > Section C requires the secretary to send notice of the meeting and a copy > of > the agenda to all directors at least two days prior thereto. We hope that > the regularly scheduled meeting will go forward as scheduled so that we > can > all focus on the important issue in front of us. I echo Andrea's > earlier > appeal for us to work together as a Board and for us to appear "in > public, > as a calm, rational, deliberative body"" given the emotions on both > campuses." Alternatively, the four members listed herein are calling > for a > special meeting to discuss our Board's response to the UTL petition > consistent with our By-laws. > Thank you. > Sincerely, > Chunlin Leonhard > Associate Professor of Law > Director, LL.M. Programs > Loyola University New Orleans College of Law > Tel.(504)861-5854 > leonhard@ky# no.edu > You can access my papers on SSRN at: h_V://ssm.com/author--1615756 > <11;pt .ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm? partid=1615756&corid=649&runid=14702&url=http://ssrn.com/author=1615756> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@m_ogiggr_ws.com > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlsg.r. > . > To view this discussion on the web visit > litpt _§,21grsumgoogle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15D272%40SPEXCH.stonezigman.com > > For more options, visit laVjilgrmas_saggle.com/d/optout. > -> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/e44be3b9.00003014.00000029%401eonhard-PC. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@mgimplips.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-only@gooqlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit Iltps://oroups.qoogle.com/d/msgidi1usher-board0nlv/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD609A5E438A242ED150BDB%40SPEXCI-1.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit ht_tps://groups.gooqle.com/d/optout. Frn Subjeot; Dek?: To: C-v; Wisdom, Rachel W. r4.;sdom@voripEwIan.corn RE: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. April 19, 2016 at 8:35 PM Chunlin Leonhard ,,•.4:ilardq;;dloyil.:.).f.?•thi re;,iben.teape-;@prudenticsi.com, cwheiantulane.edu, Blaine Lecesne Necesne@loyno.edu, Bickford, Mag (?-yfricginchey.oiwn, lusher•board•only@googiegrc)upooM Dear Chunlin; I understand your positon, Chunlin. I really do. And while don't think you are correct, I was only requesting a postponement like we usually do when someone wants one. I haven't cancelled anything. So I don't see the point in continuing a debate about it. And, even though I am very discouraged and saddened at the absence of a cooperative approach among us, I think we need to find a path together if we can. If the requests for a postponement are not going to be honored, we just need an agenda. I will use the one that you sent today, unless someone else says I cannot and convinces me that is so. Sincerely, From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 8:07 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; Chunlin Leonhard Cc: reuben.teague@prudential.com; cwhelan@tulane.edu; Blaine Lecesne; Bickford, Mag; lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. Dear Rachel, I understand that we have never before voted to set dates and/or cancel Board meetings. That does not mean that the cancellations were done pursuant to a proper procedure. In those situations, the cancellations were done without any member objecting to them. Anyone who fails to object is deemed to have waived the objection and can't complain about the validity of the actions taken in those meetings later. To that extent, the meetings held or noticed had legal effect (or to use your words, were supported by law) because any objections to them were waived.(See Section E. Waiver of Notice of the By-Laws). That, however, does not mean that the cancellations were proper under our By-laws. The By-Laws states that the meeting shall be "at such time as shall be determined by the board." However, the Board can only take action in a properly noticed public meeting (unless of course when no one objects and waives his/her right to do so). A group of board members is not the same as the Board. Nowhere does the By-Laws allow the Board to take action without a properly noticed meeting. The Louisiana open meeting laws clearly require that our Board comply with the open meeting laws for any action (that would include an action to cancel a regularly scheduled meeting) to have any legal effect. In this particular case, I am objecting to the cancellation of a regularly scheduled meeting. The April 23 meeting was scheduled with an agenda circulated. In order for its cancellation to have legal effect, the Board has to comply with our By-laws and the Louisiana open meeting laws. Therefore, no board member alone or with a few other members has the authority to cancel the meeting at this point. If you prefer, as an alternative, I have called for a special meeting pursuant to Section C of our By-laws, supported by three fellow members as set forth in my written request. Please let me know your position on this We will need to provide public notice no later than 24 hours before the meeting. It means we will have to post or disseminate the notice no later than 9 a.m. Friday. believe that it is important that we have the meeting on Saturday as scheduled, respond to the petition by the United Teachers of Lusher, debate the pros and cons publicly, and reach a reasoned conclusion to the best of our abilities. Best regards, Chunlin From: lusher-board-only.@_googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 5:30 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard' Cc: reuben.teague@prudential.com; cwhelan@tulane.edu; Blaine Lecesne ; 'Bickford, Mag' ; lusher-board-only@lgooglegroups.com Subject: RE: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. Dear Chunlin: I did not attempt to cancel the meeting. I did request postponement of it because I believe 5 of us want that, maybe 6, and I thought that at least some of the others might agree. We have never voted about setting meeting dates, or cancelling/postponing them and I sincerely believe that that practice is supported by law as well as our Bylaws, and is in accord with common corporate practice. I too would like us to work together as a Board and for us to appear "in public, as a clam rational, deliberative body." I am trying to figure out how to get us there since it appears we have differing views on many issues relating to the petition. I hope we can find a path. From: Chunlin Leonhard [rnailta:leonhardqlgyna.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 3:06 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: reuben.teague©prudential.com; cwhelamatulane.edu; Blaine Lecesne; 'Bickford, Mag'; lusher-boardonlyStmglegiws.corn Subject: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. Dear Rachel, I still strongly believe that no one has the authority to cancel a regularly scheduled public Board meeting without a valid Board action in a properly noticed public meeting consistent with our By-laws. I understand that you believe our By-Laws somehow gives a few members the authority to do so. I disagree with your position and hope that you will reconsider any attempt to cancel a regularly scheduled Board meeting (scheduled without any objection of irregularity from any Board members) without proper legal authority. In case you insist on this line of reasoning, please consider this email my written request to call for a special meeting pursuant to Section C of our By-Laws as an alternative. Under Section C, "[s]pecial meetings of the Board of Directors for any purpose may be called at any time by ... any group of Directors comprising at least one-third [1/3] of the Board of Directors then serving" at least four days before the desired meeting. Board members Reuben, Carol, and Blaine join me in the call for this special meeting to respond to the UTL petition. I have attached a notice which sets forth the agenda, the purpose of the meeting, as well as the time and place. Section C requires the secretary to send notice of the meeting and a copy of the agenda to all directors at least two days prior thereto. We hope that the regularly scheduled meeting will go forward as scheduled so that we can all focus on the important issue in front of us. I echo Andrea's earlier appeal for us to work together as a Board and for us to appear "in public, as a calm, rational, deliberative body""given the emotions on both campuses." Alternatively, the four members listed herein are calling for a special meeting to discuss our Board's response to the UTL petition consistent with our Bylaws. Thank you. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leonhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: httplIssm.corniauthor=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it. send an email to lusher-board- paPrunsi bscribegggsagitgrsups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-on114@gaggiggroups,com. To view this discussion on the web visit litullgEoupa,gaggle,comidimsgidilusher-boardpnly/FF,94FE8E1F0417744B 7D6D9A5E438A242Eal 5D272V 40SPEX 'H isman.com. For more options, visit httpallgEou.p:4,02Qgle,comidioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsuba:ri etzgoogiggroups corn. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-only@googlemps.com. To view this discussion on the web visit taps://groups.L.google.comid/msgidilusher-boardonly/FFNP "8F1F04F744BC0609A5F438A242FD15DA894‘44 SPP ,C stonel*mari corn. For more options, visit tatps://groups.goacjie.comidloptout. Frn Subjeot; Dek?: To: C-v; Wisdom, Rachel W. r4.;sdom@voripEwIan.corn RE: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. April 19, 2016 at 5:29 PM Chunlin Leonhard ,,•.4:ilardq;;dloyil.:.).f.?•thi re;,iben.teape-;@prudenticsi.com, cwheiantulane.edu, Blaine Lecesne Necesne@loyno.edu, Bickford, Mag (?-yfricginchey.oiwn, lusher•board•only@googiegrc)upooM Dear Chunlin: did not attempt to cancel the meeting. did request postponement of it because believe 5 of us want that, maybe 6, and thought that at least some of the others might agree. We have never voted about setting meeting dates, or cancelling/postponing them and sincerely believe that that practice is supported by law as well as our Bylaws, and is in accord with common corporate practice. too would like us to work together as a Board and for us to appear "in public, as a dam rational, deliberative body." am trying to figure out how to get us there since it appears we have differing views on many issues relating to the petition. hope we can find a path. From: Chunlin Leonhard [mailto:leonhard@loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 3:06 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: reuben.teague@prudential.com; cwhelan@tulane.edu; Blaine Lecesne; 'Bickford, Mag'; lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com Subject: Call for a Special Meeting on April 23 at 9 a.m. Dear Rachel, I still strongly believe that no one has the authority to cancel a regularly scheduled public Board meeting without a valid Board action in a properly noticed public meeting consistent with our By-laws. I understand that you believe our By-Laws somehow gives a few members the authority to do so. I disagree with your position and hope that you will reconsider any attempt to cancel a regularly scheduled Board meeting (scheduled without any objection of irregularity from any Board members) without proper legal authority. In case you insist on this line of reasoning, please consider this email my written request to call for a special meeting pursuant to Section C of our By-Laws as an alternative. Under Section C, "[s]pecial meetings of the Board of Directors for any purpose may be called at any time by ... any group of Directors comprising at least one-third [1/3] of the Board of Directors then serving" at least four days before the desired meeting. Board members Reuben, Carol, and Blaine join me in the call for this special meeting to respond to the UTL petition. I have attached a notice which sets forth the agenda, the purpose of the meeting, as well as the time and place. Section C requires the secretary to send notice of the meeting and a copy of the agenda to all directors at least two days prior thereto. We hope that the regularly scheduled meeting will go forward as scheduled so that we can all focus on the important issue in front of us. I echo Andrea's earlier appeal for us to work together as a Board and for us to appear "in public, as a calm, rational, deliberative body""given the emotions on both campuses." Alternatively, the four members listed herein are calling for a special meeting to discuss our Board's response to the UTL petition consistent with our Bylaws. Thank you. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard Associate Professor of Law Director, LL.M. Programs Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Tel.(504)861-5854 leonhard@loyno.edu You can access my papers on SSRN at: httpljssm,comiauthor=1615756 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to luther-board-oni•y+unsubscribe@clooglegroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to iusher-board-odyCgoodegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit httoslIgroug;.w.wleskY.mrEklirrlsgici usher- )oardoniviFE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E43M242ED15D272%40SPEXC.:H.stonemigman.00rn. For more options, visit https://arougmoogie.comidioptout. From. Subjeot; iTak?: To: C-v; Wisdom, Rachel W. rssclom@VorifpEgfrian.c..,orn RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION April 19, 2016 at 3:00 PM Chunlin Leonhard ',..,:hard@,:ioyno d her-boa rd • only r.v .poglog Bickford, Mag mbickk.s.rd4;1;moglinciley.;:m, u, m It's not a violation of our Bylaws. Our customary manner of acting is fully supported by them. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 3:00 PM To:'Chunlin Leonhard' Cc: Bickford, Mag; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION We meet at "such times as shall be determined by the Board." That means we meet when we want and we don't have to meet on any particular date. From: lusher-board-only@gmglegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only_@googkg Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 2:44 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Bickford, Mag; lusher-board-only_©googleggn Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION On Behalf Of Dear Rachel, I have a copy of our Bylaws in front of me. Nowhere does it say that any one has the authority to cancel a regularly scheduled meeting. Are you saying that because our Bylaws have been repeatedly violated, it can be violated again over someone's objection? I tried that line on our campus police one day when I did a California stop at one of the campus stop signs. I told him that I always did a California stop at that campus stop sign and never got into trouble before. He just looked at me and wrote me a ticket any way. Best regards, Chunlin From: I usher-boa rd-on ly@_googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:35 PM To:'Blaine ;'Chunlin Leonhard' ; kiki huston Cc: Richard Cortizas ; Bickford, Mag ; reuben.teague@prudential.com; I usher-boa rd-on ly@_googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION We cancel meetings all the time. Our Bylaws allow it. There is also no violation of the open meetings law. From: lusher-board-only_Ogooglegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only_Ogoogle_groups.comi On Behalf Of Blaine Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:32 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; 'Chunlin Leonhard'; kiki huston Cc: Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; reuben.teague(aprudential.com; lusher-board-onlyffqoogkgroups.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION And those very same Bylaws set forth the process by which the Board exercises its power to determine when it meets. As Chunlin pointed out, the April 23rd regularly scheduled meeting has been agreed upon and the agenda for that meeting has been set. In accordance with the Bylaws, all Board members, by email, stated they would attend and one Board member purchased an airline ticket last week to attend Saturday's meeting. There is no mechanism for now just canceling the meeting or changing the agenda without violating the public meetings law and our Bylaws, no matter how many members do not want to meet. You can express your opposition at the meeting with a vote to table the discussion of any item on the agenda but that vote has to be made in an open meeting and will trigger the same substantive discussion on the UTL petition that some are seeking to avoid by not meeting. Blaine From:"Wisdom, Rachel W." Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:17:58 +0000 To:'Chunlin Leonhard' , kiki huston , Blaine Cc: Richard Cortizas ,"Bickford, Mag" , "reuben.teague@prudential.com" ,"lusher-boardonly@_googlegroups.com" Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION disagree but don't have time to fully respond. However, Article VII of our Bylaws clearly give the board the power to determine when it will meet. We are not required to meet at any particular time on any particular date. We can, as we have many, many, times before simply cancel and/or reschedule a meeting. In fact, the meeting on the 23rd was rescheduled from April 16 based on a request from Blaine. By my count, there are 5 board members who want to call of this meeting so as to have more time to get information and assess it, and to allow our community to do so too. I ask that our requests be heeded. From: lusher-board-only_ggg_ogleg [mailto:lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:00 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; kiki huston; blecesne(aloyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teaguePprudential.conn; lusher-board_Pgooglegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Dear Board members, I agree that we need to have the regularly scheduled meeting for the reasons well articulated by Andrea, Reuben, Blaine and Carol. Here are the additional reasons why the meeting needs to happen. 1. This regular board meeting has already been scheduled and the meeting agenda was circulated to all board members on April 11 by our secretary. 2. This is a regularly scheduled board meeting, one of the meetings that we as a board are duty bound to hold under our Bylaws. We cannot cancel the meeting consistent with our Bylaws and the Louisiana open meeting laws just because some members disagree with the need for the meeting. 3. We told the people who attended the meeting on April 16 that we will be deciding the issue on April 23. 4. Finally, delaying the meeting does not help with our decision making. The longer we wait, the more painful it will get and the more goodwill we will destroy. There are already a lot of bitterness, distrust, suspicion, accusations on the Lusher campus. Our failure to face the issue, have an open and honest debate, and provide guidance on this issue will make us look weak as a board and damage our legitimacy. If I may use an analogy, our situation is similar to a ship in the middle of a category 1 hurricane. This Board is at the helm now. How do we steer the ship is going to determine whether we will survive the hurricane. We have no luxury to say that "let's stop steering and gather more information about the storm before we make a decision." Nor can we ask the hurricane to stop moving and give us more time. We have to be at the helm, steering the ship the best we can with the information we have received, imperfect as it may be. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard From:lusher-board-onlyfflgooglegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-onlyAgg2gIggroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 12:24 PM To:'kiki huston' ; blecesne@loyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas ; Bickford, Mag ; Chunlin Leonhard ; reuben.teagagEprudential.com; lusher-boardonlyfflgooglegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION agree with Kiki. Why can't they give us some more time? I don't understand the rush at all. Kiki: Do we have any fixed meeting for parents yet? From: kiki huston [mailto:kikihuston(ayahoo.corn] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 10:31 AM To: blecesneAloyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teaque(kprudential.conn; lusher-board-only_gcloodegroups.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I don't see not meeting as running from our responsibilities. I see it as doing our due diligence to attempt to fully assess how this change would/will effect our community. The ONLY thing the Lall1-11111011 MUG l i:MIS.1116 101, .tb 101 ub LAJ MOW UV VVII LUG 1/11.lA,CJJ. Kiki Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 19, 2016, at 10:16 AM,blecesne@loyno.edu wrote: > The decision to meet is not a decision to recognize. We can always choose > to not voluntarily recognize. Pm not advocating for one or the other. But > I do think we have to meet and confront the issue for the reasons > articulated by Reuben. Contentious public meetings come with the territory > of being on a public Board. The discomfort of such meetings is no reason > to not do our job. Indeed, the rancor will increase exponentially when we > are perceived as running from our responsibilities. > Blaine >> All, as you are aware,I have somewhat purposefully and intentionally >> stayed out of the debate of whether or not to have a meeting Saturday. >> However,I do want to be clear that I do not agree with having a meeting >> Saturday. I can not understand why the Union would be so unwilling to >> give us the time to fully vet the issues, or why our decision making >> process, in some measure, should be dictated by the Union. >> If this is any indication of how they will behave...then I can only >> imagine what the CBA negotiations will be like. If indeed they want to >> petition the NLRB,absent a vote ofthe board, then by all means they >> should. >> Rueben, clearly there is a divide among the teachers...why would we not >> want to encourage a ballot vote of the teachers decide? Franldy, one >> could reasonably argue that our responsibility as a board is not to >> accept a petition based on the information or lack thereof received. I >> believe meeting Saturday will not only raise the rancor, increase the >> already high levels of anxiety among the teachers(both sides), solve no >> issues-- but will leave us, unbearably, as the uninformed endorsers of >> one side's views over another amongst our teacher community. I >> personally do not see that as my role. >> Richard >> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 7:58 AM,"Wisdom, Rachel W" II I II > wrote: >><:. •••• , >> Thank you, Mad and Chunlin. >> What I mean is that the union has a right to provoke an election now or >> later, or not to do it at all. It can wait if it wants to allow us >> time to gather information. So no,I don't think you missed >> anything. Reuben — May I please speak with you later this >> morning or this afternoon before 5? I would like to tell you about >> the meeting last night in answer to your questions. If you are >> available, please let me know a time and a number to call. >> From: Bickford, Mag [mailtambickfudgm&glinchey_mn] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 6:44 AM >> To: Chunlin Leonhard >> Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W;reuben.teagut@prudential.cora; >> lusher-board-only_@gmgkgaszasa2m. >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I >> think that is a strong likelihood but not a procedural requirement. >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:54 PM,Chunlin Leonhard wrote: >> Dear Rachel, May I inquire about the bases of your comment below: >> "Their leverage, in my estimation, is an illusion"? I thought I >> heard from our attorney(loud and clear)that if no decision (regardless >> of the reasoning) is made by April 23, the Union will petition for an >> election. I remember that very question being asked and Mag talked about >> the importance of Lusher to the Union and her assessment that the Union >> will petition the NLRB if we don't make a decision by April 23. Did I >> miss something? Thank you for your clarification. Best regards, » Chunlin From:iusher-board-only_@gs2agicgamps.cora, >>[mailto:lusher-board-only_@gmgitgOn Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:09 PM >> To: areuben.teagatgpn.idential.cona' » ;lusher-board-only_@gs24gLe.gtQuai&Ma. >> Cc: mbickford@ms,siindatys.on >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Reuben: If the persons(teachers and parents) who may not want a >> union, have time to research, consider and present information to us and >> to each other about the subiect, there may not be a sDlit. I don't >> know how any of us would know, And I cannot fathom why any of us would >> think that is not important. It is probably the very reason that UTNO >> and ATF are pressuring and threatening. Their leverage, in my >> estimation, is an illusion. I think we disserve the entire community >> (teachers, students and parents) by letting them dictate an artificial >> schedule that can only harm us. If they are acting in good faith, » they can wait. From:lusher-board-only_@go_Qgkgmups.com >>[mailto:lusher-board-only@gaups coin]On Behalf Of >> rettbetauglit@prudential.coin >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:50 PM » To: jusher-board-only_@gm.gLegrows.cota » Cc: mbickford@ingslindxyconi >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Kiki >> et al- I do not want to be unsympathetic to the non-union teachers, >> this must be surprising and confusing to them, as it is to us. I just >> don't see how time will change the basic dynamic. Parents and teachers are >> split, that is clear from my inbox. What would be different in a week? >> When you mention a delay, what do you mean? From Mag's email, and >> every educated guess, failure to decide will still result in a petition to >> vote, so what would we be delaying? >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:35 PM,'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only >> wrote: >> Alysia - I did not receive any emails from Mags either. If there was >> correspondence from her, I would like to know as well. All - I see no >> reason to respond to the timeline imposed upon us. It is not a lack of >> governance. A delay would provide time for our very concerned teachers to >> gather more inforrnation on how this change might effect them. Sitting >> across the table from teachers in tears and bewilderment is heartbreaking. >> I have trusted my children to these very people. This is a big deal. The >> pro-union folks can wait. I will not be bullied into rushing this >> decision.... if that results in it going to a vote, so be it. I am >> interested in moving forward in a manner that will help heal the, already >> deep, divide. A yes vote would crush about half half of our teacher >> population - who are only asking for more time. A no vote would equally >> crush about another half of teacher population & make them feel as if >> their concerns are not being heard. A delay - while it may result in a >> vote(and thus a true gauge)- will not disenfranchise. My 2 cents. Kiki >> From: Alysia Loshbaugh >> To: reuben.teaguegnpalotiaLcgra >> Cc: "lusher>> ; "nibickad@mcglinchey.coin" >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 20166:43 PM >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Sorry, but did Mag send any emails today? If so, I did not get them. >> Perhaps it's related to security and our Listserve. Either way,if >> somebody could torward any correspondence trom Mag directly to me,that >> would be much appreciated. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:23 PM,mailto:reuben.tea,gut@prudential.com wrote: >> Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's >> analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a >> responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been >> presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where >> they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal >> argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to >> recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that >> outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. >> While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge,I don't >> think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing >> to hold a meeting,I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack >> of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called >> for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning >> for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive >> discussion. Best, Reuben >> Sent from my iPhone » On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:32 PM,kiki huston t n,yahoo.com> wrote: >> For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on n pdgman.com> >> this issue. Kiki From: "Wisdom, Rachel W." > To: "Whelan, Carol SI" < h-1 1 >;"Barron, Paul L" n 1 n-.-• >, Reuben Teague >> Cc: "lusher-board-only_@gmgLwaalps com" >> ;"m i 1@m_c_glincheycom" >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:02 PM >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things >> or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, >> please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. >> We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing >> stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the >> union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the >> union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't >> even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to >> be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think >> about this and to consider all of the information we gather. I don't >> think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good >> majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If >> we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should >> meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that >> information. Finally, we have received objections from >> constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give >> them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz >> > Fest From lusher-hoarci-onlvegooglegrolms corn >> [mailto:lusher-board-only@gmgirsumps.cota]On Behalf OfWhelan, Carol S >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM >> To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague >> Cc: lusher-board-only_@gcmgitgraups.commbidifacigiagglinday.cota >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a >> board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen >> to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. >> Carol Carol S. Whelan,Ph.D. Thomas Green Professor of Education >> Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones II >> Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane >> University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New >> Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.edu/teacher SKYPE: >> Caro1Whelanll Social Innovation in Education gatuthliintclarplulants,duZ » From:1usher-board-onlx@gmgigamps.corn >> lusher-board-only_@gmgirstsmaLsLcm> on behalf of Barron, Paul L >> <12.122agagtuis >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM >> To: Reuben Teague >> Cc: lusher-board-onlygmg,kgraups.corambickfad@ing,glinday.corn >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the >> reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in >> a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not >> favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I >> neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to >> indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the >> board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the >> union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would >> like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result >> in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul >> Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law >> School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax >> 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If >> you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply >> e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name >> and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and >> do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague >> [ffiailto:reuben.teagu@prudential.cond >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM >> To: Barron, Paul L >> Cc: lusher-board-only@gcmgitgraups.commbickford@ingglinchey.corn >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Paul>> >> Can you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to >> reply to my email. >> Thanks, >> Reuben Teague >> Director, Impact Investments >> 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark,NJ 07102-3777 >> 973-802-6707 >> reuben.teagx@prudential corn >> We're hiring! Come join our >> teamlitaAjobs.pruclential.com/job-description,php2jobReqNo=CR-00017 >> From: "Barron, Paul L" >> To: "ntick,fmcignicglinclicycom," , >> "I isher-board-onlyggmglcsamps.com" , >> Date: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM >> Subject: Meeting on Saturday >> Sent by: lusher-board-only@gmgicgamps.corn >> Dear Mag: >> I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to >> having a meeting on Saturday. Hence,I have directed this to you with a >> copy of all of the board members. >> Regards, >> Paul >> Paul Barron >> The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) >> Tulane Law School >> 6329 Freret Street >> New Orleans, LA 70118 >> Voice 504-865-5986 >> Fax 504-862-8846 >> This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the >> intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy >> all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other >> information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not >> constitute an electronic signature. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. '•>'> Tr iincliherrihrz frnm thic errnlin nri vtnr1 rprpiwitur aile frnm it co.rui at, 1%, L.41.4.0%.11.1.".1, 641..1.4,,,aSi WY.. 1.1.1.1.41 S...".411.I ...14,../11 V.1.1.1.‘161-1.0 AS, hPL#SL%4 (ALL » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gos2glegra. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gmgkgrouns.eom. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> litps://groupasmgle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB2260BB881AE96632A0F846E6D56130%40BN3PRO3MB2260.namprd03,pm d,outlook.corn. >> For more options, visit hitps.2.6e,toupasoogle.corn/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegtmal=. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googlse,roups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htps://groupasmgle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56B0%40BN3PRO3MB2260.namprd03.prod. outlook,corn. >> For more options, visit hitpsiag,toupasoogle.comid/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegr. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googLegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htps://groupasoogle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/BL2PRO3MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9B172DD6B0%4OBL2PRO3MB339 namprd03 nrod o utlook.com. >> For more options, visit lattps.2.6e,Lowasoogle.comiclioptout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegto==. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googleg,roups.corn. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htps://groupasglogle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159798%40SPEXCH.stonepi2man.com. >> For more options, visit lattpsilgtoupasoogle.com/d/optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegra. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googlssroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> hlips://grQups.gmgle.comidlin sgidllusher-board- ly/017124E596C 07B7B071 ON85257F99.00807A91-1461021799666%40prudential corn. >> For more options, visit htstaajlgaama,gogle,con-a optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmgl. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mai1to:lusher-board-only_@gmgitgram2amm. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> tatp12.grawagag2gle.com/dim sgid/lusher-board-on1y/696915CE-E51A -41B8-8A 7FEA27825B2B96%40gmai1,corn. >> For more options, visit hitaltistaupa,gmgle.comid/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gm. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@gmatgrsamisan. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> hilps://gratm&gmd.e.com/dimsgid/lusher-boardmly/1478332198.3192275.1461033336147.JavaMailyah00%4Ornailyahoo,C0111 >> For more options, visit hituLists=5.,ggg2gle.comidloptout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmgl. >> To post to this group, send email to >> raailto:lusher-board-only_@gmgkgriulassua. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> 1025.2.gratumgmgle.com/dim sgid/lusher-board-only/OF0B516B5 B,9322D26EON85257F9A.000F9554-1461034212697%40prudential con >> For more options, visit littaku2grszwaQgle,comidloptout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmaeg=2,Lon. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@gmgiggraupamm. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> bitp,i2Zguagagg_Qg1e.com/dimsgidllusher-boardp12Jy/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A166%40SPEXCH.stonepigmansan. >> For more options, visit hitrajlgrsaalgo.gle.comidloptout. >> hilp://www rricc.d inc ey,corn/ IhtaziLmnysafalaatal.w,com/ DT T r A T )LdflU1U, rit. iii 1IUQifl,11UI1U,IVIIJJ1JJinn,1CW >> York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in >> California. >> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, >> immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original >> message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New >> Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. >> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any >> remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed >> or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment >> containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a >> replacement will be provided. >> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >> bill22363D,KinQglinchey.com/disclaimer/ ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email to jusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmgiggraups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to Jusher-board-only@gmglegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htil2E2grouPl.g0S2gie.com/d/msgidi1usher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438 242Faigman.com? ut _medium=email&utm_source=footer. >> For more options, visit https://grommgmgle.comid,optout. >> >> >> >> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmgicgrOups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-or4_@gaQgltgroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> lilza2stallagmgle.com/dimsgid/lusher-boardoaly/1972778872.2655549.1461076959248.JavaMailyah00%40m ai 1.yahoo. om >> For more options, visit https://grguagmgle.comidloptout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-only+unsubscribe@goszglw_Qups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@moslegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit htips://groupasopgle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/800aI 555e45d10257cf0e1262b7e0bab.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. > For more options, visit hitalllstawasilogle,comidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gaostrzroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@goDgiegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit latipaiLgroupsziogle.com/d /msgidilusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15B862%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit bitps://gaupasmgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gaosl&groups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googkgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit latumligroupisopgle,com/d/msgidllusher-boardonly/54ce9adf.00003014.0000000c%401eonhard-PC. For more options, visit bitps://gampasmgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gaosiggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googiegtomps.com. To view this discussion on the web visit latiplligroupisoogle.com/d/msgidi1usher-boardonly/D33BC5AE.5971%25blecesne%401oyno.edu. For more options, visit bitps://graupasmgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to l usher-hoardonly+unsubscribe@ggpgiggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gawkgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visith.namlig,roupisawle.com/d/msgidilusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15BDDE%40SPEXCH.stoneplgnan.com.. For more options, visit bitps://gampasmgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gaostrzroups.com. to post to tuts group, senu email to lusrter-ooaru-oncyt8gsa2giggIsaips.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit hilialtZgroas_ga,g2gle.com/dimsgidlusher-boardmly/c7938f45.00003014.00000017%401eonhard-PC. For more options, visit littps://gEgmpax,gagle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@ggolwrot. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onla.googleg. To view this discussion on the web visit t_gps://groumgoogle.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15C56B%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visitlitip§2grszampgle.com/d/optout. From. Subiwt; OW:A?: To: Cy; Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdom@voripEwIan.corn RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION April 19, 2016 at 2:59 PM :h rd Chunlin Leonhard oog ec.;rour.--y.00m Bickford, Mag usher- boare y We meet at "such times as shall be determined by the Board." That means we meet when we want and we don't have to meet on any particular date. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailtodusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 2:44 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Bickford, Mag; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Dear Rachel, I have a copy of our Bylaws in front of me. Nowhere does it say that any one has the authority to cancel a regularly scheduled meeting. Are you saying that because our Bylaws have been repeatedly violated, it can be violated again over someone's objection? I tried that line on our c:arnpus police one day when I did a California stop at one of the campus stop signs. I told him that I always did a California stop at that campus stop sign and never got into trouble before. He just looked at me and wrote me a ticket any way. Best regards, Chunlin From: lusher-board-only@gmdegEhipiLam [mailto:lusher-board-only@gosIdggolips,com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:35 PM To:'Blaine' ;'Chunlin Leonhard' ; kiki huston Cc: Richard Cortizas ; Bickford, Mag ; reuben.teaguk@pnElenlialsam; I usher-boa rd-on ly@_googlagroup_u_om. Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION We cancel meetings all the time. Our Bylaws allow it. There is also no violation of the open meetings law. From: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com [mailtodusher-board-only_ggoogIggroubs.com] On Behalf Of Blaine Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:32 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; 'Chunlin Leonhard'; kiki huston Cc: Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; reuben.teague@prudential.com; lusher-board-only_@gmkgmgps.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION And those very same Bylaws set forth the process by which the Board exercises its power to determine when it mpptc 1c chi inlin nnintprl ni thp Anril ?Rrri rpm dark/ crhpritilpri mpprincr hac hppn aarppri linnn anti thp agenda for that meeting has been set. In accordance with the Bylaws, all Board members, by email, stated they would attend and one Board member purchased an airline ticket last week to attend Saturday's meeting. There is no mechanism for now just canceling the meeting or changing the agenda without violating the public meetings law and our Bylaws, no matter how many members do not want to meet. You can express your opposition at the meeting with a vote to table the discussion of any item on the agenda but that vote has to be made in an open meeting and will trigger the same substantive discussion on the UTL petition that some are seeking to avoid by not meeting. Blaine From:"Wisdom, Rachel W." Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:17:58 +0000 To:'Chunlin Leonhard' , kiki huston , Blaine Cc: Richard Cortizas ,"Bickford, Mag" , "reuben.teaguepprudential.com" ,"lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com" Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I disagree but don't have time to fully respond. However, Article VII of our Bylaws clearly give the board the power to determine when it will meet. We are not required to meet at any particular time on any particular date. We can, as we have many, many, times before simply cancel and/or reschedule a meeting. In fact, the meeting on the 23rd was rescheduled from April 16 based on a request from Blaine. By my count, there are 5 board members who want to call of this meeting so as to have more time to get information and assess it, and to allow our community to do so too. I ask that our requests be heeded. From: lusher-board-only_@ggggkgroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only_Agoogiegi On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:00 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; kiki huston; blecesneAtQyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teagueCaprudential.com; lusher-boardrglilagooglegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Dear Board members, I agree that we need to have the regularly scheduled meeting for the reasons well articulated by Andrea, Reuben, Blaine and Carol. Here are the additional reasons why the meeting needs to happen. 1. This regular board meeting has already been scheduled and the meeting agenda was circulated to all board members on April 11 by our secretary. 2. This is a regularly scheduled board meeting, one of the meetings that we as a board are duty bound to hold under our Bylaws. We cannot cancel the meeting consistent with our Bylaws and the Louisiana open meeting laws just because some members disagree with the need for the meeting. WP told thp neonle who attended the meeting on Anril 16 that VIP will hp deciding the issue on ' April 23. 4. Finally, delaying the meeting does not help with our decision making. The longer we wait, the more painful it will get and the more goodwill we will destroy. There are already a lot of bitterness, distrust, suspicion, accusations on the Lusher campus. Our failure to face the issue, have an open and honest debate, and provide guidance on this issue will make us look weak as a board and damage our legitimacy. If I may use an analogy, our situation is similar to a ship in the middle of a category 1 hurricane. This Board is at the helm now. How do we steer the ship is going to determine whether we will survive the hurricane. We have no luxury to say that "let's stop steering and gather more information about the storm before we make a decision." Nor can we ask the hurricane to stop moving and give us more time. We have to be at the helm, steering the ship the best we can with the information we have received, imperfect as it may be. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard Fromdusher-board-onlyffgooglegroups com [mailto:lusher-board-only@_gmlegroups.coml On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 12:24 PM To:'kiki huston' ; blecesne@loyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas ; Bickford, Mag ; Chunlin Leonhard ; reuben.teagueAprudential.com; Iusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I agree with Kiki. Why can't they give us some more time? I don't understand the rush at all. Kiki: Do we have any fixed meeting for parents yet? From: kiki huston [mailto:kikihuston@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 10:31 AM To: blecesne@loyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teague@prudential.com; lusher-board-onlyffgoogkgroups.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I don't see not meeting as running from our responsibilities. I see it as doing our due diligence to attempt to fully assess how this change would/will effect our community. The ONLY thing the non-union side is asking for, is for us to slow down the process. Kiki Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 19, 2016, at 10:16 AM,blecesnealoyno.edu wrote: > The decision to meet is not a decision to recognize. We can always choose . • > to not voluntarily recognize. I'm not advocating for one or the other. But > I do think we have to meet and confront the issue for the reasons > articulated by Reuben. Contentious public meetings come with the territory > of being on a public Board. The discomfort of such meetings is no reason > to not do our job. Indeed, the rancor will increase exponentially when we > are perceived as running from our responsibilities. > Blaine >> All, as you are aware,I have somewhat purposefully and intentionally >> stayed out of the debate of whether or not to have a meeting Saturday. >> However,I do want to be clear that I do not agree with having a meeting >> Saturday. I can not understand why the Union would be so unwilling to >> give us the time to fully vet the issues, or why our decision making >> process, in some measure, should be dictated by the Union. >> If this is any indication of how they will behave...then I can only >> imagine what the CBA negotiations will be like. If indeed they want to >> petition the NLRB,absent a vote of the board, then by all means they >> should. >> Rueben, clearly there is a divide among the teachers...why would we not >> want to encourage a ballot vote of the teachers decide? Frankly, one >> could reasonably argue that our responsibility as a board is not to >> accept a petition based on the information or lack thereof received. I >> believe meeting Saturday will not only raise the rancor, increase the >> already high levels of anxiety among the teachers(both sides), solve no >> issues-- but will leave us, unbearably, as the uninformed endorsers of >> one side's views over another amongst our teacher community. I >> personally do not see that as my role. >> Richard >> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 7:58 AM,"Wisdom, Rachel W" >> wrote: >> Thank you, Mad and Chunlin. >> What I mean is that the union has a right to provoke an election now or >> later, or not to do it at all. It can wait if it wants to allow us >> time to gather information. So no,I don't think you missed >> anything. Reuben — May I please speak with you later this >> morning or this afternoon before 5? I would like to tell you about >> the meeting last night in answer to your questions. If you are >> available, please let me know a time and a number to call. >> From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mglinchey.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 6:44 AM >> To: Chunlin Leonhard >> Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W;reuben.teagueleritial.com; >> lusher-board-only_@googlsgrJ_y_ups.corn >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I >> think that is a strong likelihood but not a procedural requirement. >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:54 PM,Chunlin Leonhard wrote: >> Dear Rachel, May I inquire about the bases of your comment below: >> "Their leverage, in my estimation, is an illusion"? I thought I >> heard from our attorney(loud and clear)that if no decision(regardless >> of the reasoning) is made by April 23, the Union will petition for an >> election. I remember that very question being asked and Mag talked about >> the importance of Lusher to the Union and her assessment that the Union >> will petition the NLRB if we don't make a decision by April 23. Did I >> miss something? Thank you for your clarification. Best regards, >> Chunlin From:lusher-board-only_@gagglegroups.com >> [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlsgroups.corn]On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:09 PM >> To:'reuben.teagu@prudential.corn' >> ;lusher-board-only_@googiggrcun >> Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.com >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Reuben: If the persons(teachers and parents) who may not want a >> union, have time to research, consider and present information to us and >> to each other about the subject, there may not be a split. I don't >> know how any of us would know, And I cannot fathom why any of us would >> think that is not important. It is probably the very reason that UTNO >> and ATF are pressuring and threatening. Their leverage, in my >> estimation, is an illusion. I think we disserve the entire community >> (teachers, students and parents) by letting them dictate an artificial >> schedule that can only harm us. If they are acting in good faith, >> they can wait. Fromlusher-board-only@gagglegro ThertInCr 1 Artrrvi'MC fortill1all RfAhdif 4>5. 111-10ilth'llid1Pr-hilqrrl-iltilw.11, ( flf t S&J11SL tJ'*JtA.L %A NV' J.J. St , S.,./ >> reuben.teac,c@prudential.corn >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 20169:50 PM >> To: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.corn >> Cc: rnbickfordrnglincheycom >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Kiki >> et al- I do not want to be unsympathetic to the non-union teachers, >> this must be surprising and confusing to them, as it is to us. I just >> don't see how time will change the basic dynamic. Parents and teachers are >> split, that is clear from my inbox. What would be different in a week? >> When you mention a delay, what do you mean? From Mag's email, and >> every educated guess, failure to decide will still result in a petition to >> vote, so what would we be delaying? >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:35 PM,'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only >> wrote: >> Alysia - I did not receive any emails from Mags either. If there was >> correspondence from her, I would like to know as well. All - I see no >> reason to respond to the timeline imposed upon us. It is not a lack of >> governance. A delay would provide time for our very concerned teachers to >> gather more information on how this change might effect them. Sitting >> across the table from teachers in tears and bewilderment is heartbreaking. >> I have trusted my children to these very people. This is a big deal. The >> pro-union folks can wait. I will not be bullied into rushing this >> decision.... if that results in it going to a vote, so be it. I am >> interested in moving forward in a manner that will help heal the, already >> deep, divide. A yes vote would crush about half half of our teacher >> population - who are only asking for more time. A no vote would equally >> crush about another half of teacher population & make them feel as if >> their concerns are not being heard. A delay - while it may result in a >> vote(and thus a true gauge)- will not disenfranchise. My 2 cents. Kiki >> From: Alysia Loshbaugh >> To: reuben.teaguprudential.com >> Cc: "lusher-board-only_@g000learoups.com" >> ; "mbickford@mgglinchey.corn" >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 20166:43 PM >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Sony, but did Mag send any emails today? If so, I did not get them. >> Perhaps it's related to security and our Listserve. Either way,if >> somebody could forward any correspondence from Mag directly to me,that >> would be much appreciated. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:23 PM,mailto:reuben.teaprudential.com wrote: >> Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's >> analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a >> responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been >> presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where >> they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal >> argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to >> recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that >> outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. >> While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge,I don't >> think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing >> to hold a meeting,I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack >> of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called >> for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning >> for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive >> discussion. Best, Reuben >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:32 PM,kiki huston wrote: >> For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on >> this issue. Kiki From: "Wisdom, Rachel W" >> To: "Whelan, Carol S" ;"Barron, Paul L" >> ; Reuben Teague reuben.teagnidentia] >> Cc: "lusher-board-only@gaggkgre >> com>;"mbickford@mcglinchev.CO >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 20164:02 PM >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things >> or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, >> please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. >> We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing >> stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the >> union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the >> union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't >> even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to >> be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think >> about this and to consider all of the information we gather. I don't >> think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good >> majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If >> we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should >> meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that >> information. Finally, we have received objections from >> constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give >> them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz >> Fest. From:lusher-board-only_@gosiggron >>[mailtolusher-board-only@googkgrOn Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM >> To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague >> Cc: lusher-board-only@galglegrmbickford@msglinchey.com >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a >> board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen >> to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. r„--1 Q 11Th1., n ne, rle•neves Dres-rnews, esc C .e.e..1-; evr. tJ1 1101 . 11Cliall, r 11.1J. 1 IltAllab VICCU r laCJJ1J1 ui 1.ULIAA1L1011 >> Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones II >> Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane >> University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New >> Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane edu/teacher SKYPE: >> Caro1Whelanll Social Innovation in Education @litnyllsiined wp.tulane.edu/ >> From:lusher-board-only_@googn >> on behalf of Barron, Paul L >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM >> To: Reuben Teague >> Cc: lusher-board-only_@ggaggroups.com;mbickford@Dsglinchey.com >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the >> reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in >> a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not >> favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I >> neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to >> indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the >> board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the >> union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would >> like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result >> in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul >> Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law >> School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax >> 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If >> you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply >> e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name >> and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and >> do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague >> [mailto:reuben.team@prudential.com] >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM >> To: Barron, Paul L >> Cc: lusher-board-only_@gga_ggrrumbickford@tncglinchey.com >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Paul>> >> Can you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to >> reply to my email. >> Thanks, >> Reuben Teague >> Director, Impact Investments >> 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 >> 973-802-6707 >> reuben.teagogprudential.com >> We're hiring! Come join our >> team:http://jobs.prudential.com/job-description.php?jobRegNo—CR-00017 >> From: "Barron, Paul L" >> To: "mbickford@osglinchey.com" , >> "lusher-board-only_@gogglegroups.com" , >> Date: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM >> Subject: Meeting on Saturday >> Sent by: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com >> Dear Mag: >> I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to >> having a meeting on Saturday. Hence,I have directed this to you with a >> copy of all of the board members. >> Regards, >> Paul >> Paul Barron >> The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) >> Tulane Law School >> 6329 Freret Street >> New Orleans, LA 70118 >> Voice 504-865-5986 >> Fax 504-862-8846 >> This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the >> intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy >> all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other >> information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not >> constitute an electronic signature. » ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To =subscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gooaleoroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gooalearoups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> lAps://groups.google.com/d/ms id/lusher-boardonly/BN3PR03MB22601313881AE96632A0F846E6D56B0%40BN3PR03MB2260.namprd03.pro d.outlook.corn. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. --'--' IOU rec.:mecums message oecause you are suosermeu to me uoogle uroups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gagskagz. s.eom. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googIssr_api s.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> hUaL/Igrot_umgoogle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB226005B46C449E070264E932D5680%40BN3PRO3MB2260.nam srdO3.'rod. outlook.com. >> For more options, visit1.20,§11groi_al,galgle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gagglam_it pi. &corn. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googIssaws.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> liVs://grot_umgoogle.comid/msgidlusher-boardonly/B1..2PR03MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9B F2D D6B0%40B1_2PR03MB339.namnrd03.prod.o utlook.com. >> For more options, visit /groi._ le.corn/d/optout.. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gagglam_it s.com. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@goodtmapi s.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> hUaLagrot_umgoogle.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159798%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. >> For more options, visit blZaillgrs_cpu sssle.com/d/optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gagglamws.eom. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googIssaws.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> 12M2a2grot_a_moogle.comid/msgid/lusher-board-only/OF124E596C.07B7B0710N85257F99.00807A91-1461021799666%40prudential.com >> For more options, visit1.2=§11grsjjaggilg , le.cornidioptout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gagglam_it s.com. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only@googkgron. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> ht_tplaroups.google.com/dimsgidilusher-board-only/696915C E-E51A -41 B8-8 A 7FEA27825B2B96%40gmail.corn. >> For more options, visit hamiLgroups.ggs2gle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gogkgr.. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only@googjarn. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> ht_tpaar_api s.google com/d/ms id/lusher-boardonly/1478332198.3192275.1461033336147.JavaMail.yalioe/040maiLyahoo.com. >> For more options, visit h.0.52/grslimggsale.comldloptout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gogkgr. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only@googkgrmps.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> hps://gps.gg1e.com/d/ms id/lusher-board-only/OF0B5 6B5R.9322D26EON85257F9A.000F9554-1461034212697%40prudential.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.g000le.comfdioptout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@mgleoroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only@googkgron. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> ht_tplarops.google.com/d/ms id/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A166%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. >> For more options, visit LittpLisroups.ggs2g1escom/dioptout. >> htpt ://www.mcglinchey.com/ ligki://www.cafalawblog.com/ >> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New >> York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in >> California. >> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, >> immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original • >> message to us at Mailinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New >> Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. >> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any >> remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed >> or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment >> containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a >> replacement will be provided. >> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >> http://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe®gagiggroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gaggitgroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msoid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A983%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com? utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer. >> For more options, visit https://oroups.g000le.com/d/optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@ggssiggroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@gpagiggroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/1972778872.2655549.1461076959248.JavaMail.yah00%40mail.yahoo.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.g000le.com/d/optout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-only+unsubscribe@g000legoups.corn. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googitgroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msoid/lusher-boardonly/800a1555e45d10257cf0e1262b7e0bab.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. > For more options, visitliVs://groups.g000le.com/d/optout. You received this message because von are subscribed to the Google C-rrouns "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gmglegrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@goodtgr. To view this discussion on the web visit Ilttuaar_LmmLgoogle.com/d/msgidilusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15B862%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit ht_tollgtglimgaggle.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gagglsgrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@goodtgmumm. To view this discussion on the web visit hi1ps://gr_mmoogle.com/d/msgidi1usher-boardonly/54ce9adf.00003014.0000000c%401eonhard-PC. For more options, visit ht_p_L/Igr_glimgaagle.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gagglssrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@goodtgr. To view this discussion on the web visit littgzar_apt,Lgoogle.com/d/msgidilusher-boardonly/D33BC5AE.5971%25blecesne%4Oloyno.edu. For more options, visit ht_p_L/Igrou s. aggle.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gagglssrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@goodtgrn. To view this discussion on the web visit blaligr_apt_Lgoogle.com/d/msgidl1usher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15BDDE%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit ht_tugligr_gommgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gagglssrn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@goodtgmumm. To view this discussion on the web visit littplar_Lmauoogle.com/dimsgidilusher-boardonly/c7938f45.00003014.00000017%401eonhard-PC. For more options, visit ht_tollgtgumgaggle.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoaqINroups.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-onlygmglegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgidAusher-board- only/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15C531%40SPEXCH.stoneagman.com. For more options, visit titps://groups.qoogle.com/d/optout. From: Sut.A.nt MIN?: To: Ov', Wisdom, Rachel W. rsscjoi.n...voritipi9.1.ian...oill RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION April 19, 2016 at 1:34 PM Blaine e-,.es4,sn:tdl,,iilo.sdu, Chunlin Leonhard kt:,5riharclioyrio.edu, kiki huston Richard Cortizas roizo.6q,',:yailc)o.00ro, Bickford, Mag mbickforci@rnoglind-iey.com, filt,iben.te..aguepfudential.com, We cancel meetings all the time. Our Bylaws allow it. There is also no violation of the open meetings law. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailtodusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Blaine Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:32 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; 'Chunlin Leonhard'; kiki huston Cc: Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; reuben.teague@prudential.com; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION And those very same Bylaws set forth the process by which the Board exercises its power to determine when it meets. As Chunlin pointed out, the April 23rd regularly scheduled meeting has been agreed upon and the agenda for that meeting has been set. In accordance with the Bylaws, all Board members, by email, stated they would attend and one Board member purchased an airline ticket last week to attend Saturday's meeting. There is no mechanism for now just canceling the meeting or changing the agenda without violating the public meetings law and our Bylaws, no matter how many members do not want to meet. You can express your opposition at the meeting with a vote to table the discussion of any item on the agenda but that vote has to be made in an open meeting and will trigger the same substantive discussion on the UTL petition that some are seeking to avoid by not meeting. Blaine From:"Wisdom, Rachel W." Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:17:58 +0000 To:'Chunlin Leonhard' , kiki huston , Blaine Cc: Richard Cortizas ,"Bickford, Mag" , "reuben.teague@prudential.com" ,"lusher-boardady@gg__Qggallipasain" Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I disagree but don't have time to fully respond. However, Article VII of our Bylaws dearly give the board the power to determine when it will meet. We are not required to meet at any particular time on any particular date. We can, as we have many, many, times before simply cancel and/or reschedule a meeting. in fact, the meeting on the 23rd was rescheduled from April 16 based on a request from Blaine. By my count, there are 5 board members who want to call of this meeting so as to have more time to get information and assess it, and to allow our community to do so too. I ask that our requests be heeded. From: lusher-board-onlOgooglegroups.com [mailtodusher-board-onlyggoogje_groups.com] On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:00 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; kiki huston; blecesne(aloyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teaguePprudential.conn; lusher-boardgud ffgooglegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Dear Board members, I agree that we need to have the regularly scheduled meeting for the reasons well articulated by Andrea, Reuben, Blaine and Carol. Here are the additional reasons why the meeting needs to happen. 1. This regular board meeting has already been scheduled and the meeting agenda was circulated to all board members on April 11 by our secretary. 2. This is a regularly scheduled board meeting, one of the meetings that we as a board are duty bound to hold under our Bylaws. We cannot cancel the meeting consistent with our Bylaws and the Louisiana open meeting laws just because some members disagree with the need for the meeting. 3. We told the people who attended the meeting on April 16 that we will be deciding the issue on April 23. 4. Finally, delaying the meeting does not help with our decision making. The longer we wait, the more painful it will get and the more goodwill we will destroy. There are already a lot of bitterness, distrust, suspicion, accusations on the Lusher campus. Our failure to face the issue, have an open and honest debate, and provide guidance on this issue will make us look weak as a board and damage our legitimacy. If I may use an analogy, our situation is similar to a ship in the middle of a category 1 hurricane. This Board is at the helm now. How do we steer the ship is going to determine whether we will survive the hurricane. We have no luxury to say that "let's stop steering and gather more information about the storm before we make a decision." Nor can we ask the hurricane to stop moving and give us more time. We have to be at the helm, steering the ship the best we can with the information we have received, imperfect as it may be. Sincerely, Chunlin Leonhard From:lusher-board-onlyff_googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@mpskgroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 12:24 PM To:'kiki huston' ; blecesneployno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas ; Bickford, Mag ; Chunlin Leonhard ; reuben.teagueftsrudential.com; lusher-boardonlyfflgooglegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I agree with Kiki. Why can't they give us some more time? I don't understand the rush at all. Kiki: Do we have any fixed meeting for parents yet? mum; sjtci IUSLUII illidillt.LKIKIIIUSWIlcu.ydi RA/AAA I Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 10:31 AM To: blecesne(kbyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teague(a_prudential.com; lusher-board-only_ftnglegroups.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I don't see not meeting as running from our responsibilities. I see it as doing our due diligence to attempt to fully assess how this change would/will effect our community. The ONLY thing the non-union side is asking for, is for us to slow down the process. Kiki Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 19, 2016, at 10:16 AM,blusauggigyno edu wrote: > The decision to meet is not a decision to recognize. We can always choose > to not voluntarily recognize. Pm not advocating for one or the other. But > I do think we have to meet and confront the issue for the reasons > articulated by Reuben. Contentious public meetings come with the territory > of being on a public Board. The discomfort of such meetings is no reason > to not do our job. Indeed, the rancor will increase exponentially when we > are perceived as running from our responsibilities. > Blaine >> All, as you are aware,I have somewhat purposefully and intentionally >> stayed out of the debate of whether or not to have a meeting Saturday. >> However,I do want to be clear that I do not agree with having a meeting >> Saturday. I can not understand why the Union would be so unwilling to >> give us the time to fully vet the issues, or why our decision making >> process, in some measure, should be dictated by the Union. >> If this is any indication of how they will behave...then I can only >> imagine what the CBA negotiations will be like. If indeed they want to >> petition the NLRB,absent a vote of the board, then by all means they >> should. >> Rueben, clearly there is a divide among the teachers...why would we not >> want to encourage a ballot vote of the teachers decide? Frankly, one >> could reasonably argue that our responsibility as a board is not to >> accept a petition based on the information or lack thereof received. I >> believe meeting Saturday will not only raise the rancor, increase the >> already high levels of anxiety among the teachers(both sides), solve no >> issues-- but will leave us, unbearably, as the uninformed endorsers of >> one side's views over another amongst our teacher community. I >> personally do not see that as my role. >> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 7:58 AM,"Wisdom, Rachel W" » < A SNIP •I'• arnan coin> wrote: >> Thank you, Mad and Chunlin. >> What I mean is that the union has a right to provoke an election now or >> later, or not to do it at all. It can wait if it wants to allow us >> time to gather information. So no,I don't think you missed >> anything. Reuben — May I please speak with you later this » morning or this afternoon before 5? I would like to tell you about >> the meeting last night in answer to your questions. If you are >> available, please let me know a time and a number to call. >> From: Bickford, Mag[m •linchey.com] .m i kf$ • >> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 20166:44 AM >> To: Chunlin Leonhard >> Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W;reuben.teague@prudential.com; » lusher-board-only_@gmaestoupasom >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I >> think that is a strong likelihood but not a procedural requirement. >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:54 PM,Chunlin Leonhard <1.taitadi @loyno.edu> wrote: >> Dear Rachel, May I inquire about the bases of your comment below: »"Their leverage, in my estimation, is an illusion"? I thought I >> heard from our attorney(loud and clear)that if no decision(regardless >> of the reasoning) is made by April 23, the Union will petition for an >> election. I remember that very question being asked and Mag talked about >> the importance of Lusher to the Union and her assessment that the Union >> will petition the NLRB if we don't make a decision by April 23. Did I » miss something? Thank you for your clarification. Best regards, >> Chunlin From:lusher-board-only_@googWroups.com 1_ _ _1(•!"%rIENT'_ __ T1_ _1_ _I TNT Lifiamo:lusnel-ooaru-ontyegaositgalujun Denali or wisuom, rcacnei vv. >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:09 PM >> To: areuben.teagut@pnidential.corn' >> lusher-board-only_@gmgitglaups.corn >> Cc: •• • •• s • - „ran >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Reuben: If the persons(teachers and parents) who may not want a >> union, have time to research, consider and present information to us and >> to each other about the subject, there may not be a split. I don't >> know how any of us would know, And I cannot fathom why any of us would >> think that is not important. It is probably the very reason that UTNO >> and ATE are pressuring and threatening. Their leverage, in my >> estimation, is an illusion. I think we disserve the entire community >> (teachers, students and parents) by letting them dictate an artificial >> schedule that can only harm us. If they are acting in good faith, >> they can wait. Fromlusher-board-only_@gmgkgraglisan >> [inailto:lusher-board-only_@gmgitgrimusan]On Behalf Of >> reuben leagut@prudential.com, >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:50 PM >> To: jusher-board-only_@gmg,kgraupssma >> Cc: la • • c al " San >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Kiki >> et al- I do not want to be unsympathetic to the non-union teachers, >> this must be surprising and confusing to them, as it is to us. I just >> don't see how time will change the basic dynamic. Parents and teachers are >> split, that is clear from my inbox. What would be different in a week? >> When you mention a delay, what do you mean? From Mag's email, and >> every educated guess,failure to decide will still result in a petition to >> vote, so what would we be delaying? >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:35 PM,'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only >> lusher-board-only_@gmgitgrog2a&on> wrote: >> Alysia - I did not receive any emails from Mags either. If there was >> correspondence from her, I would like to know as well. All - I see no >> reason to respond to the timeline imposed upon us. It is not a lack of >> governance. A delay would provide time for our very concerned teachers to >> gather more information on how this change might effect them. Sitting >> across the table from teachers in tears and bewilderment is heartbreaking. >> I have trusted my children to these very people. This is a big deal. The >> pro-union folks can wait. I will not be bullied into rushing this >> decision.... if that results in it going to a vote, so be it. I am >> interested in moving forward in a manner that will help heal the, already >> deep, divide. A yes vote would crush about half half of our teacher >> population - who are only asking for more time. A no vote would equally >> crush about another half of teacher population & make them feel as if >> their concerns are not being heard. A delay - while it may result in a >> vote(and thus a true gauge)- will not disenfranchise. My 2 cents. Kiki >> From: Alvsia Loshbaugh >> To: reuben.teagu@prudential.com >> Cc: "lusher-board-only_@gmgjgg,rottps.com" >> lusher-board-only@goDgLegmipk___ -.coni>.,"mbickford@rosIglinchey corn" >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 6:43 PM >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Sorry, but did Mag send any emails today? If so, I did not get them. >> Perhaps it's related to security and our Listserve. Either way,if >> somebody could forward any correspondence from Mag directly to me,that >> would be much appreciated. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:23 PM,mailto:reuben.teagurgprudential.com wrote: >> Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's >> analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a >> responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been >> presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where >> they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal >> argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to >> recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that >> outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. >> While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge,I don't >> think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing >> to hold a meeting,I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack >> of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called >> for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning >> for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive >> discussion. Best, Reuben >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:32 PM,kiki huston wrote: >> For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on >> this issue. Kiki From: "Wisdom, Rachel W." >> To: "Whelan, Carol S" < - i/ - d>;"Barron, Paul L" >> ; Reuben Teague >> Cc: "lusher-board-only@gogkgroups.corn" >> lusher-board-only@ggx2gLegrowas=>;"mbickford@mgglinclicy.corn" >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:02 PM >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things >> or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, >> please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. >> We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing >> stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the >> union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the >> union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't >> even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to >> be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think >> about this and to consider all ot the intormation we gather. I don't >> think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good >> majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If >> we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should >> meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that >> information. Finally, we have received objections from >> constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give >> them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz >> Fest. From:lusher-board-only@googLegr_oupl= >> [mailto:lusher-board-only_@googkgramps.com]On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 20163:42 PM >> To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague m.m ii kfer. i olinchey.corn >> Cc: lusher-board-only_@go_agl_tisr_Qu >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a >> board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen >> to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. >> Carol Carol S. Whelan,Ph.D. Thomas Green Professor of Education >> Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones II >> Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane >> University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New >> Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.eduiteacher SKYPE: iplamtssh,il >> Caro1Whelanll Social Innovation in Education @latig >> From:lusher-board-only_@googl_w_ups.corn >> on behalf of Barron, Paul L >> > Sent: Monday, April 18, 20162:24 PM >> To: Reuben Teague m.m kfe • 0 olinchey.corn >> Cc: lusher-board-only_@go_agl_tisr_Qu >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the >> reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in >> a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not >> favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I >> neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to >> indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the >> board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the >> union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would >> like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result >> in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul >> Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law(Emeritus) Tulane Law >> School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax >> 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If >> you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply >> e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name >> and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and >> do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague >> [mailto:reuben.teaguprudential.com] >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 20162:15 PM >> To Barron Paul I, >> Cc: jusher-board-only_@gmgitgalups.commbickfad@ing,glinthcy.cora >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Paul>> >> Can you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to >> reply to my email. >> Thanks, >> Reuben Teague >> Director, Impact Investments >> 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark,NJ 07102-3777 >> 973-802-6707 >> reuben.teagut@prudential.com >> We're hiring! Come join our >> team:httail.j.d1wrudential.corn ..job-descr ption.phi2jobReciNo=CR-00017 >> From: "Barron, Paul L" >> To: "atiglifad@inQglinchey.com" , >> "lusher-board-only_@gmgkgraups.corn" , >> Date: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM >> Subject: Meeting on Saturday >> Sent by: 1usher-hoard-on1yggIgtups >> Dear Mag: >> I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to >> having a meeting on Saturday. Hence,I have directed this to you with a >> copy of all ofthe board members. >> Regards, >> Paul >> Paul Barron >> The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) >> Tulane Law School >> 6329 Freret Street >> New Orleans, LA 70118 >> Voice 504-865-5986 >> Fax 504-862-8846 >> This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the >> intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy >> all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other >> information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not >> constitute an electronic signature. » ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmatgu. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gmglegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> jimallgroupagmgle.com/dim sgid/lusher-boardady/BN3PRO3MB2260BB881AE96632A0F846E6D56B0%40BN3PRO3M B2260 namprd03 pro d.outlook.corn. >> For more options, visit Jallim/Igrsua.go_c2g1e,com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gaQgLeg >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@gaggiggrialgasan. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> 'Alps://groupasmgle.corn/dim sgid/lusher-boardonly/BN3PR03MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56B0%40BN3PR03MB2260.namprd03,prod. outlook.corn. >> For more options, visit lattimilgroalgogle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@NDgkgro. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@gaggiggrougasan. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> 'Alps://group&gmgle.corn/dim sgidlusher-boardonly/BL2PRO3MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9BF2DD6B0%40B1,2PRO3MB339,nam prd03.prod o utlook.com. >> For more options, visit lattimilgtaups.gg.pg1e.comid/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmaggroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to » mailto:lusher-board-only@gaggiggigilps corn. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> blips://gmaps.gQ_Qgle corn/dim sgid/lusher-boardDay/FE94FE8E1 F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED I 59798%40SPEXC11 stonerliginan,com. ">'> Fry- rri two. nryfinnc Nri cif- httrIc• Hi-m(1111,c arinalP rnrn /11 /rNt-Ntna .a. %A. SflJS # ¼1j1 1...1., ./.1.1.6), • I s41 >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gaoglegra. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googLegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htps://grouplgoogle.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/OF124E596C.07B780710N85257F99.00807A91-1461021799666%40prudential.com. >> For more options, visit lattps:16e,tougasoogle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegra. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googls4groups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htps://group&gmgle.com id/msgid/1usher-board-on1y/696915CE-E51A-41B8-8A7FEA27825821396%40gmail.com. >> For more options, visit h1tpa2Lgtougasoog1e.comid/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegra. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googls4,Yroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htps://groupasmgle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/1478332198.3192275.1461033336147.JavaMail.yah00%40mailyahoo.com. >> For more options, visit la1tps2Lgtougasoog1e.comid/optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegra. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googLegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> htps://groupasoogle.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/OFOB516B5B.9322D26EON85257F9A.000F9554-1461034212697%40prudential.corn. >> For more options, visit lattpsSgtoupasQogle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegra. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto.lusher-board-only_@gmglegraupman. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> blips://graupsxmgle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardpnly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A166%40SPEXCH.stonepi0111an corn. >> For more options, visit hitas. , ,roulagog2g1e comidiopiaut. >> bitp://www,rncglinchey corn >> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New >> York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in >> California. >> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, >> immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original >> message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New >> Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. >> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any >> remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed >> or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment >> containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a >> replacement will be provided. >> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >> httithaymumglinchey.com/disclaimer/ ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmgiggraups.cora. » To post to this group, send email to jusher-board-only_@goggitgamps,coin. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> tatp12,grsalps,gmgle.com/dim sgid/lusher-boardpnly/FE94FE8EIF04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A983%40SPEXCH,stoneploman corn? utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer. » For more options, visit h11425:2g,r_o_umgmg1e.comidloptout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an » email to lusher-board-on1y+unsubscribe@gmg1ggroups.cora. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gmgiggroups.coin. VAVVV UtJtA,LJW011 VII LUG VVVIJ VIJIL >> https://grouplgoogle.corml&msgidilusher-boardonly/1972778872.2655549,1461076959248.JavaMail.yah00%40mail.yahoo.com. >> For more options, visit https://groumgoog1e.comidioptout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-only+unsubscribe@goo,g,Itgroups.cont > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-or4@goog1tgroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groulagoogle.comidlmsgidil usher-boardonly/S00a1555e45d10257cf0e1262b7e0bab.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. > For more options, visit hitpa:11groulagoog1e.comidioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googttgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googl&groups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hapa:ZZgroupLg000le.com/dim sgidiusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED158862%40SPEXCH.stonepiaman.corn. For more options, visit hitps://grouplgoogle.cornid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googttgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googl&groups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit hapa:ZZgroupLgoogle.com/dimsgidllusher-boardonly/54ce9adf.00003014.0000000c%401eonhard-PC. For more options, visit hitps://grouplgoogle.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googttgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlygoogl&groups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit httiallgroupLg000le.com/dimsoidiusher-boardonly/D33BC5AE.5971%25blecesne%4Oloyno.edu. For more options, visit hitps://grouplgoogle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only.2googlegmps,com. To view this discussion on the web visit tnos://groungooctle.com/d/msgidAusher-boardcaly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15BDDE%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visitlittuArsamgaQgle,com/d/optout. From. Subiwt; OW:A?: To: Cv; Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdom@voripEwIan.corn RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION April 19, 2016 at 1:17 PM bleoesrleioyno.edti Chunlin Leonhard ,,,,:herd@,:ioyno edu, kiki huston Richard Cortizas roortizes@:yahr)o.00m Bickford, Mag mbickforciPrnoglini-tey.corn, retiberUsague@prudential.com, 0/1p1.00fT1 I disagree but don't have time to fully respond. However, Article VII of our Bylaws clearly give the board the power to determine when it will meet. We are not required to meet at any particular time on any particular date. We can, as we have many, many, times before simply cancel and/or reschedule a meeting. In fact, the meeting on the 23rd was rescheduled from April 16 based on a request from Blaine. By my count, there are 5 board members who want to call of this meeting so as to have more time to get information and assess it, and to allow our community to do so too. I ask that our requests be heeded. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:00 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; kiki huston; blecesne@loyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teague@prudential.com; lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Dear Board members, agree that we need to have the regularly scheduled meeting for the reasons well articulated by Andrea, Reuben, Blaine and Carol. Here are the additional reasons why the meeting needs to happen. 1. This regular board meeting has already been scheduled and the meeting agenda was circulated to all board members on April 11 by our secretary. 2. This is a regularly scheduled board meeting, one of the meetings that we as a board are duty bound to hold under our Bylaws. We cannot cancel the meeting consistent with our Bylaws and the Louisiana open meeting laws just because some members disagree with the need for the meeting. 3. We told the people who attended the meeting on April 16 that we will be deciding the issue on April 23. 4. Finally, delaying the meeting does not help with our decision making. The longer we wait, the more painful it will get and the more goodwill we will destroy. There are already a lot of bitterness, distrust, suspicion, accusations on the Lusher campus. Our failure to face the issue, have an open and honest debate, and provide guidance on this issue will make us look weak as a board and damage our legitimacy. If I may use an analogy, our situation is similar to a ship in the middle of a category 1 hurricane. This Board is at the helm now. How do we steer the ship is going to determine whether we will survive the hurricane. We have no luxury to say that "let's stop steering and gather more information about the storm before we make a decision." Nor can we ask the hurricane to stop moving and give us more time. We have to be at the helm, steering the ship the best we can with the information we have received, imperfect as it may be. Sincerely. Chunlin Leonhard From: lusher-board-on y@googlegroups.corn [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 12:24 PM To: 'kiki huston ; b ecesne oyno.edu Cc: Richard Cort-izas ; Bickford, Mag ; Chunlin Leonhard ; reuben.teague@prudentialcom; lusher-boardon y@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I agree with Kiki. Why can't they give us some more time? don't understand the rush at O. Kiki: Do we have any fixed meeting for parents yet? From: kiki huston [mailto:kikihustonftyahoo.corn] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 10:31 AM To: blecesNialgyno.edu Cc: Richard Cortizas; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Bickford, Mag; Chunlin Leonhard; reuben.teague(a_prudential.com; lusher-board-onlyAgoodlegroups.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I don't see not meeting as running from our responsibilities. I see it as doing our due diligence to attempt to fully assess how this change would/will effect our community. The ONLY thing the non-union side is asking for, is for us to slow down the process. Kiki Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 19, 2016, at 10:16 AM,blecesne@Lyo no.edu wrote: > The decision to meet is not a decision to recognize. We can always choose > to not voluntarily recognize. I'm not advocating for one or the other. But > I do think we have to meet and confront the issue for the reasons > articulated by Reuben. Contentious public meetings come with the territory > of being on a public Board. The discomfort of such meetings is no reason > to not do our job. Indeed, the rancor will increase exponentially when we > are perceived as running from our responsibilities. > Blaine >> All, as you are aware,I have somewhat purposefully and intentionally >> stayed out of the debate of whether or not to have a meeting Saturday. » However,1 do want to be clear that 1 do not agree with having a meeting >> Saturday. I can not understand why the Union would be so unwilling to » give us the time to fully vet the issues, or why our decision making >> process, in some measure, should be dictated by the Union. » If this is any indication of how they will behave...then I can only >> imagine what the CBA negotiations will be like. If indeed they want to >> petition the NLRB,absent a vote of the board, then by all means they >> should. » Rueben, clearly there is a divide among the teachers...why would we not >> want to encourage a ballot vote of the teachers decide? Frankly, one >> could reasonably argue that our responsibility as a board is not to >> accept a petition based on the information or lack thereof received. I >> believe meeting Saturday will not only raise the rancor, increase the >> already high levels of anxiety among the teachers(both sides), solve no >> issues-- but will leave us, unbearably, as the uninformed endorsers of >> one side's views over another amongst our teacher community. I » personally do not see that as my role. » Richard >> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 7:58 AM,"Wisdom, Rachel W" >> wrote: >> Thank you, Mad and Chunlin. >> What I mean is that the union has a right to provoke an election now or >> later, or not to do it at all. It can wait if it wants to allow us >> time to gather information. So no,I don't think you missed >> anything. Reuben — May I please speak with you later this » morning or this afternoon before 5? I would like to tell you about >> the meeting last night in answer to your questions. If you are >> available, please let me know a time and a number to call. >> From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mglinchey.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 6:44 AM » To: Chunlin Leonhard >> Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W.;reuben.teagm@prudential.com; >> lusher-board-only_@gmglearsgps.com >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I >> think that is a strong likelihood but not a procedural requirement. >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:54 PM,Chunlin Leonhard wrote: >> Dear Rachel May 1 inanire about the bases of your comment below- >> "Their leverage, in my estimation, is an illusion"? I thought I >> heard from our attorney(loud and clear)that if no decision(regardless >> of the reasoning) is made by April 23, the Union will petition for an >> election. I remember that very question being asked and Mag talked about >> the importance of Lusher to the Union and her assessment that the Union >> will petition the NLRB if we don't make a decision by April 23. Did I >> miss something? Thank you for your clarification. Best regards, >> Chunlin From:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com >> [mailto:lusher-board-only_@googkgroups.com]On Behalf OfWisdom, Rachel W. >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:09 PM >> To: Teuben.teague@prudential.com' >> ;lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com >> Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.corn >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Reuben: If the persons(teachers and parents) who may not want a >> union, have time to research, consider and present information to us and >> to each other about the subject, there may not be a split. I don't >> know how any of us would know, And I cannot fathom why any of us would >> think that is not important. It is probably the very reason that UTNO >> and ATF are pressuring and threatening. Their leverage, in my >> estimation, is an illusion. I think we disserve the entire community >> (teachers, students and parents) by letting them dictate an artificial >> schedule that can only harm us. If they are acting in good faith, >> they can wait. Fromlusher-board-only@googlegoups.com >> [mailto:lusher-board-only_@googkgroups.com]On Behalf Of >> reuben.teagurudential.com >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:50 PM >> To: lusher-board-onlx@googlegroups coin >> Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.corn >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Kiki >> et al- I do not want to be unsympathetic to the non-union teachers, >> this must be surprising and confusing to them, as it is to us. I just >> don't see how time will change the basic dynamic. Parents and teachers are >> split, that is clear from my inbox. What would be different in a week? >> When you mention a delay, what do you mean? From Mag's email, and >> every educated guess, failure to decide will still result in a petition to >> vote, so what would we be delaying? >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:35 PM,'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only >> wrote: >> Alysia - I did not receive any emails from Mags either. If there was >> correspondence from her, I would like to know as well. All - I see no >> reason to respond to the timeline imposed upon us. It is not a lack of >> governance. A delay would provide time for our very concerned teachers to >> gather more information on how this change might effect them. Sitting >> across the table from teachers in tears and bewilderment is heartbreaking. >> I have trusted my children to these very people. This is a big deal. The >> pro-union folks can wait. I will not be bullied into rushing this >> decision.... if that results in it going to a vote, so be it. I am >> interested in moving forward in a manner that will help heal the, already >> deep, divide. A yes vote would crush about half half of our teacher >> population - who are only asking for more time. A no vote would equally >> crush about another half ofteacher population & make them feel as if >> their concerns are not being heard. A delay - while it may result in a >> vote(and thus a true gauge)- will not disenfranchise. My 2 cents. Kiki >> From: Alysia Loshbaugh >> To: reuben.team@prudential.com >> Cc: "lusher-board-only_@gagglarotips.com" >> ;"mbiekfargiftgglinchey com" >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 6:43 PM >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION >> Sony, but did Mag send any emails today? If so, I did not get them. >> Perhaps it's related to security and our Listserve. Either way,if >> somebody could forward any correspondence from Mag directly to me, that >> would be much appreciated. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:23 PM,mailtoseuben.team@prudential.com wrote: >> Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's >> analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a >> responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been >> presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where >> they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal >> argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to >> recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that >> outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. >> While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge,I don't >> think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing >> to hold a meeting,I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack >> of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called >> for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning >> for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive >> discussion. Best, Reuben >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:32 PM,kiki huston wrote: >> For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on >> this issue. Kiki From: "Wisdom, Rachel W" >> To: "Whelan, Carol S" - "Barron, Paul L" >> ; Reuben Teague >> Cc: "lusher-board-only@gagglaroups.com" >> ;"mbiekfargiftgglinchey corn" >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 20164:02 PM >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Tharlle-e a11 T am liPt-cr tirprl aryl rtiel-ipti en T ann1neri,7p if T mice thinac V %./.. UV'S./ .1.1.11,1161, >> or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, >> please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. >> We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing >> stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the >> union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the >> union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't >> even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to >> be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think >> about this and to consider all ofthe information we gather. I don't >> think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good >> majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If >> we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should >> meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that >> information. Finally, we have received objections from >> constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give >> them time to gather information either and because some will be at Ja77 >> Fest. From:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com >> [mailto:lusher-board-only@googimapi s.com]On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM >> To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague >> Cc: lusher-board-only_@gc_o_ogiggroun;mbickford@a_gic linchey.corn >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a >> board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen >> to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. >> Carol Carol S. Whelan,Ph.D. Thomas Green Professor of Education >> Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones II >> Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane >> University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New >> Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.edu/teacher SKYPE: >> Caro1Whelanll Social Innovation in Education @h111:i'/siined.wp.tulane.edu/ >> From:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com >> on behalf of Barron, Paul L >> >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM >> To: Reuben Teague >> Cc: lusher-board-only_@gat_ogiggroun;mbickford@a_gic linchey.corn >> Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the >> reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in >> a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not >> favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I >> neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to >> indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the >> board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the >> union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would >> like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result >> in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul >> Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law(Emeritus) Tulane Law >> School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax >> 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If >> you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply >> e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name >> and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and >> do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague >> [mailto:reuben.teagprudential.com] >> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM >> To: Barron, Paul L >> Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com;mbickford@mcglinchey.com >> Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Paul>> >> Can you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to >> reply to my email. >> Thanks, >> Reuben Teague >> Director, Impact Investments >> 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark,NJ 07102-3777 >> 973-802-6707 >> reuben.teagtisAprudential.com >> We're hiring! Come join our >> team:http://jobs.prudential.com/job-description.php?jobReqNo=C R-00017 >> From: "Barron, Paul L" >> To: "mbickford(@,mcglinchey.com" , >> "lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.corn" , >> Date: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM >> Subject: Meeting on Saturday >> Sent by: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com >> Dear Mag: >> I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to >> having a meeting on Saturday. Hence,I have directed this to you with a >> copy of all of the board members. >> Regards, >> Paul >> Paul Barron >> The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) >> Tulane Law School >> 6329 Freret Street >> New Orleans, LA 70118 >> Voice 504-865-5986 >> Fax 504-862-8846 >> This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the >> intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy >> all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other >> information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not >> constitute an electronic signature. » ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gg_ggiggrstpi. s.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@gogkgr. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> 1.101/2grot_umgoogle.com ld/msgidllusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB2260BB88 I A E96632A OF846E6D56B0%40BN3PRO3Ni B226().namprd03.pro d.outlook.corn. >> For more options, visit littpii//gr_s_y_pu s.gmgle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gg_gdmops.corn. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only@goodtgr_api s.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> lAos://groups.google.comicl/msgidlusher-boardonly/B N3PRO3MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56BO%z10 PR03M82260.namprd03 1\4 .prod. outlook,corn. >> For more options, visithOLLgrs_q s.galgle.comid/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gaggkgmps.corn. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only@goodtgrsipi s.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> 1=§2.grot._jp.t.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/BI,2PRO3MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9BF2DD6B0%40B L2P R03M 8339.nam prd03.prod.o utlook.com. >> For more options, visit https://grs_a. ssmgle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@g000leors. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googiegroun. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> s.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159798%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. >> For more options, visit blip/opgg1e.com/d/optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To =subscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gooaleoron. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailtolusher-board-only_@googjarsjaps corn. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://aravs.goog1e.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/OF124E596C.07B7B0710N85257F99.00807A91-1461021799666%40prudential.com >> For more options, visit 1:1=2Zgrot_ip.,Imogle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlsgr. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googjarsaps corn. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> hLtps://gps.ggie.com/dims id/lusher-board-only/696915C E-E51A-4 I B8-8A7FEA27825B2B96%40gmail.com. >> For more options, visith=arat._z_. s.,gaggle.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@g000lsgrs. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googjarsjzs.corn. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> h_ttps://gr_o_L. s.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/1478332198.3192275.1461033336147.JavaMail.yah00%40mailyahoo.com. >> For more options, visith=s2Zgrot_a_. s.,ggosle.com/d/optout. >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To =subscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlsgron. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only_@googjarsaps corn. lo view uus discussion on me weo visit >> liVs://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/OF0B516B5B.9322D26EON85257F9A.000F9554-1461034212697%40prudential.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email tolusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googkgroups.corn. >> To post to this group, send email to >> mailto:lusher-board-only@googkgrimps.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> liVs://groungoogle.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A166%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.coin. >> For more options, visit https://gr_QAps.google.com/d/optout. >> http://www.mcglinchey.com/ Ihttp://www.cafalawblog.com/ >> McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New >> York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGlinchey Stafford, LLP in >> California. >> Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client >> privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the >> intended recipient(s). If you have received this transmission in error, >> immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original >> message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New >> Orleans, LA,70130 via the United States Postal Service. >> We take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any >> remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed >> or used without our express permission. If you receive an attachment >> containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately and a >> replacement will be provided. >> See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy >>12D://www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@goodtgroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> liVs://groups.google.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A983%40SPEXCH stonepigman.coin? utm medium=email&utm source=footer. >> For more options, visit https://gr_QAps.google.com/d/optout. » ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gaggkaapi s.com. >> To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gaggkgrsiips.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> http§:Ssrsjips.google.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/1972778872.2655549.146 I 076959248.JavaMail.vahoe/040maiLyahoo.com. >> For more options, visit 1=sjigr_g_Lpi s.ggs2gle.comfdlontout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-only+unsubscribe@goglggroups.corn. > To post to this group, send email to Itisher-board-only@googlsomps.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https:orouns.goog1e.com/dimsgidl1usher-boardonly/800a1555e45d1 0257cf0e1262b7e0bab.squirrel%40secui-e.1oyno.edu. > For more options, visit https://grourissmgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-onlv+unsubscribe@gooaleqjps.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-only@qooqlegrops.com. To view this discussion on the web visit bilps://cummgoople.comki/rnsgidAusher-board- onlv/FE94FE8E1F04F74413CD6D9A5E438A242ED15B862%40SPEXCH.stonepiqman.com. For more options, visit ht_ips://aroups.qooqle.com/dIoptout. From. Subiwt; OW:A?: To: Ce; Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdom@voripEwIan.corn RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION April 19, 2016 at 7:46 AM d Bickford, Mag m rJi Chunlin Leonhard ioon rd dk:yno.e4.1u reuben.teague@prudential.com, Thank you, Mad and Chunlin. What I mean is that the union has a right to provoke an election now or later, or not to do it at all. It can wait if it wants to allow us time to gather information. So no, I don't think you missed anything. Reuben — May I please speak with you later this morning or this afternoon before 5? I would like to tell you about the meeting last night in answer to your questions. If you are available, please let me know a time and a number to call. From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mcglinchey.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 6:44 AM To: Chunlin Leonhard Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W.; reuben.teague@prudential.com; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION I think that is a strong likelihood but not a procedural requirement. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:54 PM,Chunlin Leonhard wrote: Dear Rachel, May I inquire about the bases of your comment below:"Their leverage, in my estimation, is an illusion"? I thought I heard from our attorney (loud and c:lear) that if no decision (regardless of the reasoning) is made by April 23, the Union will petition for an election. I remember that very question being asked and Mag talked about the importance of Lusher to the Union and her assessment that the Union will petition the NLRB if we don't make a decision by April 23. Did I miss something? Thank you for your clarification. Best regards, Chunlin From: lusher-board-only@ggggigg=ps.com [mailto:lusher-board221y@gg_Qg1egmps.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:09 PM To:'reuben.teagia@prudential,com' ; lusher-boardpray@gg_QglEgmps.com Cc: mbickford@mcgJinchey.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday --ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Reuben: If the persons (teachers and parents) who may not want a union, have time to research, consider and present information to us and to each other about the subject, there may not be a split. I don't know how any of us would know, And I cannot fathom why any of us would think that is not important. It is probably the very reason that UTNO and ATF are pressuring and threatening. Their leverage, in my estimation, is an illusion. I think we dis.serve the entire community (teachers, students and parents) by letting them dictate an artificial schedule that can only harm us. If they are acting in good faith, they can wait. From: lusher-board-only_ftgokgmps.com [mailto:lusher-board-onlyffgoogkgrLggpn] On Behalf Of reuben.teaque@prudential.com Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:50 PM To: lusher-board-only2goodegroups.com Cc: mbickford(amcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Kiki et alI do not want to be unsympathetic to the non-union teachers, this must be surprising and confusing to them, as it is to us. I just don't see how time will change the basic dynamic. Parents and teachers are split, that is clear from my inbox. What would be different in a week? When you mention a delay, what do you mean? From Mag's email, and every educated guess, failure to decide will still result in a petition to vote, so what would we be delaying? Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:35 PM,'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only wrote: Alysia - I did not receive any emails from Mags either. If there was correspondence from her, I would like to know as well. All I see no reason to respond to the timeline imposed upon us. It is not a lack of governance. A delay would provide time for our very concerned teachers to gather more information on how this change might effect them. Sitting across the table from teachers in tears and bewilderment is heartbreaking. I have trusted my children to these very people. This is a big deal. The pro-union folks can wait. I :C VVIII IIUL Ut uuiiieu IIILU I ubliiiiy 1_1115 H LIIcIL results in it going to a vote, so be it. I am interested in moving forward in a manner that will help heal the, already deep, divide. A yes vote would crush about half half of our teacher population - who are only asking for more time. A no vote would equally crush about another half of teacher population & make them feel as if their concerns are not being heard. A delay - while it may result in a vote (and thus a true gauge) - will not disenfranchise. My 2 cents. Kiki From: Alysia Loshbaugh To: reuben.teague©prudential_corn Cc: "lusher-board-onlyggooglegroups.com" Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 6:43 PM Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Sorry, but did Mag send any emails today? If so, I did not get them. Perhaps its related to security and our Listserve. Either way, if somebody could forward any correspondence from Mag directly to me, that would be much appreciated. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:23 PM, reuben.teague@prudentialcom wrote: Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge, I don't think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing to hold a meeting, I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive discussion. Best, Reuben Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:32 PM, kiki huston wrote: For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on this issue. Kiki From:"Wisdom, Rachel W." To: "'Whelan, Carol Si" ; "Barron, Paul L" ; Reuben Teague Cc: "lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com" ; "mbickford@mcglinchey.com" Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:02 PM Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEYCLIENT COMMUNICATION Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. Its the union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't even have a rneetind scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think about this and to consider all of the information we gather. I don't think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that information. Finally, we have received objections from constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz Fest. From: lusher-board-onlyaggaglegroups.com [mailto:lusher-boardgaly_PAQ0LQgaups.com] On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-onlygmftgimps.com• mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. Carol Carol S. Whelan, Ph.D. Thomas Green Professor of Education Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.edulteacher SKYPE: CarolWhelanll Social Innovation in Education @ t- tp://siined.wp.tulane.edu/ Es....r•••• It test-sr.,- hes nre4 ....rd‘aThr4r.,nraIrNevrni in p. ne.rv't -At test-sew I I ‘1111. 11.4011C1 -1JUCLILI —til II)' lt.t.s9L.P1 / 4)91091c/UIJOAAJI I I •••-.IU01101 board-only@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Barron, Paul L Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM To: Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com• mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender ay reply e-maii and destroy au copies OT mis communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague [mailto:reuben.teague@prudential.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday PaulCan you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to reply to my email. Thanks, Reuben Teague Director, Impact Investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teaque@prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: http://jobs.prudential.com/jobdescription.plp?jobReqNo=CR-00017 "Barron, Paul L" From: To: "mbickford@mcglinchey.com" "lusher-boardonly@qooqkgroups.com" Date. Subje;A: Sant by: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM Meeting on Saturday lusher-board-only(1..gootwmps.com Dear Mag: I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to having a meeting on Saturday. Hence, I have directed this to you with a copy of all of the board members. neyw uo, Paul Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lustier-boardon y±unsubscribe@qooa egroups,com. To post to this group, send email to usherboardor To view this discussion on the web visit iltps://groupscloogle:comidirnsgkillusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB2260BE3881AE96632A0F846E6D56 BO%40BN3PRO3MB2260,nampr(103.orodoutlook,com For more options, visit httos://grouosgoogle:comidioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups,googlecornid/msgidilusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56 B09/040BN3PR03MB2260.namprd03.prodoutlook.com For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/BL2PRO3MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9BF2DD6B 0%4OBL2P RO3M B339.nam prd03.orod.outlook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonlyggooglegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/rnsgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242E D15 9798%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.corn. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonly@ googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/OF124E596C.07B7B071-0N85257F99.00807A911461021799666%40prudential.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/696915CEE51A-41B8-8A7F-EA27825B2B96°/040gmail.com. For more options, visit htips://groups.google.comidiopiout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gpsglegn. To post to this group, send email to l usher-boardaty_@googlssrsuns.com. To view this discussion on the web visit IIMLarat_al,gps.gle.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardoLly/1478332198.3192275.1461033336147.JavaMail.yah00%40mail.ya hoo.com. For more options, visit 11_,gps://grot_luLgoogle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gmglegamps. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@gm,gkgrsaips.com. To view this discussion on the web visit blip.s2gasza,gmgle.comidimsclidllusherboard-only/OFOB5 1 6B5B.9322D26E-0N85257F9A 000F9554140034212697%. For more options, visit Jattplfgroups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@go_Qglegraups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlyggppgLgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit him*. ush erboardanlyiTE94FE8E1 F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A 242E1)15/11 66%40SPEXCH.stonepig man.corn,. For more options, visit Jattp2iLgampLgoogle.comSd/optout. www.mcdlinchey.com www.CafaLawBlod.com MoGlinchey Stafford, PLLC M Aiabarna, Honda, Louisiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Washington DC and McGiinchey Stafford, P in California Confidentiality Statement: This email may contain attorney-client privileged or confidential information. It is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). if you have received this transmission in error: immediately notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the original message to us at McGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New Orisons, LA, 70130 via the United States Postal Service. We take steps to remove rnetadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metariata should be presumed inadvertent and should not be viewed or used without our express permission. if you receive an attachment containing metadata. please notify the sender immediately and a replacement wig be provided. See McGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy tittp://www.mcqlinchey.comiclisclaimeri You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gooquroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@qoogiDroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://qroupLgooqle.com/d/msqid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A983%40SPE XCH.stonepiqman.com. For more options, visit ht_lps://groups.gooqie.com/d/optout. Wisdom, Rachel W. rssci.c)i.n...Voritipi9.1.ian...oill Subject RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION De,.e: April 18, 2016 at 10:08 PM To Lide iUSht••.ir-boarci-o @;- 00g ef,; Cc; Mil)iCgOrd mogiirichey.corn Reuben: If the persons (teachers and parents) who may not want a union, have time to research, consider and present information to us and to each other about the subject, there may not be a split. I don't know how any of us would know, And I cannot fathom why any of us would think that is not important. It is probably the very reason that UTNO and ATF are pressuring and threatening. Their leverage, in my estimation, is an illusion. I think we disserve the entire community (teachers, students and parents) by letting them dictate an artificial schedule that can only harm us. If they are acting in good faith, they can wait. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of reuben.teague@prudential.com Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:50 PM To: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Kiki et alI do not want to be unsympathetic to the non-union teachers, this must be surprising and confusing to them, as it is to us. I just don't see how time will change the basic dynamic. Parents and teachers are split, that is clear from my inbox. What would be different in a week? When you mention a delay, what do you mean? From Mag's email, and every educated guess, failure to decide will still result in a petition to vote, so what would we be delaying? Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:35 PM,'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only wrote: Alysia - I did not receive any emails from Mags either. If there was correspondence from her, I would like to know as well. All I see no reason to respond to the timeline imposed upon us. It is not a lack of governance. A delay would provide time for our very concerned teachers to gather more information on how this change might effect them. Sitting across the table from teachers in tears and bewilderment is heartbreaking. I have trusted my children to these very people. This is a big deal. The pro-union folks can wait. I will not be bullied into rushing this decision.... if that results in it going to a vote, so be it. I am interested in moving forward in a manner that will help heal the, already deep, divide. A yes vote would crush about half half of our teacher population who are only asking for more time. A no vote would equally crush about another half of teacher population & make them feel as if their concerns are not being heard A delay - while it may result in a vote (and thus a true gauge) - will not disenfranchise. My 2 cents. Kiki From: Alysia Loshbaugh To: reuben.teague©prudential,com Cc: "lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com" : "mbickford@mcglinchey.com" Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 6:43 PM Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Sorry, but did Mag send any emails today? If so, I did not get them. Perhaps it's related to security and our Listserve. Either way, if somebody could forward any correspondence from Mag directly to me, that would be much appreciated. Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:23 PM, reuben.teague@prudential.com wrote: Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge, I don't think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing to hold a meeting, I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive discussion. Best, Reuben Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:32 PM, kiki huston wrote: For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on this issue. Kiki From:"Wisdom, Rachel W." To:"Whelan, Carol S","Barron, Paul L" ; Reuben Teague Cc: "lusher-board-only@googlegroups.corn" ; "mbickford@mcglinchey.com" Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:02 PM Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think about this and to consider all of the information we gather. I don't think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that information. Finally, we have received objections from constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz Fest. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailtolusher-boardonly@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@goockgroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. Carol Carol S. Whelan., Ph.D. Thomas Green Professor of Education Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones ii Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.edu/teacher SKYPE: Caro1Whelan11 Social Innovation in Education @ p://siined.wp.tulane.edu/ From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.corn on behalf of Barron, Paul L Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM To: Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not faunr the t nirr fri renraccint them I am armnelir •‘..4 V Et 80 8%. ik 8 88%.18 8 +A, 8 8.4..8 id 88. 8.8 8 88.8..8.8 88.JJ8.18.." regarding this issue. I neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague [mailtoseuben.teague@prudential.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.conn; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday PaulCan you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to reply to my email. Thanks, Reuben Teague uirector, impact investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teaque@prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: Littp://jobs.prudential.com/job-description.php? jobRegNo=CR-00017 "Barron, Paul L" From: To: "mbickford@mcolinchey.com" "lusher-boardonlag000legroups.com" Date: Sui.:jea Sent by: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM Meeting on Saturday lusher-board-only@gooqjg_groups.com Dear Mag: I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to having a meeting on Saturday. Hence, I have directed this to you with a copy of all of the board members. Regards, Paul Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, esesletel IU ciii i I ICill LU lUZ-A M;€ oniv+unsubscribe@cooglegroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardps,com only@ oogleg To view this discussion on the web visit ooci aconlidirn sgidliusher-boardhttps://q rou oniv/BN3PRO3MB2260BB881AE96632A0F846E6D56B0%40BN3 PR03MB2260.namprd03.prod.outiook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.comidfoptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly-Funsubscribeggoogiegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-boardonly@googlegroups.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgidilusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56B0`)/040BN3 PRO3MB2260.namprd03.prod.outlook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonlyfunsubscribe @googiegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to tusher-boardonly@googlegroups.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgiditusher-boardonly/BL2PRO3M83398AFF065605E33E7C9BF2DD6B09/040BL2P R03MB339.namprd03.prod.outiook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly-Funsubscribeggooglegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to tusher-boardonly@googlegroups.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgiclitusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159798%40S PEXCHstonepigman.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/OF124E596C.07B7B071-0N85257F99.00807A911461021799666°/040prudential.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-board-only/696915CE-E51A-41B88A7F-EA27825B2B96°/040gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only-f-unsubscribe@Qooglegroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@Qooglearoups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://c. s.c.roogle.com/d/msgidllusherboardonly/1478332198.3192275.1461033336147.JavaMail.yah00%40mail.yahoo.com. For more options, visit laLtps://0-roups.g0001e.comldloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@g000leomps.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comidlmsgidlusher-boardonly/OFOB516B5B.9322D26E-ON85257F9A.000F9554-1461034212697%40prudential.com. For more options, visit https://oroups.0000le.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoogIggroups.com. 10 post to MIS group, sena email CO lusrter-ouaro-orilyt&quoyiegiovs.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit titips://qroups.google.com/d/msqid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED15A166°/040SPE XCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit blps://groups.gmle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. r4.iscjoi.r .voritipi9.1.ian...oill Sut.A.nt FW: Meeting on Saturday-- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION D.ate: April 18, 2016 at 9:02 PM To: 'Barron, Paul U (pbarron@tulane.edu) p rôr½u..icane.e.(.1u, Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) rak:shba ugh Maybe I am being petty because I am tired and ornery. But what does this guy, who has not been to more than 2 meetings since he was elected as a board member, know about governance? When I suggested that he should be removed from service for his horrible record of attendance and utter lack of participation, it was Kathy who defended him and said I should not initiate any effort to that effect. All of this makes me ill. From: lusher-board-onlyAgooglearoups.com [mailto:lusher-board-onlyaggiggroups.com] On Behalf Of reuben.teaque(aprudential.com Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 6:23 PM To: lusher-board-only@googkgroups.com Cc: mbickford@mcolinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge, I don't think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing to hold a meeting, I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive discussion. Best, Reuben Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:32 PM,kiki huston wrote: For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on this issue. Kiki From:"Wisdom, Rachel W." To: "'Whelan, Carol S" ; "Barron, Paul L" ; Reuben Teague Cc: "lusher-board-only@googkgroups.com" ; "mbickford@mcglinchey.com" Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:02 PM Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think about this and to consider all of the information we gather. don't think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that information. Finally, we have received objections from constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz Fest. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailtolusher-board-only@google_groups.coml On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@0000Le_groups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. Carol Carol S. Whelan, Ph.D. Thomas Green Professor of Education Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones II Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship PreNfac.scnr ra Pr ar,tir.n Tulane University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.edu/teacher SKYPE: Caro1Whelani 1 Social Innovation in Education @ http://siined.wp.tulane.edu/ From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com on behalf of Barron, Paul L Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM To: Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@nncglinchey.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague [mailtoseuben.teague@prudential.conn] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday PaulCan you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to reply to my email. Thanks, Reuben Teague Director, Impact Investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teague@prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: tittp://jobs.prudential.com/job-description.abp? jobRegNo=CR-00017 From: "Barron, Paul L" To: "mbickford@mcalinchey.com" "lusher-board-onlyggooglegroups.com" De• Sent by: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM Meeting on Saturday lusher-board-onlyggoogitgroups.com Dear Mag: I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to having a meeting on Saturday. Hence, I have directed this to you with a copy of all of the board members. Regards, Paul Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-oniv@goodegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https:figroups.cloogle.cornidimsgidliusher-boardonly/BN3PR03MB2260BB881AE96632A0F846E6D56B0%40BN3PR03MB22 60.nam prd03.prod.outlook.corn. For more options, visit https://groups.google.comidioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Iusher-boardonly/BN3P R03MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56B0%40BN3P RO3M B22 60.nam prd03.prod.outtook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comidimsgid/Iusher-boardonly/BL2P R03MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9BF2D D6B0%40BL2P RO3M B339 • namprd03.prod.outiook.corn. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159798%40SPEXCH.sto nepigman.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@g22glearoups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/dimsgidlusher-boardonly/OF124E596C.07B7B071-0N85257F99.00807A91-1461021799666%40prudential coin. For more options, visit https://groupL,g,000le.com/d/optout. From: Subject Date: To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdornastonepiorrsan.conl RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION April 18, 2016 at 8:37 PM reuben.te>rIgi.M4@paidentil.COas, lusher-board-only@googlegrOilpe.conl nicford@rnoglinchey.corn The information we are getting from the non-union organizing teachers is alarming. I cannot stress enough that we need to have information that is reliable to act responsibly. It is not a signal of chaos or lack of governance that we do not meet to decide something of this magnitude in less than two weeks. I know from the meeting tonight that our teachers and our parents are trying to quickly gather information and assess, but feel they need more time. They want to be able to gather information and express their views once informed by that information, rather than being rushed to do so without full information. What is the harm in taking time? This is a huge decision. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of reuben.teague@prudential.com Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 6:23 PM To: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Cc: mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Having read the arguments for delaying the meeting as well as Mag's analysis, I think we should go forward and have it. We have a responsibility to the school to address the situation that has been presented. Should we vote not to recognize, the teachers will know where they stand and can move forward to an election, with the principal argumentation being directed toward one another. Should we vote to recognize, the community as a whole can move forward together with that outcome. In either case, we will have added some focus to the situation. While I share the concerns about our imperfect knowledge, I don't think another week or weeks will perfect our understanding. By failing to hold a meeting,I think we would be sending a signal of chaos and lack of governance in a moment in which the exact opposite signal is called for. I will be there on Saturday and I think we should start planning for how to manage that meeting to minimize rancor and encourage productive discussion. Best, Reuben Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18,2016, at 5:32 PM,kiki huston wrote: For the record, what both Paul and Rachel wrote reflect my feelings on this issue. Kiki From: "Wisdom, Rachel W." io: -vvneian,(Aro! ; "Barron, Haui L" ; Reuben Teague Cc: "lusher-board-onlyAgooglegroups.com" ; "mbickfordp,mcglinchey.com" Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:02 PM Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think about this and to consider all of the information we gather. I don't think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that information. Finally, we have received objections from constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz Fest. From: lusher-board-only@googLe_groups.com [mailtolusher-board-only@doodlegroups.coml On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S Sent: Monday, April 18, 20163:42 PM To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@goog&gmps.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. Carol Caro/ S. Whelan, Ph.D. Thomas Green Professor of Education Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones II Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.edu/teacher SKYPE:CarolWhelan11 Social Innovation in Education @ htto://siined.wp.tulane.edu/ From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com on behalf of Barron, Paul L Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM To: Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.corn; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the union without a vote by the teachers, Since I prefer an election, I would like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will result in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 FA Y fl4-AR2-R1:44R This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague [mailto:reuben.teague@prudential.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday PaulCan you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to reply to my email. Thanks, Reuben Teague Director, Impact Investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teaque@prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: http://jobs.prudential.corn/job-description.pILV jobReqNo=CR-00017 Frorn: "Barron, Paul L" To: "mbickford@mcglinchey.com" , lusher-board-onlv@gooq9roups.com"" Date: Subject: Sent by: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM Meeting on Saturday lusher-board-only@qQgleqroups.com Dear Mag: I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to having a meeting on Saturday. Hence, I have directed this to you with a copy of all of the board members. Regards, Pat II Paul Barron The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usher-board-only±unsubseribe@clooglegroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlyftgooglegroups.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.gooqie.comidimsgidilusher-boardonly/BN3P RO3MB2260BB881AES6632A0F846ESD56B0%40BN3P RO3M B22 60.nam prd03‘prod.outiook.corn. For more options, visit https://groups.cpogie.cornidioptaut. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups,com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comidimsgiausher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56B0%40BN3PRO3NAB22 60.namprd03.prod.outlook.corn. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.corn. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups,com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comidimsgiausher-boardonly/BL2PRO3MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9BF2DD6B09/040BL2PRO3MB339 .namprd03.prod.outlook.corn. Fnr mnrn nntinne cif htine rni nnr1 I e.:1 orirri /r1 /(Nrtfr-Nt I WI I I 1%./I Su), V liOSI I It ¼41 tJJIJt4 I. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comkUmsgid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159798%40SPE XCH.sto nepigman.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving, emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@goocrlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only(&googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.000gle.com/dImsgidllusher-boardonly/OF124E596C.07B7B071-0N85257F99.00807A91-1461021799666%40prudential.com. For more options, visit l'ps://groups.000gle.comidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoogitgiggps.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googitgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msqid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159C75%40SPE XCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit titps://groups.qooqle.com/d/optout. From: Subiwt; OW:A?: To: C-v; Wisdom, Rachel W. r4.isdom@VoripEwIan.corn RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION April 18, 2016 at 4:02 PM Whelan, Carol S ciiwileianctui.ane.e.:.11.1, Barron, Paul L 106her-boad-oly,?,;',Ijooglegroulds.cof11, nibiokford@•Mcgio -ley.4.:.Edi-r; Reuben Teague Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think about this and to consider all of the information we gather. I don't think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that information. Finally, we have received objections from constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz Fest. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday. Carol Carol S. tilielan, Pki9. Thomas Green Professor ofEducation Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones TI Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Ls:- I I-tie:UM, wcy A, / 1 4 . ..4%.,11.k..4 %.01 CAA 1%.,Atitt.U. A I U5ICLAU 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-M5-5341 tulane.eduiteacher SICYPE: Caro1Whelan11 Social Innovation in Education @ http:/jsiined.wp.tulane.edu From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com on behalf of Barron, Paul L Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM To: Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-onlyfflgooglegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to indicate how they feel.. The only reason for a meeting is to give the board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would like to avoid a rancorous discussion., particularly because it will result in comments that will be unfair to the administration. Regards, Paul Pad Favzog The Class of 1.937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 701.18 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. if you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague [mailto:reuben.teague@prudential.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday PaulCan you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to reply to my email. Thanks, Reuben Teague Director, Impact Investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teague@prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: http2Ijobs.prudential.com/job-description.php?jobReqNo=CR-00017 From: "Barron, Paul I: "mbickford@mcqlinchey.com" ,"lusher-board-onlyAgoodleqroups.com" , Date. Subject. Sent by: 04/18/2016 03:08 PM Meeting on Saturday lusher-board-only_@g000legroups.com Dear Mag: I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to having a meeting on Saturday. Hence, I have directed this to you with a copy of all of the board members. Regards, Paul Ated slim* The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only±unsubscribe0googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googkgroups.corn. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.rom/d/msgidilusherboardonly/BN3PRO3M82260B8881AE96632A0F846E6D5660%40BN3PRO3MB2260.namprd03p rod.outiookcom. For more options, visit httlfgroups.google.comidloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-onl +unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlyffgoockgroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.gaggle.com/d/msgid/lusherboardonly/BN3PRO3M B226005B46C449E070264E932D56130%40BN3PRO3M B2260.nam prd03.p rod.outlook.com For more options, visit httoillgroups.google.com&I/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribeg.g000legru s.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlylcDgooglegroups com To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.000gle.com/d/msgidlusher-boardonly/BL2PRO3MB3398AFF065605E33E7C9BF2DD6B0%40BL2PR03MB339.namprd03.prod o utlook.com. For more options, visit 1-mps://gpi s.000gle.comidloptout You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoogitgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googitg s.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://grouplgooqle.com/d/msqid/lusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED159798%40SPEXCH.stonepig man.com. For more options, visit tjllps://groups.qoogle.com/d/optout. From: SuNect: L.late; To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssciornstonepionsan.com RE: Quick question re:Bylaws April 19, 2016 at 2:57 PM Alysia Loshbaugh aics.10;Afgh@.grfle.i.f:om From my read, that would be a deadlock -- no action. See Article VII g. Original Message From: Alysia Loshbaugh [maitto:aloshbauglag ail,corr] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 2:27 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Subject: Quick question re:Bylaws What would happen if we had a split vote of 5-5, in the event not all members were present to vote on an issue? Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdorn@stonopEgman.corn Subject: [Lusher] Litigation hold. Attorney-Client Privileged communication Date; April 18,2016 at 9:47 PM To: robic.itford@rnoglimthey.00M, iusher-board-anci-miroirlistrei.ersCigoogif.4groepe.com Mag. Please send out information for a litigation hold if you have not already done so. All: Do not delete, discard etc any document, electronic or paper, that relates to this matter. Not from personal email or files, or anywhere. Thank you. Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmarm L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gatvLimuilanck. minilArator*;+unsubsOlbet: .6 :110g11.• To post to this group,send email to LiVtet-beatil-arz:1-a.:Iminitit.ratonftgolagmiM Gorrk. For more options, visit atinittga),Lmgiazasamalcasp.a. From. Subiwt; OW:A?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdomdvoripEwIan.corn FW: Meeting on Saturday-- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Privileged and not to be disclosed April 18, 2016 at 8:40 PM Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) , Alysai Kravita-Loshbaugh (loshbaugh@gmail.com) From: Bickford, Mag [mailto:mbickford@mcglinchey.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 5:24 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W.; 'Whelan, Carol S'; Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Privileged and not to be disclosed In response to Rachel's question, there is no rule or law which requires us to meet on Saturday or vote on Saturday. The decision to convene for either or both purposes is up to you. We have a duty to promptly consider the request for bargaining unit rec:ognition. It would not be unreasonable to meet with the various stakeholders for the Board to make an informed decision on whether to recognize UTNO. (By the way, I am not going to use the term UTL...that is a only a term to gather support. It is the AFT and UTNO that are financing and moving this along). The union, however, c:an file a petition with the NLRB at any time seeking recognition. If we cancel Saturday, I would recommend that we announce that we plan to have the topic on the agenda for the May board meeting for the purposes of gathering information. You have voc:al support both for and against the union and there are many individuals who have been silent. My guess is that when the union learns that the meeting will not occur on Saturday, they will file the petition. We don't really lose anything if that happens and should you decide to recognize the unit, we are free to change our position and recognize. If you chose this route, make it clear it is for the purpose of gathering information. Whatever the choic:e is, keep it to yourselves. Do not share it beyond the Board and me at this time. I had a call from Audra today wanting to know where the Board was going. My response was that we are still gathering information to assess the options. She mentioned that they have evidence that multiple Unfair Labor Practices ("ULPs") have occ:urred. I have a call with her to discuss these alleged illegal activities. As Blaine mentioned this on Saturday, there is not a surprise here. This is a routine way for them to put pressure on you to move to recognizing the unit and bargaining. Magdalen Biessey Bickford direct: (504) 596-272.6 fax: (504)910-6944 email: mbickfordftmcglinchey.com office: 601 Poydras St, Ste 1200 New Orleans, LA 70130 luNcriEy FpoRD vcard I www.mccilinchey.com I www.calalawblog,com From: Wisdom, Rachel W.[mailto:RWisdom(kstsmaigman.coml Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:03 PM To:'Whelan, Carol S'; Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-onlyRgooglegmpssam; Bickford, Mag Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday -- ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Thanks all. I am very tired and rushed, so I apologize if I miss things or misunderstand things. I did earlier today and if I do again, please feel free to correct me. I have no sensitivity about it at all. We don't have to address the petition Saturday, there is nothing stopping us from considering it at a later date. Right, Mag? If the union won't wait, that is not us not respecting someone. It's the union not allowing us time to make measured decisions. We don't even have a meeting scheduled for our parents yet and their views need to be considered. I least I believe they do. I need time to think about this and to consider all of the information we gather. I don't think a few days is enough. If we learn that there is a good majority of the faculty that want this, that will affect my view. If we don't have reliable information about that, I don't think we should meet. I think it would be irresponsible to act in the absence of that information. Finally, we have received objections from constituents about having the meeting Saturday because it doesn't give them time to gather information either and because some will be at Jazz Fest. From: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-onlyggoogigagipJ s.com] On Behalf Of Whelan, Carol S Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:42 PM To: Barron, Paul L; Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only_@googroups.com; mbickforcamcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday Hello Everyone, I believe that as a board, we are obligated to address this petition and respect and listen to all parties who are involved. I believe we should to meet on Saturday Carol C/A e 11.74. e.1110,$1 Pi. rt tre st.s..iestari4 r4.1,2,0* Thomas Green Professor ofEducation Director, Tulane Teacher Certification Program Paul Tudor Jones 11 Professorship in Social Entrepreneurship Professor of Practice Tulane University Teacher Certification Program 7039 Freret St, Suite 202 New Orleans, LA 70118 Office: 504-865-5341 tulane.edutteacher SKYPE: Caro1Whelanli Social Innovation in Education @ httpjisiined.wp.tulane.edu/ From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com on behalf of Barron, Paul L Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:24 PM To: Reuben Teague Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: RE: Meeting on Saturday Ruben: I am happy to explain the reason for my position. I favor giving the teachers the right to vote, in a secret ballot election, as to whether they wish they favor or do not favor the union to represent them. I am agnostic regarding this issue. I neither favor the union nor oppose it. I simply want the teachers to indicate how they feel. The only reason for a meeting is to give the board the opportunity to vote in favor of accepting representation by the union without a vote by the teachers. Since I prefer an election, I would like to avoid a rancorous discussion, particularly because it will resul.t in comments that will be unfair to the administration. 'Regards, Paul Awe Vane* The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 5(4-865-S986 Fax 5044362-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. From: Reuben Teague [mailto:reuben.teague@_prudential.corn] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:15 PM To: Barron, Paul L Cc: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com; mbickford@mcglinchey.com Subject: Re: Meeting on Saturday PaulCan you explain why you are opposed to the meeting? You're the first to reply to my email. Thanks, Reuben Teague Director, Impact Investments 751 Broad Street, 15th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102-3777 973-802-6707 reuben.teagat©prudential.com We're hiring! Come join our team: http://jobs.prudential.com/job-description.phejobReqNo=CR00017 From. "Barron, Paul L" To: "mbickford@mcglinchey.com" "lusher-board-onlyAgoogle_m_: _it. s.com" , Date: Subject: Sent by 04/18/2016 03:08 PM Meeting on Saturday lusher-board-only@googloroups.com Dear Mag: I do not know the mechanism for indicating the fact that I opposed to having a meeting on Saturday. Hence, I have directed this to you with a copy of all of the board members. Regards, Paul Pea &mut The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans, LA 70118 Voice 504-865-5986 Fax 504-862-8846 This communication may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic signature. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only-f-unsubscribePgooglegroups,com. To post to this group, send email tolusher-board-onlyNooglegroups,com. To view this discussion on the web visit https:Ligrouuszoogle.comjcilmsgidliusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB2260BB881AE96632A0F846E6D56B0%40BN3PRO3MB2260.namp rd03.prod.outiook.corn. For more options, visit https://groupsgmlemaild/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe(agooglegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_Pgmlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit litip5jigmt25,gmgle.comi_dinal gid/lusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB226005B46C449E070264E932D56130°/040BN3PRO3MB2260.namp rd03.prod.outlook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.comatioptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusherboard-only+unsubscribe@g000legroups com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https:Hgroups.coogle.com/d/msgidilusher-boardonly/BL2F'RO3MB3398AFF06560.5E33E7C9BF2DD6B0%4OBL2F'RO3MB339.namprd03 .prod.outlook.com. For more options, visit httpsgroualsao_gle.comictioptout. www.mcglinchey.com www.CafaLawBlog.com McGlinchey Lfo,PaC k AVatiams, Florida, Loan,Mississippi. New York, Ohio,'Texas, end Washington DC arid McGirhey Starfomi. LLP in California. Confidenty Statement: This email my contain attorney-dent prf,dieged or oonfidentiai inbrmation. it is for the soie use of the intended r.-lpient(s). if you have iiiceived this tr-insmission in error, immediateiy notify us by telephone at 504-586-1200 and return the onginai message to us at MoGlinchey Stafford, 12th Floor, 601 Poydras Street, New Orleans, LA, 70130 vie the United States Postal Service. M take steps to remove metadata in attachments sent by email, and any remaining metadata should be presumed inadvertent and should not he viewed or used without our express permission, if you receive an attachment containing metadata, please notify the sender immediately end a replacement wli be provided See tvioGlinchey Stafford Disclaimer/Privacy Policy p:/,Www.mcglinchey.com/disclaimer/ From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rssdorcz&sto,riepEcorian.com Subject; [Lusher] Requests for Lusher Board documents --ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION Date; April 18, 2016 at 3:42 PM To: Bickford, Mag adm '.',trators@cjooglagroups,coril Cc: ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION I received these this afternoon. The documents requested are public records. So do I respond to these requests as public records requests or simply by forwarding copies as requested? I can't do anything now because I am jammed, but probably could get to it tomorrow. Thank you! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to i.$ii•er..Lp,ai:d:.„Kid:: To post to this group, send email to icih:,.,r-bro-q1; , :-administratore:::ilue.,,,vgootinroups com. To post to this group,send email to tushof-boafd-oni @ oo l.rou scorn. To view this discussion on the web visit _litips://ctroups.goosie.00trid/nissidAusher-hoardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E4q8A242ED I 573A1%40S EXCH stonepi man com. For more options, visit ilttpsi/groups.cioogie.comfdloptout. From: Subject: Date: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdorn&stompioftsan.com dt? FW:[Lusher][Fwd: FW: Lusher Docs] April 17, 2016 at 11:59 AM 1.=,..•—•-:•• •••••• :-••••:-•••• :•••••••<•t• -•,•• s:Aoogleoroups.com Hi all. Blaine obtained the attached documents from James Brown and explained that they were provided by Bob Spencer when he, Paul, Kathy and James met with Spencer back in 2014. I think they are very helpful. Original Message Subject: FW: Lusher Does From: "James A Brown" Date: Wed, April 6,2016 1:35 pm To: "blecesnegky) no.edu" See attached from Bob Spencer You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gaggkg,roups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://group_s_google.com/d/msgidllusher-boardonly/37083de3a423d733960b7cc12fe132d7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://group_s_gaggle.comid/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. : To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Kabgkbcgrst:a.nd. administrators+unsubscribe@ggolegm. To post to this group, send email to Jusher-board-and-administrators@googjegEoups.com. For more options, visit bilmligLakumags_gle.com/d/optout. untitled-[1.2] Lusher Fact Bulletin.pdf Lusher Prep Union Organizing.pdf From: Subject: Date: To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisclorn@storiepicamacom RE:[Fwd: FW: Lustier Docs] April 17,2016 at 11:28 AM bleoesrm@loyno.ociu lusher-board-only Thank you very much Blaine. These are helpful. > Why can't this be shared with our administrators? I am deeply > troubled by their continued exclusion from our communications about this > matter. >R > From: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com > [mailto:lusher-hoard-only_@googjars On Behalf Of oiecesnevyalyno.euu > Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2016 10:44 AM > To: lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com > Subject:[Fwd: FW: Lusher Docs] > Attached are materials prepared by labor attorney Bob Spencer when we > first consulted him two years ago in anticipation of union organizing > activity at Lusher. Paul, Kathy, James, and I met with Spencer back then > to prepare for a union effort. Of cours, now that the union is a reality, > much of the union avoidance advice he gave us two years ago is now moot. > Nonetheless, James retrieved the memos last week and I am passing it along > to you. Kathy also retrieved copies directly from Spencer. > Blaine Original Message > Subject: FW: Lusher Docs > From: "James A Brown" > > Date: Wed, April 6, 2016 1:35 pm > To: "blecesneagyno.edu" > > > See attached from Bob Spencer >-> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to > lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups com. > To post to this group, send email to > lusher-board-only_@googlegrs2ps.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > ://groups.google com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/37083de3a423d733960b7ccl2fe132d7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edulAWs•//groups.gootlie.c om/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/37083de3a423d733960b7cc12fe132d7.squirrel?/040sec ure.loyno.edu>. > For more options, visit > liVs://groups.google com/d/optous://goups.google.com/d/optout>. > -> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegts_y_ups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlygooglegrps.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgidiusher-boardonly/FE94FESE1F04-F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED156827%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.corn. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@gooqitgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_g_googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit blps://groual,g2 .2gle.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED1568EF%40SPE XCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit https://groups.qooqle.com/d/optout. From: Subject: Dote: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisilorri@storiepiciriari.com RE:[Fwd: FW: Lustier Docs] April 17,2016 at 10:51 AM blecesne@icyno.eciu, illther-beeirii-orily@googleor U Thank you very much Blaine. These are helpful. Why can't this be shared with our administrators? I am deeply troubled by their continued exclusion from our communications about this matter. From: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne©loynaedu Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2016 10:44 AM To: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com Subject: [Fwd: FW: Lusher Docs] Attached are materials prepared by labor attorney Bob Spencer when we first consulted him two years ago in anticipation of union organizing activity at Lusher. Paul, Kathy, James,and I met with Spencer back then to prepare for a union effort. Of cours, now that the union is a reality, much ofthe union avoidance advice he gave us two years ago is now moot. Nonetheless, James retrieved the memos last week and I am passing it along to you. Kathy also retrieved copies directly from Spencer. Blaine Original Message Subject: FW: Lusher Docs From: "James A Brown" Date: Wed, April 6,2016 1:35 pm To: "blecesneagyno.edu" See attached from Bob Spencer You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goo& Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlsgps.com. To post to this group, send email to luslier-board-only_@crooglsg. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/37083de3a423d733960b7cc12fe132d7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-onlvi-unsubscribe@coocilegroups.corn. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-only@cootumps.com. To view this discussion on the web visit littpiammgooale.com/d/msaidAusher-boardonlv/FE94FE8E1F04F74413CD6D9A5E438A242ED156827%40SPEXCH.stonedigman.com. For more options, visit ht_lps://qroups.cooqle.com/d/optout. more Wisdom. n-ehel w. subject- RE Communlcatlon among board members only and between eoaid and or Aprll is. zero a|235 PM in chuniiri Leonhard is; Thank you for your comments, chunlin. i agree with many of the points you make but don't have time now to fully respond, However, tomorrow's executive session is for obtaining advice from counsel and the administrators need to he able to ask quesnons and hear advice too. 50 do not think we should them from the meeting tomorrow and believe It would not only further erode our relationship with them were we to do so but will also hinder their ability to handle what is happening at the schools, Perhaps we can have another sesslon a! some point them if there really is some Conflict between the board and the administrators. ldon't think there is, but maybe lam wrong. But we could have a separate session later if the need arises without excluding them tomorrow. lam not responding further because i have a deadline St Can't, But I am happy to talk any other time to anyone about any at this. My cell i Thanks, From: Chunlin Leonhard Sent: Friday, April 15, 2015 12:29 PM Yo: Wisdom, Rachel Subject: Communication among board members only and between Heard and administrators Dear Board members, Because of the upcoming meeting scheduled for tomorrow, I'd like to respond to Rachel's concern about our communication among board members only. meant to respond earlier, but wasn't able to find the necessary time to address this lssue. With all due respect to Rachel, I disagree that we as a board should not Communicate among ourselves, i understand her concern, but I believe that it is important that board members have an opportunity to discuss the petition related issues Without the presence of the administrators. As a general agree that it is critically important tor the Board and school administrators to work closely together and to have a relationship bullt on trust and transparency. in the vast majority or eases, I would have no problems discussing and consulting with the administrators and welcoming their input, However, the situation that we are currently facing is one ofthose extremely rare situations where the Board's interests and these or the school administrators may not necessarily be 100 percent aligned. I view the duty of the Board is to act as a governing body for the best interest of the Lusher, On that issue, the Board and the school administraturs' lnterests should be aligned 100 percent. However, because the union petition has the potential to take away some control from the administrators (that is the nature of the beast here), the Board's fiduciary interests and those of the administrators may diverge. For example, the Board may decide that it is in the best interest of the Lusher and its students to voluntarily recognize the union while the school administrators may disagree (either because they believe that it is in the best interest of Lusher not to recognize the union voluntarily or because they understandably don't like to give up control of all the decision making). It is this last possibility that made me think that the Board members should have an opportunity to discuss the issues openly and frankly without any concern about their words being misconstrued or taken out of context. As we all know, it is very easy for one's words to be misconstrued and understood out of context even with the best of intentions. I have not made up my mind and would like an opportunity to hear all comments from my fellow (wiser and more experienced) board members outside the presence of the administrators. I would like to request that the executive session be closed to the administrators. This does not mean that I am not open to input from everyone affected by this decision including the administrators. I am open to different sessions seeking input from administrators so that I can understand their perspectives before the Board has to make a decision. For me,this current issue is a difficult decision to make with serious consequences. We as a board need to work together and focus on our core mission — the best interest of the school. I hope that the board has an opportunity to listen to input from all parties, to seek legal advice from counsel, and debate the pros and cons of our potential decision without unnecessary distractions. Sincerely, Chunlin From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Wisdom, Rachel W. Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:23 PM To:'blecesne@loyno.edu' ; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Special meeting and legal counsel Also — please understand that I think board-only communications about all of this are not only unwarranted but are seriously damaging our relationship with our administrators and I object to continuing on this basis. From: lusher-board-onlyffgooqlegroups.com [mailtodusher-board-onlyngoogleciroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne(aloyno.edu Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:07 PM To: lusher-board-onlaggig) legroups.com Subject: Special meeting and legal counsel Hi all, As previously reported, our prior labor counsel, Robert Spencer, had to withdraw for reasons 1 prefer not to put in an email. Faced with the sudden loss of counsel, and in consultation with general counsel, I was advised by both general counsel and our former labor counsel to get labor ,• ,• . 1 • counsel immediately. ims was yesterday at 4:JU p.m. I was advised in me strongest terms by James to do whatever I could to line someone up by today. I found a labor attorney with extensive experience representing school management in labor disputes, consulted with her in several conversations, discussed her with both James and Robert, and awaited a conflicts check to see if she was a viable candidate to represent us. Her name is Mag Bickford. I spent a good part of last evening and most of today trying to do so. Since time is short, I thought it would expedite our consideration of her to introduce her to Board members who attended today's and tommorow's small group meetings. It was intended as an introduction, not a committment. She was prepared to stop by each day to answer our questions and tell us how she could be of assistance. The Board has the authority to hire a lawyer. With all due respect, Rachel is simply wrong that only the CEO can do so. In the ten years since we have been a charter, this inarguable fact has never been an issue. It wasn't an issue when we utilized the services of Robert Spencer. It wasn't an issue when we hired general counsel to represent AABE years ago. AABE is the legal entity being represented, not the CEO. To suggest that this entity, which functions through the Board,is powerless to hire its own lawyer is puzzling, to say the least. In any event, time is too short to quibble over procedural matters that have never been raised before. For those who stayed tonight to hear from the attorney, who was gracious enough to stay and advise us despite a very chilly reception, she was indeed very impressive and we learned an awful lot. To cut through all this procedural bickering, which we don't have time for, the Board needs to select counsel and do it quickly. That should lay the matter to rest and we can get on with resolving the substantive issue before us. We have no choice but to make a decision on the union by April 23rd. Failure to act is tantamount to rejection of the bargaining unit and means an immediate election. Like it or not, we can't say we need more time to decide. I think we need a special meeting to discuss all of this before the April 23rd meeting where we will have to decide the ultimate issue. I am proposing a special meeting this Saturday, April 16th,to consider our situation. If we don't have a quorum, we should still meet to discuss these urgent and serious matters. Please let me know your availabilty. Blaine You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@goodeg,roups.com. To post to this aroua send email to lusher-board-onlyZeooalearouos.com. To view this discussion on the web visit littpaiLgroualsgpole.com/dImsaidllusher-boardonly/Ob125d6e2d5c872de56b96cb5f5282c7.squirrel%40secui-e.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://group_s_gaQgle.comidlopto-ut. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gg_Qglegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlyggpglegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit littpaiLgroulas.gQ.Q0le.com/dImsoidllusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED14BA52%40SPEXCH.stoneplornan.corn. For more options, visit https://group_s_gaQgle.comidlopto-ut. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoociwroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@cloogiNroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit blips://groups.gps_gle.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonlv/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED153CD7%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit https://groups.qooqle.com/d/optout. rom: : Date; To: Wisdom, Rachel W. RE, Budget will need to be an Agenda Item for 05/14/16 Meeting (MAY) April 15, 2016 at 10:23 AM org Lynden Swayze CC; Kathy Riedlinger Kothy„,riedlinger@lusherwhod.org, Alysia Loshbaugh a(mzt:tion k):1i1 ( ,),edLi ii.;attgliggfrall.com, Andrea Armstrong Ok From: Lynden Swayze [mailto:lynden_swayze©Iusherschool.org] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 8:14 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: Kathy Riedlinger; Alysia Loshbaugh; Andrea Armstrong Subject: Budget will need to be an Agenda Item for 05/14/16 Meeting (MAY) Approval of FY17 Budget Calendar Board Approval of FY1 7 Preliminary Budget Lynden Clay Swayze, CPA Chief Financial Officer Lusher Charter School Advocates for Arts-Based Education Corp 5624 Freret Street, Room 201B New Orleans, Louisiana 70115 504-324-7307 Fax: 504-861-1839 lynden swayze@lusherschool.org From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisriorn@stompicasartcom Subject RE:[Lusher] April 2016 AABE special meeting notice.DOC Date: April 15, 2016 at 10:23 AM To: istrators@googfegroups,com d Cc; I think so. Why? Alysia needed the one on the 23'd to be at 9 but not this one From: blecesne©loyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@loyno.edu] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 8:38 AM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: lusher-board-and-administrators©googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [Lusher] April 2016 AABE special meeting notice.DOC Is the meeting definitely for 10:00? Blaine > Hi all. > Here is a revised notice for the meeting this Saturday. I just talked to > a friend of mine, Duris Holmes, who is a lawyer and was board president > for Franklin during their turmoil with the push for unionization and he > recommended that I reference collective bargaining in the item regarding > advise about the petition by UTL because there is an express exception > from open meetings laws for that and including it will help counter any > argument from the press that we can't convene an executive session. > Blaine had mentioned that to me too, but I'd forgotten until I talked to > Duris. So I revised the notice to include the suggested reference. > That is the only difference. > Pat - this is the final for posting. Thank you! >-> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-and-administrators+unsubscribe@googlegs_pu s corn. > To post to this group, send email to > lusher-board-and-administrators@googl_Qgron. > For more options, visit 1=§2gr_ops.gimgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-andadministrators+unsubscribegdoodearoups.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-and-administrators@gooalegroups.com. For more options, visit tilpt s://groups.goocile.comid/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. . Sz.thix:€; [Lusher] April 2016 AABE special meeting notice.DOC Ote; April 14, 2016 at 2:11 PM Hi all. Here is a revised notice for the meeting this Saturday. I just talked to a friend of mine, Duris Holmes, who is a lawyer and was board president for Franklin during their turmoil with the push for unionization and he recommended that I reference collective bargaining in the item regarding advise about the petition by UTL because there is an express exception from open meetings laws for that and including it will help counter any argument from the press that we can't convene an executive session. Blaine had mentioned that to me too, but I'd forgotten until I talked to Duris. So I revised the notice to include the suggested reference. That is the only difference. Pat — this is the final for posting. Thank you! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to losbeLbm-d-, 10admin<;tilic):•i.u:.14:u ,:,-:i.ihRci.Viqg To post to this group, send email to ius$ilef.-bQwf.l-am4,-aqrvinitratai,z,E,D.)row...na For more options, visit Moll.g.LQ.a...InZ31.:''',Q1T,Alibiltout• April 2016 AABE special me...otice.DOC From: Subject: Dote; To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisclorn@storiepittman.com RE: Teacher emails to the Board April 13,2016 at 2:40 PM Alysia Loshbaugh clowINugh@graaikx.sal, Kathy Riedlinger kathy_rie.derMusherschw org Blaine Lecesne blecesneeloyno.edu, Barron, Paul L pbarron@tuiane.edu, Ann Salzer asaizeretulane.edu, Carol Whelan ewhetanctulans.e0u, kiki huston kiidhur3toneyahoo.com, Andrea Armstrong andrea.craig.arrnstrongOgmai1.0, Chunlin Leonhard leOnhard©k)yno..as'iti, Cortizas, Richard rc;ortizas(jrwaiker.g:xn All you have to do to find mine is to googie my name From: Alysia Loshbaugh [mailto:aloshbaugh©gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 2:39 PM To: Kathy Riedlinger Cc: Blaine Lecesne; Barron, Paul L; Ann Salzer; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Carol Whelan; kiki huston; Andrea Armstrong; Chunlin Leonhard; Cortizas, Richard Subject: Re: Teacher emails to the Board My guess was perhaps the parent/student directory?? Alysia K. Loshbaugh Sent from my iPhone On Apr 13, 2016, at 2:36 PM,Kathy Riedlinger wrote: Board members, I received an email from Blaine asking how teachers have access to board member information. Please see my answer and call if you have any questions. Thanks, Blaine,for bringing this to my attention. Kathy Forwarded message From: Kathy Riedlinger Date: Wed,Apr 13, 2016 at 9:27 AM Subject: Re: Teacher emails to the Board To: blecesneggyno.edu Email addresses and phone numbers are accessible in many ways. All of that information is submitted to central office. Many people know where our board members work. There are board members who have worked closely with Lusher staff on numerous issues. Many of our board members are Lusher parents and their information is accessible to teachers in a variety of ways. Kathy Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 12, 2016, at 10:20 PM,blecesne@lo_yno.edu wrote: > Kathy, > The Board is receiving emails from anti-union staff. I'm just curious as > to how these teachers managed to get the private emails of Board members. > I understand the Tulane and Loyola emails, assuming they knew where each > Board member works. But I don't understand where they got the private > gmail accounts. I didn't see them posted on the website. Any idea? > Blaine From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisciorn@atoriapE9frsan.corn Subject: [Lusher] April 2016 AABE special meeting notice.DOC Date; April 13,2016 at 10:42 AM To: iilStle,r-boarri-and-adMiniS3tratcqs(Ag6ticj ,,.,7,..., corn We have a quorum if everyone who has responded that they can attend does. I have drafted a Notice with agenda. Please let me know if I should revise, and especially whether there are any action items I should add. Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmarm L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to juft[vacluglanck. minilArator*;+u nsubsolbet: .: 6 110gil• To post to this group,send email to LIV.tet-cwaril-ar,41-41.4,troirl.rators.Mamm corn. For more options, visit atunittga),Lmgazjksamalcalom. April 2016 AABE special me...otice.DOC From: Subject: Date; To: VVIsdom, Rachel W. .i wisslorn@storienasan.corn Sorry I lef you out of executive committee stuff. I forgot. April 13, 2016 at 10:08 AM Alysia Loshbaugh (aloshbaugh@gmail.com) atosnbaugh(?Pmaikx)m Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmarm L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rMsdomdvori:tipEgnan.corn Sut.A.nt [Lusher] Emergency meeting on the 16th :C,k1te: April 13, 2016 at 8:12 AM oul,w.com Hi all. I am polling to see whether this Saturday, April 16th, will work for an emergency meeting convened to hire counsel. I have not yet drafted a notice with agenda but please let me know if there are items, particularly action items, I should include on the agenda other than hiring counsel. I ask that everyone respond ASAP at to their availability on the 16" so we can work on getting an alternate date if necessary. Rachel W. Wisdom Stone Pigman Walther Wittmann L.L.C. 546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70130 Direct Dial:(504)593-0911 Direct Fax: (504)596-0911 This communication is from a law firm and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this communication. The sender's name and other information in this e-mail are for information purposes only and are not electronic signatures You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Charter Board and Administrators" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to .............. To post to this group, send email to i.Vt.m.-z.Ymd-t43:1(1-Kir(15.11StratMqc1pGavroQos For more options, visit tlaa.sa.g.LQ.LMcifIZWM.121.1=ila• From: $ut.A.mt D.ate: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. . RE: availability April 13, 2016 at 8:06 AM kiki huston dVoripEcgnan.c.x:m1 (, / 1 2l;ipcig lesy com Thank you< Kiki. Blaine doesn't have to be at all of the meetings, but if he wants to be I think we should schedule things to allow it. I can do all three of those dates, but prefer Monday and Wednesday because I will have to leave by 6 Tuesday. From: 'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 7:40 AM To: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: availability Good Morning All It is clear from the deluge of emails that there are many who would like to have their side heard. I think it should be a similar set-up to our discussion w the union folks - a few spokespeople. I have requested the library at Willow St for Mon at 5. I would like to add a second date. Blaine - is it imperative for you to attend both meetings? Can all who want to attend, make one of the days if I move these meetings to Tues & Wed at 5 (Willow St). If Blaine does not need to attend both, then I would like to keep Mon & add Wed. Please advise. I will let those interested & who have contacted the board know that they will have an outlet. I will stress that they find a handful of representatives not for all concerned to attend. Best, Kiki You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gooaleopu s.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlyegooglegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit ims://groups.000gle.com/d/msgidilusher-boardonly/286413761.2384613.1460551187872.J avaMail.yah00%40mail.yahoo.com. For more options, visit bitp/groups.0000le.com/dloptout You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@q22,g1Droups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@qps_glearoups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit t_gps://groups.qoogle.com/d/msclidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED 14C50A0/040SPEXCH.stonepjg man.com. For more options, visit https://groups.qooqle.com/d/optout. From: StMject: Date; To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. wisdorn(§storiepEgf RE: Special meeting and legal counsel April 13,2016 at 8:04 AM blecestmeloyno.ociti lusher-board-only The executive committee does not need ratification for its actions. Again, > please read our bylaws. It exists to act quickly and has already been > authorized by formal vote of the board to do so. I can dig up the > minutes if you want. I just want to HIRE counsel . When counsel is > hired then counsel can advise the full board. I think we need to act > really quickly to engage counsel and if you didn't read my comments > before about Meg,let me repeat, I found her impressive. I wish I could > have stayed but I had to teach night class at Tulane. I have no > opposition to a meeting of the full board. All I am trying to do is to > use our existing structures to expedite our decision to hire counsel. > Why is that wrong? > From: blecesneggyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@loyno.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:32 PM > To: Wisdom, Rachel W > Cc:'blecesne@loyno.edu'; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com > Subject: RE: Special meeting and legal counsel > Rachel, > I was not purporting to act for the Board, as I thought my email made > very > clear. I suggested a Board meeting to select counsel because we have much > more than just counsel to discuss. There are only so many possible > meeting > dates available. We don't have time for an Executive Committee meeting > and > then a Board meeting to adopt a recommendation. > I would ask what is your objection to the full Board deciding? That way > we > can make a transparent decision where all can be heard and remove any > doubt about the procedure. Several Board members,including yourself, > have > been asking for legal guidance. Why is an attempt to expedite that being > met with this procedural opposition? > Blaine >> Blaine: All I was asking was that we convene an executive committee >> meeting — the executive committee was created for things such as » this. >> I do not mean to offend you but you do not have the power to act for >> the board, please read our bylaws. I don't understand your resistance >> to an executive committee meeting. Please explain. Thanks n,., >> From: >> lusher-board-only@googitgroups.com >> [mailto:lusher-board-only_@googkgroups.com] On Behalf Of >> blecesne@igyno.edu >> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:07 PM >> To: >> lusher-board-only@googitgroups.com >> Subject: Special meeting and legal counsel >> Hi all, >> As previously reported, our prior labor counsel, Robert Spencer, had to >> withdraw for reasons I prefer not to put in an email. Faced with the >> sudden loss of counsel, and in consultation with general counsel,I was r norni a iv.an ri al eve. A ev,vie• -re,e-rvs eve 1 estsemr• "4- uy uUui6C11C141 LAJU.LIJCIL atiu out 101.1.11C1 1IUU1 lA/U111 Lli >> labor >> counsel immediately. This was yesterday at 4:30 p.m. I was advised in >> the >> strongest terms by James to do whatever I could to line someone up by >> today. I found a labor attorney with extensive experience representing >> school management in labor disputes, consulted with her in several >> conversations, discussed her with both James and Robert, and awaited a >> conflicts check to see if she was a viable candidate to represent us. >> Her >> name is Mag Bickford. I spent a good part of last evening and most of >> today trying to do so. Since time is short, I thought it would expedite >> our consideration of her to introduce her to Board members who attended >> today's and tommorow's small group meetings. It was intended as an >> introduction, not a committment. She was prepared to stop by each day >> to >> answer our questions and tell us how she could be of assistance. >> The Board has the authority to hire a lawyer. With all due respect, >> Rachel >> is simply wrong that only the CEO can do so. In the ten years since we >> have been a charter, this inarguable fact has never been an issue. It >> wasn't an issue when we utilized the services of Robert Spencer. It >> wasn't >> an issue when we hired general counsel to represent AABE years ago. >> AABE >> is the legal entity being represented, not the CEO. To suggest that >> this >> entity, which functions through the Board, is powerless to hire its own >> lawyer is puzzling, to say the least. In any event, time is too short >> to >> quibble over procedural matters that have never been raised before. >> For those who stayed tonight to hear from the attorney, who was >> gracious >> enough to stay and advise us despite a very chilly reception, she was >> indeed very impressive and we learned an awful lot. To cut through all >> this procedural bickering, which we don't have time for, the Board >> needs >> to select counsel and do it quickly. That should lay the matter to rest >> and we can get on with resolving the substantive issue before us. We >> have >> no choice but to make a decision on the union by April 23rd. Failure to >> act is tantamount to rejection of the bargaining unit and means an >> immediate election. Like it or not, we can't say we need more time to >> decide. >> I think we need a special meeting to discuss all of this before the >> April >> 23rd meeting where we will have to decide the ultimate issue. I am >> proposing a special meeting this Saturday, April 16th, to consider our >> situation. If we don't have a quorum, we should still meet to discuss >> these urgent and serious matters. Please let me know your availabilty. >> BlaMe » ->> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups >> "Lusher Board Only" group. >> To =subscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send » an >> email to >> lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegrmps.com>. >> To post to this group, send email to >> lusher-board-only@moglearsups.com>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> blips://or_olpi s.google.com/d/msgidflusher-boardonly/Ob125d6e2d5c872de56b96cb5f5282c7.squin-el%40secure.loyno.edu >. >> For more options, visit >> ht_sp_§..11gr_okpi s.google.com/d/optout >. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googjggroups.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-only@coodleciroubs.com. To view this discussion on the web visit Littpslitiroups.doocle.com/d/mscidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED14C4FA%40SPEXCH.stonepjgman.com. For more options, visit ht_Ips://droups.coocle.comid/optout. From: Subject Date: To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. ivisclornastoriepicasen.com RE: Special meeting and legal counsel April 12, 2016 at 10:45 PM lusher-bwd-only@googiegroulls.com Please read our bylaws. Kathy is authorized to hire counsel. You are not. Based on representations (I cannot remember whose) I believed that Spencer had been retained years before with Kathy's authorization. No one asked me about it nor was I involved. I had no issue as I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that it was authorized. The Board can hire counsel, but needs to do so as a board. All I am trying to do is expedite the decision to engage counsel and address any other urgent matter quickly. I liked Mag Bickford. What is really going on here? From: blecesne©loyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:38 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: 'blecesne@loyno.edui; lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Special meeting and legal counsel Rachel, May I ask why you did not demand this procedure when I, not Kathy, asked Robert Spencer to advise us? Blaine > Blaine: All I was asking was that we convene an executive committee > meeting — the executive committee was created for things such as this. > I do not mean to offend you but you do not have the power to act for > the board, please read our bylaws. I don't understand your resistance > to an executive committee meeting. Please explain. Thanks > From: lusher-board-only@gg2glegroups.com > [mailtolusher-board-only_@googjampi s.comi On Behalf Of > blecesne@lsyno.edu > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:07 PM > To: lusher-board-only_ftwglegroups.com > Subject: Special meeting and legal counsel > Hi all, > As previously reported, our prior labor counsel, Robert Spencer, had to > withdraw for reasons I prefer not to put in an email. Faced with the > sudden loss of counsel, and in consultation with general counsel,I was > advised by both general counsel and our former labor counsel to get labor > counsel immediately. This was yesterday at 4:30 p.m. I was advised in the > strongest terms by James to do whatever I could to line someone up by > today. I found a labor attorney with extensive experience representing > school management in labor disputes, consulted with her in several > conversations, discussed her with both James and Robert, and awaited a --- comae-is eneeK to see u sne was a viame canowate to represent us. ner > name is Mag Bickford. I spent a good part of last evening and most of > today trying to do so. Since time is short, I thought it would expedite > our consideration of her to introduce her to Board members who attended > today's and tommorow's small group meetings. It was intended as an > introduction, not a committment. She was prepared to stop by each day to > answer our questions and tell us how she could be of assistance. > The Board has the authority to hire a lawyer. With all due respect, Rachel > is simply wrong that only the CEO can do so. In the ten years since we > have been a charter, this inarguable fact has never been an issue. It > wasn't an issue when we utilized the services of Robert Spencer. It wasn't > an issue when we hired general counsel to represent AABE years ago. AABE > is the legal entity being represented, not the CEO. To suggest that this > entity, which functions through the Board, is powerless to hire its own > lawyer is puzzling, to say the least. In any event, time is too short to > quibble over procedural matters that have never been raised before. > For those who stayed tonight to hear from the attorney, who was gracious > enough to stay and advise us despite a very chilly reception, she was > indeed very impressive and we learned an awful lot. To cut through all > this procedural bickering, which we don't have time for, the Board needs > to select counsel and do it quickly. That should lay the matter to rest > and we can get on with resolving the substantive issue before us. We have > no choice but to make a decision on the union by April 23rd. Failure to > act is tantamount to rejection of the bargaining unit and means an > immediate election. Like it or not, we can't say we need more time to > decide. > I think we need a special meeting to discuss all of this before the April > 23rd meeting where we will have to decide the ultimate issue. I am > proposing a special meeting this Saturday, April 16th, to consider our > situation. If we don't have a quorum, we should still meet to discuss > these urgent and serious matters. Please let me know your availabilty. > Blaine >-> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to >lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to >lusher-board-only_@gooalegroups.com > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.cornid/msgid/lusher-board- only/Ob125d6e2d5c872de56b96cb5f5282c7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. > For more options, visit > http/oroups.google.com/d/optout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@g000legtws.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@jgoogleors_ll s.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > http/oroups.google.com/d/msgidiusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED14BA2E%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.g000le.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qooqjggroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_g_gagglegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit Illps://groups.qoogle.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED14BCF1%40SPEXCH.stonepigman.com. For more options, visit ht_Ips://groups.qooqle.comid/optout. From: Subject Date: To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. ivisclornastoriepicasen.com RE: Special meeting and legal counsel April 12, 2016 at 10:38 PM blecerl,.?•",,.:c.)yrio.edii lusher-bwd-only@googiegroulls.com The executive committee does not need ratification for its actions. Again, please read our bylaws. It exists to act quickly and has already been authorized by formal vote of the board to do so. I can dig up the minutes if you want. I just want to HIRE counsel. When counsel is hired then counsel can advise the full board. I think we need to act really quickly to engage counsel and if you didn't read my comments before about Meg, let me repeat, I found her impressive. I wish I could have stayed but I had to teach night class at Tulane. I have no opposition to a meeting of the full board. All I am trying to do is to use our existing structures to expedite our decision to hire counsel. Why is that wrong? From: blecesne©loyno.edu [mailto:blecesne@loyno.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:32 PM To: Wisdom, Rachel W. Cc: 'blecesne@loyno.edui; lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Special meeting and legal counsel Rachel, I was not purporting to act for the Board, as I thought my email made very clear. I suggested a Board meeting to select counsel because we have much more than just counsel to discuss. There are only so many possible meeting dates available. We don't have time for an Executive Committee meeting and then a Board meeting to adopt a recommendation. I would ask what is your objection to the full Board deciding? That way we can make a transparent decision where all can be heard and remove any doubt about the procedure. Several Board members, including yourself, have been asking for legal guidance. Why is an attempt to expedite that being met with this procedural opposition? Blaine > Blaine: All I was asking was that we convene an executive committee > meeting — the executive committee was created for things such as this. > I do not mean to offend you but you do not have the power to act for > the board, please read our bylaws. I don't understand your resistance > to an executive committee meeting. Please explain. Thanks > From: lusher-board-only@goglegro > [mailtolusher-board-only_@googjggro > blecesnegloyno.edu > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:07 PM > To: lusher-board-only_@goglegroups.com > Subject: Special meeting and legal counsel TT: -11 On Behalf Of an, > As previously reported, our prior labor counsel, Robert Spencer, had to > withdraw for reasons I prefer not to put in an email. Faced with the > sudden loss of counsel, and in consultation with general counsel,I was > advised by both general counsel and our former labor counsel to get labor > counsel immediately. This was yesterday at 4:30 p.m. I was advised in the > strongest terms by James to do whatever I could to line someone up by > today. I found a labor attorney with extensive experience representing > school management in labor disputes, consulted with her in several > conversations, discussed her with both James and Robert, and awaited a > conflicts check to see if she was a viable candidate to represent us. Her > name is Mag Bickford. I spent a good part of last evening and most of > today trying to do so. Since time is short, I thought it would expedite > our consideration of her to introduce her to Board members who attended > today's and tommorow's small group meetings. It was intended as an > introduction, not a commitunent. She was prepared to stop by each day to > answer our questions and tell us how she could be of assistance. > The Board has the authority to hire a lawyer. With all due respect, > Rachel > is simply wrong that only the CEO can do so. In the ten years since we > have been a charter, this inarguable fact has never been an issue. It > wasn't an issue when we utilized the services of Robert Spencer. It > wasn't > an issue when we hired general counsel to represent AABE years ago. AABE > is the legal entity being represented, not the CEO. To suggest that this > entity, which functions through the Board, is powerless to hire its own > lawyer is puzzling, to say the least. In any event, time is too short to > quibble over procedural matters that have never been raised before. > For those who stayed tonight to hear from the attorney, who was gracious > enough to stay and advise us despite a very chilly reception, she was > indeed very impressive and we learned an awful lot. To cut through all > this procedural bickering, which we don't have time for, the Board needs > to select counsel and do it quickly. That should lay the matter to rest > and we can get on with resolving the substantive issue before us. We have > no choice but to make a decision on the union by April 23rd. Failure to > act is tantamount to rejection of the bargaining unit and means an > immediate election. Like it or not, we can't say we need more time to > decide. > I think we need a special meeting to discuss all of this before the April > 23rd meeting where we will have to decide the ultimate issue. I am > proposing a special meeting this Saturday, April 16th, to consider our > situation. If we don't have a quorum, we should still meet to discuss > these urgent and serious matters. Please let me know your availabilty. > Blaine > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to > lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@jgooglegrsa_pi s.com. > To post to this group, send email to > usher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > http/oroups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/Ob125d6e2d5c872de56b96cb5f5282c7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. > For more options, visit > https /oroups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googitgroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_g_gagglegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit Illps://groups.qoogle.com/d/msgidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED14BC59%40SPE XCH.stonepig man.com. For more options, visit ht_Ips://groups.qooqle.comid/optout. From: Subject Oct*: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisciornas-toriepioasaac,orn RE: Special meeting and legal counsel April 12, 2016 at 10:23 PM bieeen,-.?•',,.:cioyrio.eciu, luther-board-orsly@gootjle.3r. U ps3.tx:m Richard or Paul: Do I have a second for an executive committee meeting being scheduled? Thank you. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne@loyno.edu Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:07 PM To: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Special meeting and legal counsel Hi all, As previously reported, our prior labor counsel, Robert Spencer, had to withdraw for reasons I prefer not to put in an email. Faced with the sudden loss of counsel, and in consultation with general counsel, I was advised by both general counsel and our former labor counsel to get labor counsel immediately. This was yesterday at 4:30 p.m. I was advised in the strongest terms by James to do whatever I could to line someone up by today. I found a labor attorney with extensive experience representing school management in labor disputes, consulted with her in several conversations, discussed her with both James and Robert, and awaited a conflicts check to see if she was a viable candidate to represent us. Her name is Mag Bickford. I spent a good part of last evening and most of today trying to do so. Since time is short, I thought it would expedite our consideration of her to introduce her to Board members who attended today's and tommorow's small group meetings. It was intended as an introduction, not a committment. She was prepared to stop by each day to answer our questions and tell us how she could be of assistance. The Board has the authority to hire a lawyer. With all due respect, Rachel is simply wrong that only the CEO can do so. In the ten years since we have been a charter, this inarguable fact has never been an issue. It wasn't an issue when we utilized the services of Robert Spencer. It wasn't an issue when we hired general counsel to represent AABE years ago. AABE is the legal entity being represented, not the CEO. To suggest that this entity, which functions through the Board,is powerless to hire its own lawyer is puzzling, to say the least. In any event, time is too short to quibble over procedural matters that have never been raised before. For those who stayed tonight to hear from the attorney, who was gracious enough to stay and advise us despite a very chilly reception, she was indeed very impressive and we learned an awful lot. To cut through all this procedural bickering, which we don't have time for, the Board needs to select counsel and do it quickly. That should lay the matter to rest and we can get on with resolving the substantive issue before us. We have no choice but to make a decision on the union by April 23rd. Failure to act is tantamount to rejection of the bargaining unit and means an immediate election. Like it or not, we can't say we need more time to decide. I think we need a special meeting to discuss all of this before the April 23rd meeting where we will have to decide the ultimate issue. I am proposing a special meeting this Saturday, April 16th,to consider our situation. If we don't have a quorum, we should still meet to discuss these urgent and serious matters. Please let me know your availabilty. Blaine You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/Ob125d6e2d5c872de56b96cb5f5282c7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-onlvi-unsubscribe@qooqlegps.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-only@000tumps.com. To view this discussion on the web visit littmar9gmgooale.comId/msaidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F74413CD6D9A5E438A242ED14BBE1%40SPEXCH.stonebidman.com. For more options, visit ht_lps://oroups.000qle.com/d/ootout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisciornas-toriepiwruo,c,orn Subject RE: Special meeting and legal counsel Oct*: April 12, 2016 at 10:22 PM To: If)yrio.edu, ILICil'ior-board-orsly@gootjlegf Oups3.corn Also — please understand that I think board-only communications about all of this are not only unwarranted but are seriously damaging our relationship with our administrators and I object to continuing on this basis. From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne©loyno.edu Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:07 PM To: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com Subject: Special meeting and legal counsel Hi all, As previously reported, our prior labor counsel, Robert Spencer, had to withdraw for reasons I prefer not to put in an email. Faced with the sudden loss of counsel, and in consultation with general counsel, I was advised by both general counsel and our former labor counsel to get labor counsel immediately. This was yesterday at 4:30 p.m. I was advised in the strongest terms by James to do whatever I could to line someone up by today. I found a labor attorney with extensive experience representing school management in labor disputes, consulted with her in several conversations, discussed her with both James and Robert, and awaited a conflicts check to see if she was a viable candidate to represent us. Her name is Mag Bickford. I spent a good part of last evening and most of today trying to do so. Since time is short, I thought it would expedite our consideration of her to introduce her to Board members who attended today's and tommorow's small group meetings. It was intended as an introduction, not a committment. She was prepared to stop by each day to answer our questions and tell us how she could be of assistance. The Board has the authority to hire a lawyer. With all due respect, Rachel is simply wrong that only the CEO can do so. In the ten years since we have been a charter, this inarguable fact has never been an issue. It wasn't an issue when we utilized the services of Robert Spencer. It wasn't an issue when we hired general counsel to represent AABE years ago. AABE is the legal entity being represented, not the CEO. To suggest that this entity, which functions through the Board,is powerless to hire its own lawyer is puzzling, to say the least. In any event, time is too short to quibble over procedural matters that have never been raised before. For those who stayed tonight to hear from the attorney, who was gracious enough to stay and advise us despite a very chilly reception, she was indeed very impressive and we learned an awful lot. To cut through all this procedural bickering, which we don't have time for, the Board needs to select counsel and do it quickly. That should lay the matter to rest and we can get on with resolving the substantive issue before us. We have no choice but to make a decision on the union by April 23rd. Failure to act is tantamount to rejection of the bargaining unit and means an immediate election. Like it or not, we can't say we need more time to decide. I think we need a special meeting to discuss all of this before the April 23rd meeting where we will have to decide the ultimate issue. I am proposing a special meeting this Saturday, April 16th,to consider our situation. If we don't have a quorum, we should still meet to discuss these urgent and serious matters. Please let me know your availabilty. Blaine You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/Ob125d6e2d5c872de56b96cb5f5282c7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@goodecnoi s.com. To post to this group,send email to Iusher-board-only@oogjQps.com. To view this discussion on the web visit Lamalgamgooale.comIdimsgidAusher-board0nly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6O9A5E438A242ED14BA52%40SPEXCH.stonepdgman.com. For more options, visit ht_Ips://ciroups.cooqle.com/d/optout. From: Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisciorna.storiepioasaac,orn Subject RE: Special meeting and legal counsel Oct*: April 12, 2016 at 10:20 PM oyo.ocu,!Mit•ier-i•.6arti-orsly gootj To: ups..i.tx:m Blaine: All I was asking was that we convene an executive committee meeting — the executive committee was created for things such as this. I do not mean to offend you but you do not have the power to act for the board, please read our bylaws. I don't understand your resistance to an executive committee meeting. Please explain. Thanks From: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne©loyno.edu Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:07 PM To: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com Subject: Special meeting and legal counsel Hi all, As previously reported, our prior labor counsel, Robert Spencer, had to withdraw for reasons I prefer not to put in an email. Faced with the sudden loss of counsel, and in consultation with general counsel, I was advised by both general counsel and our former labor counsel to get labor counsel immediately. This was yesterday at 4:30 p.m. I was advised in the strongest terms by James to do whatever I could to line someone up by today. I found a labor attorney with extensive experience representing school management in labor disputes, consulted with her in several conversations, discussed her with both James and Robert, and awaited a conflicts check to see if she was a viable candidate to represent us. Her name is Mag Bickford. I spent a good part of last evening and most of today trying to do so. Since time is short, I thought it would expedite our consideration of her to introduce her to Board members who attended today's and tommorow's small group meetings. It was intended as an introduction, not a committment. She was prepared to stop by each day to answer our questions and tell us how she could be of assistance. The Board has the authority to hire a lawyer. With all due respect, Rachel is simply wrong that only the CEO can do so. In the ten years since we have been a charter, this inarguable fact has never been an issue. It wasn't an issue when we utilized the services of Robert Spencer. It wasn't an issue when we hired general counsel to represent AABE years ago. AABE is the legal entity being represented, not the CEO. To suggest that this entity, which functions through the Board,is powerless to hire its own lawyer is puzzling, to say the least. In any event, time is too short to quibble over procedural matters that have never been raised before. For those who stayed tonight to hear from the attorney, who was gracious enough to stay and advise us despite a very chilly reception, she was indeed very impressive and we learned an awful lot. To cut through all this procedural bickering, which we don't have time for, the Board needs to select counsel and do it quickly. That should lay the matter to rest and we can get on with resolving the substantive issue before us. We have no choice but to make a decision on the union by April 23rd. Failure to act is tantamount to rejection of the bargaining unit and means an immediate election. Like it or not, we can't say we need more time to decide. I think we need a special meeting to discuss all of this before the April 23rd meeting where we will have to decide the ultimate issue. I am proposing a special meeting this Saturday, April 16th,to consider our situation. If we don't have a quorum, we should still meet to discuss these urgent and serious matters. Please let me know your availabilty. Blaine You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.comid/msgid/lusher-boardonly/Ob125d6e2d5c872de56b96cb5f5282c7.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-onlv+unsubscribe@qooqlegps.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-only@000qjgQps.com. To view this discussion on the web vistt Litgaalgmagooale.comIdimsgidAusher-board0nly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED14BA2E%40SPEXCH.stoneDidman.com. For more options, visit hilps://groups.cloocile.com/d/optout. From: Subject: Dote; To: Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W. ivisclom@storiepicasen.c.,om RE: legal counsel position April 12,2016 at 9:25 PM Kathy Riedlinger katly„,fiediingef giushercichoolorg blecesneg. loyno.eciu, Paul L Barron pbarron@tularie.edu, Ann Selzer asalzeretulane,erlu, Alysia Loshbaugh alothbaugh@grnallcom, kikihustoneyahoo.o3m, Chunlin Leonhard lecinhattiti?eseloyno.edu, Carol Whelan cwhelanOtuiane.eclu, Richard Cortizas mortiza.V?Pyahoo.mn, Andrea Armstrong tancirea craig.mistronTagasag corn Kathy: I have no intention of leaving you or our other wonderful administrators out of any important communication so as to exclude you or them from the conversation. Nor do I believe the board does, but I do not speak for it. However, we do want to make sure that we act in a way that does not compromise our position with respect to the petition we received Friday. It is my preference that all communications be shared with you and our other administrators and as soon as we have advice from counsel so we know what we can share, I expect that the separate communications will cease and they will be fully open again. Based on what I know, I believe there is no reason for separate communications yet I believe confirmation of that is needed and that it should not come from me. Your views and information are critical, of tremendous value. First time in 11 years is right and I do not like it. Not at all. Please call me when you have time to talk. From: Kathy Riedlinger [mailto:kathy_riedlinger@lusherschool.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 5:12 PM To: Andrea Armstrong Cc: blecesne©loyno.edu; Paul L Barron; Wisdom, Rachel W.; Ann Balzer; Alysia Loshbaugh; kikihuston©yahoo.com; Chunlin Leonhard; Carol Whelan; Richard Cortizas Subject: Re: legal counsel position Andrea, I spent some time the other day calling each board member to let them know we had been given the petition. I reached all but Chunlin and I emailed her and asked her to call. When we spoke, I recall that you said that you did not feel that getting a lawyer was necessary. You told me you are a lawyer. I interpreted that to mean you were reinforcing your statement that you didn't know if we needed one. You did say that if the board did hire legal counsel that it should not be a big anti-union attorney or one that has a reputation of being "a union buster" and there were several in town with that reputation. I thank you for copying me on this email. I am also willing to discuss this with anyone directly. As of now,I don't know who the lawyer is or if we have one. For the first time in 11 years, I have been eliminated from our board's email list. Again, thank you very much for coming to me with this. As always,I am glad to talk to you. Kathy Sent from my iPhone On Apr 12, 2016, at 3'10 PM, Andrea wrote FYI I was sad to hear that my position was being mis-stated by several other board members Below is what I sent to the board members to correct any false impressions about my position Thanks, Andrea - Forwarded message - From Andrea Date Tue' Apr 12, 2016 at 3 09 PM Subject legal counsel position To com Dear fellow board members, Several of you have mentioned to me that you have heard from Kathy Reidlinger that 1 don't believe we need legal counsel for our decision-making process around a potential union at Lusher That is wrong I believe the legal terrain has shifted and that we do need legal advice to help us understand these new boundaries that we operate in now that a petition has been presented to us More generally, I wholeheartedly believe that "the lawyer who acts as his own counsel has a fool for a client I raise this mischaracterization for two reasons 1) to be clear on my position 1 am traveling this week to Chicago and unable to meet In person 2) to emphasi7e that 1 am happy to discuss my thoughts with each of you directly My cell is (There is no need to rely on another person's characterization of our individual views, when we can Just as easily find out directly I look forward to discussing our next steps in person at our 4'23 meeting, if not earlier All the best, Andrea From: SuNeot MIN?: To: Wisdom, Rachel W. RE: legal counsel position April 12, 2016 at 9:02 PM Barron, Paul L axrri :USher-bz:Wd e(Iu, Andrea Armstrong nd .ora Ec,1. ar m v.rorig c§.;g i. fYi ci0Ogleg FOU Everyone: We really need an attorney and should pick a good one. Blaine invited Mag Bickford to speak to us tonight after the teachers meeting and I thought she was impressive. Only the CEO has the power, absent a specific grant from the board, to hire a lawyer for RABE. If we want to hire one, we need to act as a board. To do it quickly we could act through executive committee. An executive committee meeting must be called either by the CEO OR by 2 of its members. I am a member, as is Blaine, Paul and Richard. I am asking another member to join me to call for an executive committee meeting so that we can hire counsel and address any other urgent matters relating to the petition for voluntary recognition of a union sent to us this past Friday. Blaine, Paul, and Richard, do I have a second? Thank you From: lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Barron, Paul L Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 7:06 PM To: Andrea Armstrong; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: legal counsel position Andrea: I called you a few minutes ago before I read your email. I know of no one on the board does not want to hire competent legal representation in this matter. Choosing the right person is a board decision. I do not think that we should wait until the 23. We,and our administration members, risk acting improperly. Telling people what they should not say is very important so as to not jeopardize our decision on the 231.d. The statement that Kathy does not think that we need a lawyer is incorrect. In fact a seasoned labor lawyer was hired last week. Unfortunately, he has decided that he cannot continue to represent us. If you want to talk to me further about this I'm happy to do so. We all need all of the input we have to make a decision regarding representation. At this point, I do not know what that right decision is and can only do so once I have all of the possible information available and even more importantly the opportunity to discuss this matter among all my other board members. Regards, Paul pad Fama The Class of 1937 Professor of Law (Emeritus) Tulane Law School 6329 Freret Street New Orleans. LA 70118 Voice '304~3e5~5986 Fax 504786278846 This communication may be privileged and confidential llyou are notthe intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of mi; communication. The sender's name and other inlormation in this email are tor information purposes only and do not constitute an electronic Signature. From: On Behalf DfAndrea Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 3:09 PM 10: lusherrboar onlyfi ooglegroupsLom Subject. legal counsel postion Dear fellow board members, Several of you have mentioned to me that you have heard from Kathy Reidlinger that I don't believe we need legal counsel for our decision-making process around a potential union at Lusher That is wrong I believe the legal terrain has shifted and that we do need legal advice to help us understand mese new boundaries that we operate in now that a petition has been presented to us More generally, I wholeheartedly believe that "the lawyer who acts as his own counsel has a fool for a client" I raise this mischaracterization for two reasons' to be clear on my position, I am traveling this week to Chicago and unable to meet in person size that I am happy to discuss my thoughts with each of you directly My cell is MThere is no need to rely on another person's characterization of our individual views, when we caniust as easily find out directly I look forward to discussing our next steps in person at our 423 meeting, if not earlier All the best, Andrea You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "l/usher Board Only" group To unsubscribe from this group and stop receivmg emails from IL send an email to lushei'rboard- To post to this group, send email to [usher--board nlngEgLegroupscom. To view this discussion on the web visit lee com msgidrlusher-boar - mi qu gmail com For more options, visit comrdr'ogtout You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" urmm To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@gog. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only_@googitgrn. To view this discussion on the web visit ht_tgLjgroups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/BN3PRO3MB22605A6A58BBCFD7731E59EFD5960%40BN3PRO3MB2260.namprd03.oro d.outlook.com. For more options, visit h0,511groi_jgasogle.com/dloptout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-onlv+unsubscribeeg000leoroups.com. To post to this group,send email to lusher-board-onlv@cooqlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit ligps://oroups.q000le.com/d/rnsgidi1usher-board0nlv/FE94FE8E1F04F74413CD6D9A5E438A242ED14B891%40SPEXCH.stonepioman.com. For more options, visit taps://croups.gooqie.com/d/optout. From; Subject; Da€e: To: Cc; , Wisdom, Rachel W. RE: proposed meeting for teachers w concerns April 12, 2016 at 4:05 PM kiki huston kikEhusiony-,-thoO.;y.;;n, blecesrie:,@loyn.edu lusher-boad-only@googiegroups.com Works for me. I prefer Monday but could do Tuesday before 6 From: 'kiki huston' via Lusher Board Only [mailto:lusher-board-only@googlegroups.corn] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:00 PM To: blecesne@loyno.edu Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: proposed meeting for teachers w concerns Perhaps we could, again, have two meetings - so as not to have a quorum present? So Mon & Tues? And yes, I think a small group of representatives & no administration present. Thoughts? Kiki From:"blecesnegloyno.edu" To: kiki huston Cc: "blecesne@loyno_edu" , "Wisdom, Rachel W." : "lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com" Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 3:01 PM Subject: Re: proposed meeting for teachers w concerns I was going to propose Tuesday or Wednesday at that time because I have to present a report in the City Council starting at 5:00. Is there any reason we can't move it to one of those days? Blaine > I am proposing that those who are available, and interested, meet with > those teachers who have expressed concern about the formation of a union > at our schoo1.1 suggest Mon the 18th , Willow St at 5pm. I will check to > see if the library is available.Kiki > From: "blecesne@loyno.edu" > To: kiki huston > Cc: "Wisdom, Rachel W." ; > "lusher-board-onlyggooglegroups.com" > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 8:32 AM qiihiort• Ro• niioctinn •-.0,41, ....j,/,-/l• 1 > Kiki, > Good question. Out of an abundance of caution, I would wait until we can > hear from them in a more controlled setting so that no one is accused of > interferrence or collusion with anti-union sentiments. Rest assured that > all stakeholders will be afforded the opportunity to be heard. > I am trying to arrange an advisory session with legal counsel ASAP to > guide us on these very types of questions. > Blaine » If I have a good friend, who I know is on the non-union side of the » issue, » am I allowed by law, to ask her about it?I really would like to know » more » from the side of teachers/staff who are on the other side of this » issue.I » know that Blaine said we would provide time to hear from both sides » but » I have several very close friends who are teachers, and are opposed to » unionizing. My understanding is that we are not to ask whether someone » signed the petition, but it is not clear to me as to whether I can have »a » private conversation w one I would not be 'threatening' or » 'interrogating' » , as they have been vocal about their stance.....Please advise.Best,Kiki >> >> » You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google » Groups » "Lusher Board Only" group. » To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send » an » email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. » To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.corn. » To view this discussion on the web visit » https://groups.google.cornicUmsgidilusher-boardonly/172822953.1692913.1460467024547.JavaMail.yah00%4OrnaiLyahoo.corn. » For more options, visit https://groups.google.comidioptout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.comid/msgidilusher-boardonly/6b5db874b268f357f8d4919e34c60a7e.squirrel%40secure.loyno.edu. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lusher Board Only" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/dimsgiausher-boardonly/1566911896.1963574.1460489507515.JavaMail.yah00%40mail.yahoo.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lusher-boardonly/613bb2b0a4781bc05f1d2da6b1eca5a3.squirrel°/040secure.loyno.edu. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-boardonly+unsubscribe@oagslearoups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-onlyg_P,gg_Qglev,roups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit ht_tpaillgroup_s_gg_Qale.com/d/msaidllusher-boardonly/1537431555.2071796.1460494775394.JavaMail.yah00%40m ail.yahoo.com For more options, visit https://groups.ag_Qgle.com/d/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lusher Board Only group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lusher-board-only+unsubscribe@qoogiNroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lusher-board-only@googlegmps.com. To view this discussion on the web visit rigps://aroups.goocile.com/d/msaidAusher-boardonly/FE94FE8E1F04F744BCD6D9A5E438A242ED14AEBE%40SPEXCH.stonerigman.com. For more options, visit hilps://groups.google.com/d/optout. From: Subject Date: To: Cc; Wisdom, Rachel W. rwisdorri@stortepiomart C.43m RE: question April 12, 2016 at 8:56 AM lA,srleioyrio.ocit.i, kiki huston Kikinustorst§yshoo.(x)fn lusher-boad-onlyggoogiegroulls.com I didn't see Blaine's email before I replied. idisagree but am eager to hear advice of counsel. From: lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com [mailto:lusher-board-only©googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of blecesne©loyno.edu Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 8:32 AM To: kiki huston Cc: Wisdom, Rachel W.; lusher-board-only@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: question Kiki, Good question. Out of an abundance of caution, I would wait until we can hear from them in a more controlled setting so that no one is accused of interferrence or collusion with anti-union sentiments. Rest assured that all stakeholders will be afforded the opportunity to be heard. I am trying to arrange an advisory session with legal counsel ASAP to guide us on these very types of questions. Blaine > If I have a good friend, who I know is on the non-union side of the issue, > am I allowed by law, to ask her about it?I really would like to know more > from the side of teachers/staff who are on the other side of this issue.I > know that Blaine said we would provide time to hear from both sides - but > I have several very close friends who are teachers, and are opposed to > unionizing. My understanding is that we are not to ask whether someone > signed the petition, but it is not clear to me as to whether I can have a > private conversation w one I would not be 'threatening' or 'interrogating' >,as they have been vocal about their stance.....Please advise.Best,Kiki >