The Charter School Board Discussion in the St. Vrain Valley School District

There's a controversy brewing in the St. Vrain Valley School District (SVVSD) over a proposed change to district policy that would require charter school board members to live within school district boundaries. This would be the first time a district will have imposed such a requirement.

According to a Longmont Times-Call editorial, this district policy provision is not warranted because the district's charter schools are doing well and the editorial questions why this change is proposed after a proposed charter school application last year had out-of-district founders.

Last year the Lotus School for Excellence proposed a new charter school using a model similar to the school they already operate in Aurora. The application was denied, in part due to their founders -- and proposed board members -- being from outside the school district. In the Lotus proposal they intended to use their existing governing board to also oversee the new school in Longmont.

It's apparent that the vital issue with this whole debate is where should the line be drawn in charter school authorizing responsibilities. This subject came up in the last legislative session when certain lawmakers wanted to see "something done about" schools like the Cesar Chavez School Network. The top three administrators of the Network were eventually terminated, but it was disclosed that they had extraordinarily high salaries and little accountability. Several lawmakers questioned who had the responsibility to ensure things like that didn't happen.

There are differing viewpoints on where the line should be drawn between charter school accountability and "regulation creep." The charter school philosophy embodies the right of a charter school to operate independently, in exchange for increased results. Leaders in the charter school community have expressed concerns over the years that gradually charter school autonomy has been eroded. In fact, this was an issue in the most recent charter school appeal hearing before the State Board of Education.

This debate about autonomy is likely to be a hot topic at the committee hearings established as a result of HB10-1412, which creates a committee to review charter school standards and charter school authorizer standards. The committee will meet this fall and ultimately, have recommendations for the State Board by August 1, 2011.

Prospect Ridge Ordered Open by State Board

Today in another unanimous vote, the State Board of Education told the Adams 12 Five Star School District to open Prospect Ridge Academy. This was a second appeal from Prospect Ridge, a proposed K-12 math science focused Core Knowledge charter school in the Erie area. The State Board voted unanimously at the conclusion of the first appeal hearing to remand the application back for further consideration. The State Board, whose membership is split 4-3 along party lines, rarely votes unanimously on charter school appeals.

Today's appeal hearing centered on six issues: two contained in the approval resolution dealing with enrollment and four contractual issues. The four contractual issues were 1) the district requirement that they approve any financial auditor the charter school wanted to use, 2) the requirement of additional audits and/or reports, 3) the district's insistence that they could rescind waiver of district policy from the charter school at any time, and 4) the district's stipulation that they be able to approve any staff hired by the charter school.

The district claimed the four contractual issues were not relevant to the appeal hearing and should have been dismissed because they weren't "ripe" yet because negotiations broke down after the first meeting and no contract was ever signed. The charter school stated there had been a "gross imposition of conditions," a reference to the statute that pertains to a charter school having to comply with unreasonable contract provisions.

Barry Arrington, counsel for the charter school, said contract negotiations broke down when the district refused to negotiate. Charter school founder Dr. Ken Rooks said that the district had simply said they'd "negotiate to impasse" if the charter school leaders didn't agree to the contract terms set forth by the district, which is another way to acknowledge that the district holds all the cards in a charter school contract negotiation and doesn't need to open a new charter school.

In it's deliberation comments and in the resolution to support the charter school's claims, the State Board specifically addressed five of the issues and said the sixth seemed to be close to resolution by the parties and didn't need to be included. The charter school's founders said they planned to use only Highly Qualified or appropriately licensed staff and so if they were able to have complete autonomy over hiring, they would agree to more clear language addressing the district's concerns that staff be appropriately identified as Highly Qualified.

The two enrollment provisions in the hearing were the district's requirement that the charter school must have 80% of each grade's enrollment by March 1st in order to keep its charter and that 70% had to be from the Adams 12 School District. The charter school said they'd agree to 80% aggregate enrollment by March 1st since that was a reasonable expectation. As to the other provision, they cited state law that says a charter school must have a majority of its students from the district or a contiguous district and said they were willing to give priority to in-district students.

More than one State Board member noted the angst between the two parties that was evident during the hearing and expressed hopes that the two parties would be able to resolve their differences.