Survey of Placer County Schools, p.10.)

Recommendations 5

• R1
  The District would assist RA in identifying funding, selecting land, and constructing their own school. In addition, the District would make a contribution toward the cost of building this facility as well as guide RA through all state applications, building requirements, EIR's, etc.
• R2
  The District would work with the RA to create its own school on land owned by the District, located across from Rocklin High School, and referred to as the Rocklin High Annex. The District offered to have its architects design a layout that would meet the needs of a K-8 school and also provide some funding along with the RA financing to create this school. \ad01\ado00\Data\Superintendent\CONNIE\WPFILES\Grand Jury\Honorable Frances Kearney 071106.doc Board Members: Greg Daley • Todd Lowell • Camille Maben • Jeff Nicolaysen • Steve Paul 51 The Honorable Frances Kearney July 11, 2006
• R3
  The District offered additional space at Parker Whitney to house RA's growth for next year. In addition, the District made a second offer to house all K-3 students at Ruhkala and all 4-6 students at Parker Whitney. The District also offered to lease facilities for the non-Rocklin students. RA's Proposal to the District:
• R4
  The Board of the Ackerman School District should consider vacating the charter of the Bowman Charter School at the earliest practicable time. Other, more legitimate, means should be sought to make the school available to out-of-district parents who wish to educate their children there. Response: The Board of the Ackerman Elementary School District respectfully rejects the Report's recommendation that the charter of the Bowman Charter School should be vacated. First, for the reasons outlined in response to Finding 5, the Board believes it has acted lawfully. Second, even if the current configuration of the Bowman Charter School were unlawful, immediate revocation of the charter is not warranted here. Immediate revocation of the charter would have a tremendous, negative impact on the children attending Bowman Charter School and their families. The children should not be the ones made to suffer because of a legal dispute devoid of bad faith or fraud. There has been no bad faith or subterfuge, and the entire process has been transparent and above board. As the Report points out, the Ackerman Elementary School District was straightforward about both its motive for developing a charter school and that all students, charter and non-charter, would be attending school side-by-side. (2005-2006 Grand Jury Report - Survey of Placer County Schools, p. 10-11.) In fact, the District was entirely candid with the California Department of Education, the County Office of Education, its teachers and community throughout the process of creating the charter school. Under these transparent conditions, the Ackerman Elementary School District received approval from the State, and immediate revocation is not the appropriate remedy if the charter school is found to violate legal requirements. Moreover, the Ackerman Elementary School District has identified various other vehicles for continuing to offer an educational alternative to out-of-district students in the event that the current configuration of its charter school is determined to be unlawful. For example, the Report could spark renewed collaborative efforts among the districts of Placer County, or the District could shift to an all-charter District. Given the flexibility afforded to districts by California's permissive Education Code, and Ackerman's readiness to explore other options if necessary, it is highly likely that it will continue to be able to offer an education alternative to out-of-district students in some lawful form. Thus, the District believes that the better—less educationally disruptive—course of action would be to permit school to continue while these other avenues are explored. Paul Ridgeway, Foreman August 30, 2006 Recommendation 5: The Board of the Newcastle Elementary School District should consider vacating the charter of the Newcastle Elementary Charter School at the earliest practicable time. Other, more legitimate, means should be sought to make the school available to out-of-district parents who wish to educate their children there. Response: The Board of the Newcastle Elementary School District respectfully rejects the Report's recommendation that the charter of the Newcastle Elementary Charter School should be vacated. First, for the reasons outlined in response to Finding 5, the Board believes it has acted lawfully. Second, even if the current configuration of the Newcastle Charter School were unlawful, immediate revocation of the charter is not warranted here. Immediate revocation of the charter would have a tremendous, negative impact on the children attending Newcastle Charter School and their families. The children should not be the ones made to suffer because of a legal dispute devoid of bad faith or fraud. There has been no bad faith or subterfuge, and the entire process has been transparent and above board. As the Report points out, the Newcastle Elementary School District was straightforward about both its motive for developing a charter school and that all students, charter and non-charter, would be attending school side-by-side. (2005-2006 Grand Jury Report - Survey of Placer County Schools, p. 10-11.) In fact, the District was entirely candid with the California Department of Education, the County Office of Education, its teachers and community throughout the process of creating the charter school. Under these transparent conditions, the Newcastle Elementary School District received approval from the state, and immediate revocation is not the appropriate remedy if the charter school is found to violate legal requirements. Moreover, the Newcastle Elementary School District has identified various other vehicles for continuing to offer an educational alternative to out-of-district students in the event that the current configuration of its charter school is determined to be unlawful. For example, the Report could spark renewed collaborative efforts among the districts of Placer County, or the District could shift to an all-charter District. Given the flexibility afforded to districts by California's permissive Education Code, and Newcastle's readiness to explore other options if necessary, it is highly likely that it will continue to be able to offer an education alternative to out-of-district students in some lawful form. Thus, the District believes that the better—less educationally disruptive—course of action would be to permit school to continue while these other avenues are explored. Recommendation 6: The Board of the Auburn Union School District should consider that a restrictive interdistrict policy is an ineffective long-term solution to addressing its problem of declining enrollment. It should consider modifying its policy at the earliest practicable time to be less restrictive.
• R6
  does not address the Newcastle or Ackerman Elementary Response: School Districts. Therefore, the Districts respond only generally that less restrictive interdistrict 47 Paul Ridgeway, Foreman August 30, 2006 policies in all of Placer County would serve everyone's interests, and welcomes working collaboratively with other districts to create unrestrictive transfer policies designed to meet the needs of our communities. V.