November 25,
2014
Mr. Donald A
Ogilvie, Interim Superintendent
Buffalo
Public Schools
712 City Hall
Buffalo, New
York 14220
Dear Mr.
Ogilvie:
This letter
is a follow up on the discussions at the Board meeting of this date regarding
the Resolution RFP Charter Schools,
the subsequent passage of that Resolution by a 5 to 3 vote and numerous
questions resulting from the same. The
Resolution proposes that “the attached RFP” be released for existing Charter Schools
to make application to operate one of the “out of time schools”; namely East,
Bennett, Lafayette High Schools or School #39, MLK, Jr. Multicultural
Institute.
The attached
document however is entitled an “RFS, Request for Space” not an RFP and does
not appear to correspond to the RFP(s) issued earlier. The RFS states as follows:
“The Board of Education is therefore
establishing a transparent (my emphasis) Request for Space (RFS) process
for proposed charter operators to notify the school board that they would like
to seek space in a district building and, at the board’s discretion, begin
negotiations with the board.
Just as Buffalo Public Schools is considering
proposals for conversion charter schools, educational partnership
organizations, SUNY lead partner and local innovative programs through a
Request for Proposals, this RFS process will enable independent charter schools
to seek selection for operation in any the following “out of time” school
buildings:
• East
High School
• Lafayette
High School
• Bennett
High School
• Martin
Luther King School
Applicants for an independent charter that
seek space in one of these district buildings must include with the RFS any
relevant application or other documentation that they submitted to a charter
authorizer, if applicable. (my emphasis) Applicants are only asked to
answer the questions below to the extent they are not addressed in such
attachment.
1. What is the name of the school that the
applicant is seeking to site? Please note that
BCSD is committed to building on the rich
history and strong community ties of these four schools. Applicants must
therefore submit proposals that retain the existing name as all or part of the name of the proposed schools.
2. What school building does the applicant
seek to use?
3. Does the applicant seek (indicate all
that apply):
a. Use of the entire school building
b. Co-location with one or more independent
charter schools
c. Co-location with one or more
district-operated schools
4. Does the applicant’s proposal require
formal closure of the current school at the location requested?
5. Describe the applicant’s approach to:
a. Education
b. Leadership, oversight, staffing and operations
c. Community involvement
d. Finances, including school operational
costs and any start-up operating or capital funds sought by the applicant
Applicants are asked to submit responses to
the RFS as soon as possible, and no later than January 7, 2015, for operation
beginning in the 2015-16 school year.”
My concerns/questions about this RFS relate
to the questions that prospective charter applicants are asked as there are few
or none that ask for any information about the charter school’s ability to
provide a “quality educational program”.
What would these applicants offer that is innovative, creative and
likely to result in better educational outcomes then the current
program(s)? What populations would they
serve? What are their admissions
criteria? How will they recruit
students? Further, the emphasis appears
to be on the use of the building as the primary consideration and not on the
educational program to be offered. Also,
what does it mean to “operate” one of the schools? In addition,
why is the date for submission January 7th, not December 12th?
Rather than a level field, it appears
that these charters are being given an undeserved advantage.
I’m sure that I would be accused of
making an “assumption” that there are already charter schools in the wings
waiting to submit a proposal. And there
have been numerous disclaimers regarding this possibility. But there has been too much work to get these
Resolutions crafted (with the input and consultation of NYSED staff) and
passed, that it’s difficult to believe that there are not several proposals
waiting to be submitted.
Who will evaluate these
proposals? The same group evaluating the
proposals resulting from the RFP? Again the time frame for public hearings,
input from the Board will be truncated considerably and not reasonable to
provide a thorough vetting.
Another question, which has yet to be
answered, even though I posed it several times in tonight’s meeting relates to
the authority that the Board has to seek “Requests for Space” from independent
charter schools in the instance of the out of time schools or any District
schools for that matter. A review of the
Guidance from NYSED on out of time schools states the following:
“Guidance for Schools
Districts Required to Submit Plans for “Out of Time” Schools
Consistent with sections 100.2(p) and
100.18 of Commissioner’s Regulations, districts with “Out of Time” schools must
choose one of the following options to implement in identified schools for the
2014-15 school year:
- Close the school
and disperse the students;
- Phase-out of the
identified school and phase-in of a new replacement school;
- Contract with an
Educational Partnership Organization (EPO);
- Establish an
alternate governance structure for the school(s);
- Convert to a
charter school;
- Enter into a
contract with the State University of New York (SUNY), or in New York
City, the City University of New York (CUNY), to provide for the education
of the students at the identified school(s).”
Where in this
Guidance does it offer the option to the District to seek independent charter
schools to take over the school buildings, co-locate in the school buildings,
“operate the schools” or co-opt the school building space or program?
In fact, this
statement appears in the RFP issued by the District:
“Independent Charter School - A
Charter Management Organization may choose to apply to the Board of Regents or
the SUNY Charter Schools Institute to operate an Independent Charter School at
one of the four schools. An Independent
Charter School under a charter school
operator or charter management organization must directly apply and be approved
by a NYS chartering entity, either the Board of Regents or the SUNY Charter
Schools Institute”
According to
comments made by Mr. Quinn, conversations with SED staff have provided you and
some Board members with information and guidance that all Board members have
not been privy to. I have included a
copy of the motion passed by the Board in July 2013 regarding the requirement
that the Superintendent share all communication with NYSED with the Board
immediately upon receipt. I remind you
that this requirement is still in force. The fact that a significant number of Board
members, specifically the four minority members of the Board are not
consistently given information communicated from NYSED or included in
conversations with the State regarding important issues about the future of our
schools impacts our ability as elected officials to represent our constituents
or to make sound, informed decisions, which will have a serious impact on the
education of the children in our District.
That is not acceptable.
I am
requesting, in writing, guidance received from the State Department of
Education officials that supports the Resolutions and RFS submitted and passed
by five members of the Board. I am
requesting that all Board members be given the opportunity to participate in
phone and or personal meetings with NYSED officials on these matters. I am requesting that information be shared in
a timely manner with all Board members.
Yours Truly,
Barbara A. Seals Nevergold
Barbara A.
Seals Nevergold, PhD
At-Large
Member
Cc: Board Members
No comments:
Post a Comment