Responses to the 2005-2006 Grand Jury*

The adoption of charters by the Newcastle Elementary School District and the Ackerman Elementary School District was a transparent attempt to exploit the Charter Schools Act to achieve a purpose for which it was not intended, namely to allow transfers. Response: The Boards of Trustees of the Newcastle and Ackerman School Districts disagree with Finding 5. Neither the letter of the law nor the intent of the law substantiate this finding. Compliance with the Letter of the Law The Charter Schools Act contains provisions regarding the formation of a charter school, such as obtaining parent and teacher signatures in support of the creation of the charter school, not compelling any pupil to attend or teacher to instruct at the charter school and obtaining approval and a charter school number from the State Board. (See Ed. Code § 47605, § 47602.) Newcastle and Ackerman both complied with all of these provisions, and the Report does not allege otherwise. The Report correctly states that both districts received state approval to operate a charter school beginning in September 2005. (2005-2006 Grand Jury Report - Survey of Placer County Schools, p. 10.) In fact, both districts properly implemented the process for establishing a charter school by, among other things: (1) preparing the required petition; (2) drafting a legally sufficient charter; (3) holding the required public hearing and receiving approval from their respective Board of Trustees; and, (4) receiving State approval for the charter, and a charter number. As such, neither Newcastle nor Ackerman violated California Charter School Law, or any law, when they created their respective charter schools. What appears to trouble the Grand Jury is that Newcastle and Ackerman organized their charter schools to allow charter and non-charter students to attend school side-by-side. However, our search of the Charter Schools Act finds no provisions that prohibit fashioning a charter school in this manner. The California Education Code is permissive, meaning that anything that is not explicitly prohibited is permitted. (Ed. Code § 35160.) Because nothing in the Charter Schools Act, Education Code 47600 et seq., prohibits forming a charter school in this manner, it is permitted. Indeed, the Report correctly states, the Charter Schools Act does not contain a definition of "school" and as such a charter school may be an existing school, a school Paul Ridgeway, Foreman August 30, 2006 within a school, or could involve classrooms at a number of sites within a district. (2005-2006 Grand Jury Report - Survey of Placer County Schools, p. 2.) The Report appears to base its critique on Newcastle's and Ackerman's motivation to attract and retain out-of-district students. However, if charter schools were considered unlawful if motivated by the desire to attract out-of-district students without need to resort to interdistrict transfers, many existing charters would be implicated. Further, Newcastle and Ackerman find it noteworthy that interdistrict transfers are not required to attend an out-of-district charter school. Had the Legislature wished to preclude districts from using the creation of charter schools to by- pass the interdistrict transfer process, it would have required interdistrict transfers in this context. However, this is clearly not the case. It is both lawful and pervasive that California charter schools enroll students from outside their home districts. Newcastle and Ackerman are aware that certain language in Education Code section 47602, subdivision (a)(1), has likely been brought to the Grand Jury's attention. This language disallows counting as separate charter schools, programs that are located at the same site and provide similar programs to similar populations. However, this provision relates to the regulation of the maximum number of charter schools and has no bearing on the relationship between a charter school and its authorizing district. Newcastle and Ackerman are also aware that the Grand Jury has likely considered arguments, articulated in opinion letters solicited by the Placer County Office of Education, that discuss Education Code section 47601. These opinions suggest that the current arrangement fails because charter schools are required to operate independently from the school district structure. However, this argument relies on generalized intent language and fails to consider the many ways in which both Newcastle and Ackerman are fulfilling the intent of California's charter school scheme by providing meaningful options and competition through creative and flexible educational programming. (See Ed. Code § 47601, subd. (e), subd. (g).) Indeed, if charter schools were illegal if they did not operate independently from their authorizing districts, the many district-sponsored charters that have been authorized throughout the State would be called into question. Compliance with the Spirit of the Law The creation of the Newcastle Charter School and Bowman Charter School by their respective districts actually furthers two central goals of the Charter School Act: to give parents a choice about the kind of educational environment they want for their child; and to provide vigorous competition within the public school system. Charter schools were conceived largely to encourage educational choice and healthy competition in the public school system. Section 47601 of the Charter Schools Act states that in enacting the Charter Schools Act the Legislature intended to "[p]rovide parents and pupils with expanded choices in the types of educational opportunities that are available within the public school system" and "[p]rovide vigorous competition within the public school system to stimulate continual improvements in all public Paul Ridgeway, Foreman August 30, 2006 schools." (Ed. Code § 47601, subd. (e), subd. (g).) This is precisely what the Newcastle and Ackerman School Districts have accomplished in establishing their charter schools. The Report concedes that charter schools were instituted to provide parents and students greater choice in the kind of education they desire. (2005-2006 Grand Jury Report - Survey of Placer County Schools, p. 1.) The Report fails to acknowledge, however, that by establishing their charter schools, Newcastle and Ackerman further this goal by allowing parents and students the choice to continue enrolling their child in their preferred school. For example, as the Report correctly points out, many parents initially chose the Newcastle and Ackerman School Districts because they preferred the K-8 small school environment at Newcastle and Bowman, over the middle school approach of the Auburn Union School District. (2005-2006 Grand Jury Report - Survey of Placer County Schools, p.10.) The Newcastle and Bowman charter schools also offered unique programming and educational opportunities—infusing public education with creative options as intended by the Charter Schools Act. For example, parents are attracted to the Newcastle Charter School, as it is high achieving, focuses on project-based learning and fine arts, and is perceived to have a safer and more positive school climate for students and families. Similarly, parents are attracted to Bowman School for many reasons which include but are not limited to its Distinguished School status; outstanding vocal and instrumental music program; technology program; library program; garden program and incredible teaching staff. When the neighboring school districts effectively blocked interdistrict transfers to these exciting K-8 alternatives, it eliminated parents' ability to choose what kind of education they wanted for their child and insulated these districts from healthy competition. In response, Newcastle and Ackerman were faced with the upset and disappointment of parents and students who were being forced to leave, as well as potentially devastating consequences to their finances. The creation of the Newcastle and Bowman charter schools also promotes healthy competition within the public schools, another important objective of the Charter Schools Act. Both charter schools offer academically rigorous and challenging educational experiences to families who have chosen to educate their children outside of their local traditional public schools and district. They also offer educational programs tailored to the needs and desires of their charter school communities—and provide options not available in these families' home districts. This is precisely the sort of innovation and competition that the Charter School Act envisions. In other words, allowing out-of-district students the choice to attend Newcastle Charter School provides competition within the Placer County public school system and helps to stimulate improvements in all public schools. Paul Ridgeway, Foreman August 30, 2006

The Newcastle and Ackerman Districts felt forced to adopt charters arising from a restrictive transfer policy adopted February 2005 by the Auburn Union School District, and surrounding districts. Response: The Boards of Trustees of the Newcastle Elementary School District, and the Board of Trustees of the Ackerman Elementary School District agree with Finding 7. IV. RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS