Thursday, May 10, 2012

The Valley has spoken: No charter school

Tonight the Lagunitas School Board of Trustees hearing on the charter petition heard from one of its attorneys Edward Sklar, a statement against the charter school signed by 295 Valley residents, parents and voters, and speakers who commented 2 to 1 against the charter school.

Mr Sklar of the law firm Lozano-Smith summarized the initial staff report released this week emphasizing the "burden on this district and board to move forward with this petition." This burden, he noted, would be caused by several factors including the lack of facilities for the charter school, the dearth of money it has budgeted for expensive administrative services, and its demand for $165,000 in discretionary money. "I'm concerned," he said "there would be a hit on the district from all of these." According to the initial staff report the preliminary impact of the charter's Regular Budget would drain $464,000 in the first 3 years. It gets worse under the Fair Share Budget. In the first year alone the District would lose $274,000. (p. 19) We anxiously look forward to estimates for the 2nd and 3rd year as well. The charter's claims of savings to the District the report concludes are "grossly inaccurate" and incorrect.

This evening a long-time parent delivered a statement circulated by Concerned Citizens for Public Education and signed by 295 Valley residents, parents, and voters opposing the charter school and asking the board to vote to deny the charter petition. The Board should stand up and take notice that these signers amount to about 10% of the total local registered voters. To put this into context, 1683 votes were cast in the 2011 election for myself, two incumbent Trustees and write-in candidates. Of course, because voters could vote for two candidates the number of actual voters is probably much less but 295 signatures is a sizable block in any Valley-wide election for Trustee, a bond measure (which is expected on the November 2012 ballot), or a parcel tax.

Lastly, 64% of those who took a position tonight were explicitly opposed to the charter, a bit less than twice the number of those who spoke in support, 36%, while 5 took no clear position. This sizable turnout against the charter combined with the significant number of those who signed the statement opposing the charter demonstrates that the charter lacks the community support it requires to successfully implement its educational plan. Keep in mind, this is the second item in the list of 5 criteria items that board must consider in voting to accept or reject the charter petition.

Many of my fellow LWIP parents, while framing their comments in terms of compassion and heart, paradoxically came armed with their expensive charter industry corporate attorney Michelle A. Ruskofsky of the law firm Middleton, Young & Minney, LLP. Ms. Ruskofsky finally publicly acknowledged that the firm has been advising the charter advocates on their petition as I was informed in March and have reported here. This is only one of the consultants the staff report requested that the charter petitioners disclose. Ms. Ruskofsky explicitly warned the board of its lack of grounds to reject the charter petition based on any of the 5 criteria. Her comments should be read as an underhanded threat of potential costly appeals to the county and the state if its rejects the petition and perhaps legal action.We should also read it as a warning for years of costly legal battles were the board to approve the charter petition and then find the charter school making further demands.

As you read Ms. Ruskofsky's bio pay careful attention to her experience transiting through the swinging door between the charter-industrial-complex and the Charter Schools Division of the California Department of Education. Through the revolving door corporations and their hired guns move from industry into government where they write, rewrite, water down, slant, distort, or gut the regulations only to then miraculously swing back out back into their old industry to exploit the rules to the advantage of their own bottom line. The entire charter law is rigged against parents and public education. The only things that can stop it is a well organized community as ours is becoming and hopefully a sympathetic board of trustees.

If you have any doubt that a well organized community can stop a charter school from pillaging their District just look north to Santa Rosa where two weeks ago parents and volunteer public interest and civil rights attorneys have put a temporary stop to the conversion of Doyle Park Elementary School into a French charter school.

No comments:

Post a Comment