Administrators running Gilroy’s only charter school threw a last-minute charter-saving option into the mix but some trustees balked at the idea, calling it a distraction.
Administrators running Gilroy’s only charter school threw a last-minute charter-saving option into the mix but some trustees balked at the idea, calling it a distraction.
“It’s a stalling tactic,” said trustee Rhoda Bress. “My reaction is that the students deserve better than this. I am not in favor of this option.”
Trustees planned to review three options for Gilroy’s only charter school – El Portal Leadership Academy – at Thursday’s board meeting: revoking the school’s charter, developing an agreement for co-managing the school or placing the school’s administrators on notice requiring specific actions be completed at specific times. Late Monday afternoon, Superintendent Deborah Flores received an e-mail from the Mexican American Community Service Agency – which operates the school – requesting that Gilroy Unified School District trustees add a fourth option to their list of possible choices: a one-year transition allowing for a new, though unnamed, chartering partner to come onboard.
MACSA recently came under fire for misappropriating $140,000 from employees retirement accounts at El Portal. While the organization has paid back about $103,000 to its Gilroy employees, it also had a debt of $250,000 owed to teachers at its San Jose charter school, Academia Calmecac, and sources revealed that the organization could “easily” owe up to an additional $400,000 to its non-school employees. A union representative with Service Employees International Union – which represents these employees – did not return phone messages.
The agency is scheduled to make a $20,000 payment to El Portal employees later this month and plans to be caught up by the end of June. The Santa Clara County Office of Education has also brought in the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team to conduct an investigation of MACSA’s two charter schools. The District Attorney is waiting for the Office of Education’s report before making any decision about prosecution.
In addition, a district report showed that the school has also fallen behind academically on state standards for about six years running.
“El Portal has been in existence since I’ve been on the board,” Bress said. “And every year when their report comes to us, there have been problems. They have had a lot of time to correct the situation. We’ve given this a fair amount of time.”
Meanwhile, Flores has prepared contingency plans should trustees decide to shut the floundering school down.
“We are prepared to accept all of El Portal’s students if the option to revoke is chosen,” Flores said Tuesday.
The letter from MACSA, written by Chief Executive Officer Olivia Soza-Mendiola, came several days after the board packets had been posted online and distributed to trustees. The letter stated that the agency convened an educational committee that recommended MACSA bring on a “partner” that would have “historical experience working with the identified population … demonstrate fiscal viability” and have an “understanding of support systems.” However, the letter did not name a specific party.
“No, I can’t consider it,” trustee Mark Good said of the fourth option. “Number one, it’s late. Number two, they don’t say who (the partner) is, what their background is. It leads me to believe they haven’t even identified this alleged partner.”
“We can’t put our faith and resources in an unknown entity,” Bress agreed.
Bress and Good said that the new option wouldn’t delay their vote Thursday night.
Although both said they planned to hear the agency out and “maintain an open mind,” Bress said that the problems trustees are addressing with El Portal are by no means new.
Meanwhile, board Vice President Francisco Dominguez welcomed the new option and, though he hadn’t had a chance to examine it closely, said he would be willing to look at other options that may arise Thursday night.
“I want to know about all the options available,” he said. “This is not a decision we should jump to quickly. I’m not going to rush to a judgment.”
Dominguez, who met with MACSA administrators Friday, said he was not put off by the lateness of MACSA’s request to add another option to the list, calling the procedure an “evolving process.” As far as he knew, the nonprofit had not named a specific partner yet.
Although he said he expected to make a decision Thursday, the decision could be to look at other options.
Board President Javier Aguirre, who also met with MACSA administrators last week, said he looks forward to hearing more details of the agency’s plan to bring on a chartering partner. Aguirre said the option had actually crossed his mind before.
“I will certainly take this option into consideration,” he said. “We owe it to the students and the community.”
Although he has not decided how he will cast his vote Thursday, Aguirre said he is prepared to take action.
Other trustees did not return phone calls.
Flores acknowledged that introducing a new option so late in the game might complicate matters and she didn’t think the process of bringing on a new chartering partner could take place in time for next school year. She plans to outline the previous three options for board members and allow MACSA to expand on the new option.
Sharing management of El Portal with MACSA, an option several trustees recoiled from, would be “problematic on a number of different levels,” she said, pointing out that the school district is already short-staffed.
If the board decides to revoke the charter, the school district’s agreement with MACSA includes a mediation/arbitration clause that would have to be fulfilled and the district could hold the mandated public hearing on the matter as soon as June 14, she said. She plans to walk the board through a complete timeline Thursday night.
“I’m convinced that if their decision is to revoke the charter, these students will be well served by one of our good – very good – high school options,” she said.
