If I'm reading the report in Patch correctly, Wells has just foreclosed on the property but agreed to keep the school running until June 2012. So they're getting more than $ out of this. The creditors are getting the collateral promised when the loan (bond) was taken out: The buildings and perhaps the contents therein.

Some clarification from someone in the know would be great. Because from here, it sounds as if Wells now owns WR, lock, pledged stock, and tuition barrel.

I agree. BTW, why does WR need the pledged money? To pay teachers? To pay administrators? If they are not paying off the bond, then that should be freeing up money. Also I think that Wells is just acting on behalf of the bondholders and may not own any of the bonds. Another question, how many more students are leaving now or at the winter break? Any update on insurance coverage for those who leave?

The pledged cash, tuition, & cash on hand are just enough to run the school until June, so was told. My feeling is Wells feels they can run it cheaper so will make cuts & pocket some cash. I think this is sad for WR. They no longer own the school.

What sane family will re-enroll and start paying tuition coming spring for next year. There's no future beyond June. Let's hope those staying can have a decent remaining time at WR.

Agree it's going to be hard. But if they cleaned house (HOS and BOT) and created transparency on financials, maybe there's a chance. And everyone's tuition dollars would need to be protected in the event there was insufficient enrollment.

but I wonder how much WR has over such matters now? what will be an acceptable budget to Wells? and required enrollment for that budget? other conditions? maybe we won't know until the next court date on 11/10.

My understanding is that the pledges will be used for WR's operating expenses through June. Don't assume HOS will keep her job.

How about "The Ilana Kaufman chapter 11 fully funded well-off retirement vacation school"?

Ilana Kaufman is flying to the east coast as we speak to pitch the budget to the bondholders. If you think you have legal basis for an injunction through the bankruptcy courts then right now is the time to act. However, although that may buy you time through the court it may sour Wells Fargo to your Board and they may decide to proceed with the court proceedings in lieu of negotiating. It appeared last hearing that the court was responsive to Wells Fargo's argument that a) bankruptcy court was an inappropriate venue for a manufactured bankruptcy crisis by windrush or b) it should proceed with chapter 7 and liquidate assets as opposed to chapter 11 as windrush desires. In which case, the school might not be guaranteed to stay open through June. Then again school may ot have enough money to stay open despite the dismssal of the bankruptcy case anyway. In the end, Wells Fargo prevails either way. Best of luck to you though if you think you have a shot.

This just in from WR HOS Ilana Kaufman - the new WR logo:
https://skydrive.live.com/P.mvc#!/view.aspx?cid=FDB89BF8628816DA&resid=FDB89BF8628816DA%21107

Totally. Where are you, K-Man? Weigh in. Even if you see no hope. What's going on here? Why? What will happen? Tell us the rest of this story; what remains of the board certainly isn't going to, and HOS is probably shopping in flight right now, spending her $80,000.00 on garden ornaments.

I'm here, just not sure that I have any insight. I'm not an insider here, just really saddened by the situation. The actual details of the WFB agreement aren't quite clear to me. I understand that the control agreements are back fully in place, but I don't really understand the status of the property itself -- between the school website and patch it's not quite clear.

If I were king, here's what I might try: (1) replace >50% of the trustees, (2) name an interim HOS who is trusted by faculty and parents, (3) declare a fresh start and acknowledge that while there is a lot of inherent greatness in the school, old leadership did not live up to Windrush standards, (4) gather commitments for next year now -- earlier than the normal cycle -- contingent on a level of minimum enrollment such that the school can actually operate on a budget that makes sense. If there are enough students, I would then (1) immediately try to strike a deal with WFB with a few years of reduced interest payments on the property, and (2) create an escrow arrangement for deposits/tuition so that nobody gets burned if something happens and the school can't continue.

I don't think the bondholders want to own this property. I bet they prefer a viable school that can pay interest and ultimately principal to owning a vacant property for which there is no market.

I don't think that I would try to undo the WF deal. The risk is that could just create chaos and a chapter 7 liquidation. Instead, I would call up the bondholders' trustee (her name is available online) and tell her that -- unless the bondholders are interested in owning a property for which there is no market -- they need to insist on certain provisions in the agreement with Windrush, including a repopulation of the trustees to ensure that there is real governance. The current path is destined for failure in June, if not sooner. They need to be sold on another path, that is in the interests of the students and the school. At this juncture, I think that the bondholders and the irate parents are actually more aligned that you might think, and there's an opportunity to work together.

Then I would have a group go to IK, point out the problems with the payout (among other issues), and have her agree to put the money back and walk away in exchange for a release from additional liability. If she doesn't agree, she will face a significant personal lawsuit. And if you make the right allegations, she won'e be indemnified by Windrush. That might inspire her to move on.

But all this assumes that there's a core group of parents willing to work like crazy to make this all happen.

The bondholders do not want to own the property and they certainly do not want to run a school. The current board and administration cannot possibly pay off the bonds. Therefore, if there is a default the property will be worth much less. I think the idea is for a group to come in with an offer of say $8 million or perhaps less.

I do not know about school accreditation issues.

Raising $8 million (or whatever is required to pay off the bonds) doesn't seem realistic to me. Nor do I think it's necessary. I would negotiate a restructuring of the existing debt instead, maybe 1% interest rate in year 1, rising back to 5.5% in year 5 or 6. These bonds are sitting in muni bond funds. They just want performing debt that has some reasonable story of getting repaid someday. Moreover, managers of these types of funds don't like realized losses; if there's a credible path there's a good chance they will buy into it.

And we would know that... how?

Our school district (WCCUSD) has done the "bankruptcy dance" for decades, takes bond money from my property taxes every year so my kid can sit in a portable, down hill from a condemned building, at the bottom of a slide zone.

I'm starting to think our school board and Windrush's are one-in-the-same.

@mykidsdad: We know because the wishlist is not coming from WCCUSD. It is coming from a group of parents, wanting to directly support teachers (i.e. your point, not throwing money at the district, but sending it directly to teachers and their classrooms). We can help teachers directly, and respond directly to them.

And as for the portables, they are a huge improvement to that outdated, dangerous building! I sent two kids through that building, and have one in the portables now. I much prefer the portables.

I am not a fan of WCCUSD, and agree with you that the district has misled us and deceived us (as a former Castro Elementary School parent, I saw the lies and manipulation first hand that were used to close that school). But, I feel like we parents are in a sort of "Take Back Our Neighborhood Schools" mode, and it feels good. I see parents out there, supporting teachers and students, on all of the El Cerrito campuses. We have to keep this momentum. We have writing programs, parent patrols, parent volunteers....

Finally, as for donations, I had THREE Windrush families call me, asking for donations. And I did offer a donation, in the spirit of helping a community school. Now I hope the WR parents will do the same for our El Cerrito public schools. Apparently, folks are in the giving mood. Click on the link provided in The Patch and donate directly to a teacher at ECHS, or go to donorschoose.org and donate directly to a Portola teacher's project.

If the district had any sense they'd approach Windrushs' bondholders and give them $13 mi. put the "Portola" on the grounds and save a couple hundred mil in construction costs.

Though, honestly, I'd like to see WR survive. It's a lovely campus with great kids and families. Plus, it's a local alternative (hopefully, a less expensive one) to the slightly haughty Prospect Sierra (I'm talking about the "institution", not the parents or kids - many of whom are great neighbors).

@El Cerrito Resident: I can't believe three WR families asked you to donate to their school. As a public school parent I would never support the fund raising efforts of a private school, especially one where the HOS is illegally siphoning money into her own pocket.

I presume you mean the bondholders trustee -- that's WFB. (There's also a US Trustee involved in bankruptcy court but they don't do much in most bankruptcies.) I don't know whether it's possible or not, but it's worth a try. You would need a coherent group of parents that feels like a critical mass that speaks for the customer (the parents/students). Random one-off calls probably just confuse the trustee. I would also ask the trustee for the contact info of the lead bondholder (I suspect someone at Lord Abbott). That's where the decision making authority really lies. The bondholders trustee just follows instructions. If you sound like a coherent, credible group with a real plan, you may get some traction. If it's a bunch of one-off angry parents, probably not.