 |
|
|
|
|
School board rejects charter
proposal, for second time
By KELLY WILKINSON
The school board unanimously rejected a charter school proposal at last week's board meeting, consistent with its rejection to an earlier charter plan filed in October.
The grounds for rejection ranged from qualifications of employees to admission requirements, from ethnic balance to the basic operation of the school. The district comprehensively outlined its dismissal of the plan in a document entitled "Findings of Fact."
Trustee Linda Killian read from a prepared statement at the Feb. 25 board meeting concerning the charter school proposal. She acknowledged the good intentions of parents who petitioned for the school, though, she said, she disagreed with their approach.
"I do not doubt for a moment the sincere desire of every parent in this room to provide the best education possible for his or her child," she said. "I believe that we all want the best for our children and will do whatever possible for his or her child. However, I am concerned that some of the project designers, or authors, of this SILCN (Sunnyvale Intensive Learning Center) proposal are willing to use any means to achieve their goals." This is the second time the same parents' group submitted a charter school proposal. The parents withdrew the first proposal after discovering it did not include required parent or teacher signatures. This time, though they collected the signatures, board members said the new proposal still fell short.
Several trustees, including Killian and Bob Roberts, voiced concern over the charter school's proponents working independently of the board, rather than collaboratively to arrive at an acceptable proposal.
But Jeff Richey, a parent and leader of the SILCN, said he feels that the school board's decision has more to do with control than meeting the criteria in the proposal, which he strongly feels they have done.
"Their rationale for rejection is erroneous, unconstitutional, and indefensible," he said. [The school board's] actions consistently show a lack of trying to improve education."
The decision has already been appealed, although Richey would not divulge if it was being appealed at the county or state level, saying only that, "there have been a number of violations in this case."
"It's almost as if they've forgotten what the purpose of education is, which is to educate the child," he said. "The bureaucracy is out of control, and that's where the money is being spent rather than on the kids."
The SILCN charter proposal, according to Richey, allocates more money per child for resources, supplies and programs than public schools provide. It aims to create smaller classes with more art and music offerings, and eventually plans to incorporate day-care into the school.
Boardmembers said the proposal was not specific enough in several areas, leading them to determine that it was "demonstrably unlikely" that the program could be successfully implemented. According to the district's rejection report, SILCN addressed student assessment in too-general terms, the group's recruitment and admission practices did not demonstrate how the school would maintain a diverse racial and ethnic balance, and SILCN did not have a strong contingency plan in the event that expected grants did not materialize.
Sunnyvale superintendent Joe Rudnicki said that the school board has a very strong interest in charter schools, but that this specific proposal just wasn't complete.
In order to approve a charter school proposal, Rudnicki said that they would need to see "an idea that doesn't undo some of the things we've fought so long for," referring to the threat of a charter school acting as a private school at the public's expense for "upper middle-class whites."
"If it's not planned well," he said, "it just won't be successful."
|
|
|
|
Sunnyvale, California Since 1994
