Side Note: Cannibals string fired up again
_________________________________
I have to make this quick since I am using my PFT time. By the way, it is real quiet in the office. One more advantage of working during off hours.
The Star Tribune is thoroughly bashing Charters today in the name of Investigative Journalism and exciting headlines. Here is one of many articles in the Sunday paper.
By the way, I have no doubt that there were some questionable behaviors involved and that some oversight may need revision. What I find incredible frustrating is ABSOLUTELY NO MENTION of the fact that Charters have become so creative in part because the Publics are refusing to give Charters access to the empty buildings we have already paid for !!!! Maybe the Teacher's Union does have a lot of pull at the Strib.
Thoughts encouraged as always !!!
Star Tribune Charters "Out of Control"
Star Tribune Charter School Fails...
Star Tribune Want junk bonds...
Star Tribune Two Projects...
Star Tribune Low Enrollment...
G2A Public Buildings
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Sometimes the public does give access to public buildings to charter schools and sometimes they don't. Charter schools are public schools. Prairie Seeds, prominently mentioned in the article, is located in a former District 281 building.
As always, it's up to charter schools to persuade taxpayers and residents of our community that it's in their interests to make the buildings they paid for and own available to to charter schools.
The Strib didn't tell the whole story, but then no newspaper can ever tell the whole story about any subject it covers. If it did, there would something approaching the size of the Encyclopedia Brittanica landing with a thump on our doorsteps every morning.
Unfortunately, the Mn Dept of Education, cities, communities, tax payers and residents don't get a direct say in who gets to use the empty public buildings. The local "Public School Board and Administration" decides.
They simply can not be an effective judge of what is the best for the community and the most cost effective use of public dollars, because their stake/bias is too strong. They do not represent the community, they represent the "Local Public School District". Which is correct per their role definition.
In the case of RAS, they have gone on the record saying that they will never give up another building to those "unfair competitors"... Seems the bias may be pretty strong here.
I wouldn't want them trying my case.
The school boards are elected by taxpayers among others, and they do have direct responsibility over used and unused school buildings.
"They simply can not be an effective judge of what is the best for the community and the most cost effective use of public dollars, because their stake/bias is too strong."
Sure they can, and in any event that is precisely what they were elected to do.
"They do not represent the community, they represent the "Local Public School District". Which is correct per their role definition."
Members of the school board are elected by the community they represent. The "Local Public School District" doesn't have a vote.
"Seems the bias may be pretty strong here."
Let's not confuse bias with a decision. Personally, I think school board members should never say never. I think they should always listen to the community, and I think they should always be open to persuasion based on what's in the interest of our kids, our schools, and our community. Advocates of bringing in new charter schools into our district should think about that and frame their proposals in ways that are consistent with the mission of the board, which is to serve the interests of all members of our community.
Jon,
No matter how you spin it. The reality is the board believes it was elected to represent the citizen's with regard to the operation, marketing and growth of the "District 281 Robbinsdale Area Public Schools". (Supt Sicoli and the org below him)
No where in their charter does it say.
- We will evaluate the needs of the community to determine if District 281 is the best answer for the community's children.
- We will partner with whatever school mgmt can most effectively teach our community's children.
Their goal is very simply to maximize RAS revenues in order to cover fixed/variable costs and run a great District. This is probably as it should be.
It just makes them poorly suited to be the abitrator of our public funds/buildings once District 281 no longer needs them.
"The reality is the board believes it was elected to represent the citizen's with regard to the operation, marketing and growth of the "District 281 Robbinsdale Area Public Schools"."
I don't have to spin that at all. The board was elected to run the school district. That's what they have done and hopefully, what they will continue to do.
"No where in their charter does it say."
What does their charter say?
"It just makes them poorly suited to be the arbitrator of our public funds/buildings once District 281 no longer needs them."
Who is better suited? In any event, these kinds of policy issues are clearly board level decisions. As you suggest, there were some pretty good reasons the board made the decisions that it did. I think now and going forward, it's for charter school advocates to identify those reasons and address the board's concerns. If they do that effectively, they might get a better result from their point of view.
"Who is better suited?"
The City government where the empty school building is located, the county board or the Minnesota Dept of Education. (all are more neutral)
"In any event, these kinds of policy issues are clearly board level decisions."
Legally they are at this time.
Maybe with time this will change, or the future "Community Education Board" would have some say over all "Public Schools", District 281 and Charters. This would probably be a good model to keep everyone honest and ensure the best performers are given the lion's share of the resources.
Thanks for the interesting thought !!!
"The City government where the empty school building is located, the county board or the Minnesota Dept of Education. (all are more neutral)."
Let them make an offer for the properties.
"Maybe with time this will change, or the future "Community Education Board" would have some say over all "Public Schools", District 281 and Charters."
When and if they come into existence, such an entity should feel free to make an offer as well.
These are assets of the school district, not the city, or the county or the state in which they are located. It would be inappropriate for a city of which I am not a resident, in which I do not have a vote, to make decisions with respect to an asset which I own. There would be nothing of the neutral about that.
An asset that you own????
Most of the district's funding comes from the state. It is hard to specify who "owns" what public asset. I agree that a journal entry should be made to credit the District something towards the value of the transferred asset.
However, if the District no longer has value added use of the Public asset. The State certainly should have the right to disposition it. Remember, the accounts are just pockets in the same set of pants. Funded by the same tax payers.
Or do you think the wealthy should have a greater say in what happens? I mean they paid the most...
Now as you are the first to mention, Charters are Public schools of Minnesota. Why shouldn't the State find them a home in the existing vacant structures that were built with tax payer money? Seems rational.
By the way, let's test the Local RAS tax payer's paid for the school, therefore all of the cities need to agree on its disposition theory. Let's pick on PLE. Now I am quite certain that the homes in Plymouth more than paid for their local schools. By your logic, then the City of Plymouth should probably own the school. I mean their residents paid for it. Why is the RAS Board the one to disposition it?
This is a fascinating topic.
"The State certainly should have the right to disposition it."
If the state wants to re-assume the obligations to our schools it has shirked, and start keeping the promises it has broken, I think that would be great public policy. Feel free to write our legislators and our governor about that.
"Remember, the accounts are just pockets in the same set of pants. Funded by the same tax payers."
True, but that isn't a principle that's well understood in St. Paul.
"Why shouldn't the State find them a home in the existing vacant structures that were built with tax payer money?"
Charter schools are run by citizens, not the state. The state way of running things is through the school boards. As it is, charter schools are financed by the state, both directly and indirectly, with some of the organizers making a tidy little profit from them, it seems.
I've got to start focusing on the next post, anyone have different thoughts or want to chime in support of these ideas???
Maybe it's the Public schools that shouldn't be allowed to own real estate, not exactly a core competency of most districts.
"I'm not sure why Supt Sicoli was hesitant to answer the lost student questions."
I wasn't there, but I suspect that question was hard to answer because it related to the subjective motivations of individuals to which Sicoli can't speak to with any authority.
It was entirely foreseeable and should have been foreseen that some students would open enroll out of the district because their schools were closed. That should have been a factor in the board's decision.
Post a Comment