On behalf of our amazing students, passionate teachers, committed Council of Trustees, dedicated leadership and myself, I write to thank all of our supporters throughout cyberworld on ThinkMexican and elsewhere. Please like us on our Facebook page as well to stay informed and go to semillasdelpueblo.org to download important updates on our struggle and even to make a donation if possible. Overcoming a recession is not easy for any community-based nonprofit, but with your support our children’s educational future remains bright!
Here is a legal update:
Specifically, the District has wrongly denied the petition based largely upon Anahuacalmecac’s refusal to provide personal information of certain governing board members and parents. In an email to Marcos Aguilar on May 31, 2013, LAUSD Charter Division representative Joyce Johnson indicated that the Charter Schools Division would be recommending denial of the petition based, in part, on the fact that the nonprofit governing board, Semillas Sociedad Civil, did not submit documentation required for the Office of the Inspector General to exercise due diligence in verifying the petitioners’ capacity to fulfill their role at the charter school.
The Charter Schools Act sets forth an exhaustive list of criteria and does not allow a charter authorizer to impose additional criteria for approval of a charter petition. (Education Code Section 47605). So long as those criteria are met, “the governing board of the school district shall not deny a petition for the establishment of a charter school.” (Education Code Section 47605(b)). Anahuacalmecac’s renewal petition contained sufficient information to meet the approval criteria established by the Charter Schools Act, including the petitioner’s capacity to “successfully implement the program set forth in the petition.” (Education Code Section 47605(b)(2)).
Anahuacalmecac submitted page 24 of the Charter School Application, entitled “Due Diligence Questionnaire,” for all lead petitioners. While the petitioners elected not to disclose certain personal information on the Questionnaire, including social security numbers, the District nonetheless had sufficient information to exercise due diligence in approving the renewal petition. For example, the petitioners’ past performance in implementing the charter school program during the current charter term is evidence of their continued capacity to fulfill their respective roles at the school.
Further, incorporated charter schools are required to comply with federal and state laws applicable to nonprofit, tax exempt corporations. As such, charter schools are obligated by California corporate and federal tax laws to institute safeguards for preventing conflicts of interest and ensuring sound governance practices. The District should have respected the autonomy of a charter school to select board members who will govern responsibly and ensure successful implementation of the educational program set forth in the charter petition.
Also important is that a denial of a charter school petition based on the petitioner’s refusal to provide his or her social security number may amount to a violation of the Privacy Act of 1974. Section 7(a)(1) of the Act provides that, “it shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his social security account number.” Section 7(b) of the Act further requires a government agency requesting person’s social security number to notify the person whether the request is mandatory or voluntary and what uses the agency will make of the social security numbers that are collected. (5 U.S.C. § 552 (note)).
Approval of a charter petition that meets all legal requirements for the establishment of a charter school, as set forth in Education Code Section 47605, may be classified as a “right, benefit, or privilege” provided by the Charter Schools Act. Accordingly, the Privacy Act would bar the District from denying a charter school petition based on the petitioner’s refusal to disclose his or her social security number. In addition, the Due Diligence Questionnaire on page 24 of the Charter Application fails to notify applicants that disclosure of a social security number is voluntary.
Finally, as the District is aware, student academic achievement must be the primary consideration in approving or denying a charter renewal. Education Code Section 47607 provides:
“The authority that granted the charter shall consider increases in pupil academic achievement for all groups of pupils served by the charter school as the most important factor in determining whether to grant a charter renewal.” (Education Code 47607(a)(3)).
Anahuacalmecac has demonstrated 104 points of growth on the Academic Performance index (API) over the past three years. This represents a significant increase in academic achievement for the students enrolled in the charter school. Compared to local comprehensive LAUSD high schools, Anahuacalmecac is twice as effective at graduating UC/CSU eligible students - particularly students who may ha
ve otherwise fallen into drop-out recovery or alternative education settings, forty percent of which this year are in Special Education.
Test scores and school ranking may be all important to some people, but when a student like Juan, who required so much more support to graduate, gets it, at our school - we know our true vocation as educators is well-served. As compared to local “high-performing” charter schools as well, our students reflect those typically not granted access to a college-preparatory curriculum either due to a lack of English language proficiency or a general disregard or even antagonism against our community’s identity and culture. Graduation at all cost, is not, in our opinion sound educational practice. Assimilation, even for the noble pursuit of college admittance, is a crime against our students and humanity.
- Marcos Aguilar, Founder and Executive Director of Semillas Sociedad Civil
No comments:
Post a Comment