[NSD] – At its Dec. 9 meeting, the Governing Board of the Newhall School District voted to authorize an appeal of the Superior Court’s October 9, 2014, ruling in Newhall School District v. Acton-Agua Dulce Unified School District, et al.
Although the Superior Court found that Newhall was the prevailing party and agreed with the District that Acton-Agua Dulce Unified’s approval of the Albert Einstein Academy-Elementary School charter petition on May 16, 2013, was invalid and therefore had to be set aside, it did not require the charter school to cease its operations within the District’s boundaries.
Instead, the Superior Court crafted a remedy that allowed the charter school to continue operating within the District’s boundaries without a valid charter, infringing on the District’s sovereignty over public education, including the ability of the local community to participate and oversee educational agencies operating within its geographic boundaries.
The District believes the Superior Court erred by allowing the charter school to continue operations despite finding that it did not have a valid charter, a result in contravention of the California Charter Schools Act of 1992.
Newhall School District Response to Acton-Agua Dulce Unified School District Board Approval of Albert Einstein Academy Charter Petition:
[NSD] – We are disappointed by the Acton-Agua Dulce Unified School District (AADUSD) board’s decision on Jan. 8 to approve a new charter petition for the Albert Einstein Academy for Letters, Arts and Sciences – Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM), which is explicitly designed to locate within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Newhall School District. We believe the board’s decision is yet another abuse of California’s law governing charter schools.
Following a Superior Court ruling, AEALAS (the parent entity of STEAM) was directed to start the charter petition process over because the Albert Einstein-SCV charter operating at the former Pinecrest school site in NSD had not been validly approved. AADUSD’s board was directed to consider any new charter petition in a manner consistent with the letter and spirit of the Charter Schools Act, particularly with respect to any charter school’s possible location outside of AADUSD’s boundaries. Instead, AEALAS submitted a new petition that added additional programs for the 2015-16 academic year. Then, because this new petition contained errors and insurmountable deficiencies, last-minute revisions were made – as early as the morning of the hearing, denying the public the ability to fully participate in the public hearing process. By not following the Court’s basic direction, AEALAS continues to demonstrate either willful ignorance or purposeful disregard of the law, and an obvious intent to illegally place its school within the boundaries of the Newhall School District, where the school has continued to operate since its charter was vacated by the Court on October 9, 2014.
The leadership of AADUSD and AEALAS continue to toe the line that no suitable site exists for the school within the AADUSD boundaries. This is crucial, as we believe they could indeed hold to the stated intent of their own charter petition – which recites the desire and intent to locate within AADUSD – and house their program within AADUSD’s boundaries, compliant with the requirements of state law.
To help STEAM comply with the law and hold to its stated purpose, the Newhall School District and two other SCV school districts offered to provide more than 60 portable classroom and restroom buildings for the charter school’s use within AADUSD. Beyond that, a former member of the AADUSD board offered a thorough and considered analysis of STEAM’s ability to use the vacant Acton Elementary School campus. AADUSD and STEAM officials summarily dismissed these opportunities to be compliant with the law without any investigation or follow-up, instead meeting those offers with invalid excuses for why the solutions will not work.
We are left to assume that what the AADUSD has stated publicly is indeed true: It is approving charter schools to make money, not to benefit students within its district boundaries, despite being explicitly directed by a Superior Court judge to not use a revenue-generation scheme as a reason for approving charter petitions. Newhall School District’s Public Comment & Report to AADUSD’s board comprehensively demonstrates that STEAM was never designed to serve the students of the Acton-Agua Dulce School District in accordance with the Charter Schools Act’s purpose. Indeed, AADUSD continues to dodge the hard question:
Why does it makes sense for AADUSD to approve a charter petition for a school that proposes to have a population larger than all of AADUSD itself; that is not designed or meant to serve students from AADUSD at all, particularly in light of the separate Partnership Academy; and that will locate its primary campus two school districts away?
Many continue to frame this as a David-and-Goliath battle over “school choice,” when in fact school choice has nothing to do with this continuing struggle. Every member of the Newhall School District board is committed to serving the community for the benefit of its students and seeing that the law is upheld. We have no opposition to charter schools; but we are opposed to the actions of organizations that twist the law and its purpose in an effort to make money rather than to serve children.
We want to see this matter resolved in a way that abides by the letter and spirit of the Charter Schools Act, and is in the best interests of students and families in both school districts. In the wake of this decision by the AADUSD board, we will return to court on Feb. 5 prepared to present our case that both the AADUSD and AEALAS still have not complied with the law, and to seek answers to the larger questions of district jurisdiction and sovereignty that remain unanswered.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
19 Comments
I am pleased that Agua Dulce district approved the charter…Santa clarita & newhall only care about the lost revenue..not the children that are happily enrolled AEA…i hope santa clarita/ newhall districts lose alot if money fighting this battle they wont win…
Great job AEA, thank you agua dulce. Newhall and Santa Clarita districts keep fighting / losing revenue…
it would be great to see all the districts claiming they’re being wronged to focus on what, in their own districts, are chasing students away. I beleive that if the local school districts provided what parents wanted for their children and offered real solutions to the problems they face they wouldn’t see such an exodus from their classrooms. Instead of looking within their own schools and spending their monies fixing their own problems, they are squandering time and funds fighting something that has a relatively small effect on their own revenue. The adage about glass houses and throwing stones might apply here. Apparently it seems more reasonable to point fingers and assign blame elsewhere rather than recognize what they are doing to make parents want out of their districts.
This is where your tax payer money is going to Newhall district families! In case you werent aware the district offered AEA 61 portables that they got through a bond measure (your tax dollar). Apparently your district has money to burn!
The NSD PR machine continues to churn out these nice stories. Dr. Winger has clearly said at the public hearing that “this” is not about the quality of education offered by AEA, but about the failure to follow the letter of the law. Sure seems to me that they are spending a lot of money, time, and effort on the principle that AEA did not follow the letter of the law. They have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to prove a point. Money, time, and effort that would more wisely be spent on the quality of education. THAT is where the story lies. It’s really too bad that local residents and the local media aren’t picking that story up and demanding that they stop this nonsense.
The NSD PR machine continues to churn out these nice stories. Mr. Winger has clearly said at the public hearing that “this” is not about the quality of education offered by AEA, but about the failure to follow the letter of the law. Sure seems to me that they are spending a lot of money, time, and effort on the principle that AEA did not follow the letter of the law. They have spent hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars to prove a point. Money, time, and effort that would more wisely be spent on the quality of education. THAT is where the story lies. It’s really too bad that local residents and the local media aren’t picking that story up and demanding that they stop this nonsense.
So, let’s say some stranger illegally garnishes your wages. You’re just going to sit there and take it? Because Acton arbitrarily deciding to open a school in Newhall is exactly the same thing. (It has nothing to do with a particular school or its educational program.) Can you imagine if the roles were reversed and Newhall instead spent its “money, time and effort” on opening a school in Acton? Acton would go bananas. And rightly so.
To Newhall School District. Since this is about following the law and you are not against a charter school in your district, you can save everyone further pain by simply approving an AEA charter school in the Newhall School District. But no, wait, Newhall School District has never approved a charter school in their district, so why start now? Let’s be honest, you are very afraid of competition and this is why you are wasting our tax dollars to do anything you can to prevent this and any other charter school from opening in your district. The truth will set you free!
We all know SCV News and KHTS is against AEA, NSD IS FULL of tunnel vision members who are mainly focused on the money. No one has ever brought up a valid reason why AEA should not be in SCV. AEA IS A THREAT to NSD and the other districts in SCV. They have to step up their game in order to keep parents from leaving to go to aea. Oh wait that had already started.
That is a misrepresentation of SCVNews.com’s position. We have no opinion whatsoever about Einstein’s educational model. For the record, Acton-Agua Dulce is a district in the SCV.
Make no mistake about it, this about 2 things for NSD…money as power. As NSD has stated publicly and in their lawsuit, their SOVEREIGNTY has been breached. And the only material loss is the ADA money being re-directed to school of choice rather than the local public district. So, they’ve wasted millions of dollars of tax payer $$ bullying a school of choice rather than on improving their own programs. What does BK do if McD’s moves in next door? Do they spend all their time, energy, and $$ suing BK b/c they challenged their “sovereignty” over burgers? Or do they invest in some burger improvement? Shame on you, NSD! There’s a new kid on the playground. He won’t give you his lunch money and he’s done what any kid needs to do to the school yard bully…punch him in the teeth. Congratulations AEA.
I agree with SCVNews.com, they are simply reporting the news and they are not the problem. The real story here, in my opinion, boils down to one simple question: Why are so may parents interested in pulling their kids from public schools and sending them to charters, private or home schooling? Well, the answer is simple to me: The public schools (like NSD) are letting us down in serious ways. AEA solves many problems by requiring that all students wear uniforms, class sizes remain small, great execution of curriculum and the teachers unions are not involved. NSD needs to look at themselves in the mirror, recognize their deficiencies and approve the AEA charter. NSD can learn from AEA and implement the items mentioned above within their district. Do this and the hemorrhaging of students leaving their schools would stop. But no, it’s to painful to look at yourself in the mirror and accept your flaws. Instead NSD rather not ask the hard questions of themselves or the teachers unions. It’s easier to blame AEA and anyone else except themselves. This is a classic case of denial and it will take a true leader at NSD to lead them in a new direction that truly benefits our children.
Those districts don’t need to continue losing revenue. They can stop fighting AEA and AAUSD. If they stepped up the quality of education in their schools AEA wouldn’t be a threat to them.
Newhall schools are the top performing in the valley, and they aren’t losing revenue since the judge named Newhall as the prevailing party in the case. AAUSD is responsible for all legal fees incurred by NSD.
Not entirely true or accurate Hilary Hall. The order says that the court will enter judgment in February and at that time NSD will be adjudged the prevailing party. Period.
NSDs motion for attorney’s fees is pending. It may or may not be granted. Under the law, generally each side pay their own attorneys fees. In some cases, a prevailing party MAY be awarded the fees. It is at the discretion of the court. We will know after a ruling on the motion if AADUSD is ordered to pay NSD fees.
It is notable too that NSD seeks $211,000 – money spent prosecuting the action. It doesn’t include fees paid for other legal services outside the prosecution of the lawsuit.
In the end a boatload of money is being squandered in the name of following the letter of the law and protecting NSD’s turf. The bill is being footed by the taxpayers regardless of the outcome of the motion.
To be more precise, the order says that the court will enter judgment in February and at that time NSD will be adjudged the prevailing party. Not all prevailing parties are awarded attoeneys fees. NSDs motion for attorney’s fees is pending. It may or may not be granted.
They seek $211,000 for prosecuting the case. It doesn’t include fees paid for other legal services outside the prosecution of the lawsuit.
In the end a boatload of money is being squandered, just to prove a point and protect turf. And no matter what the ruling is on the motion, we taxpayers are footing the bill. We should all be livid.
Let’s keep score… in the end who gets the money?
Lawyers = win.
Teachers union = win.
Public school administrators = win.
Taxpayers = loose.
Note that the lawyers, unions and public school administrators generally support the democrats. Interesting and sad how this lot say they stand for the common folk, but take from us when they feel threatened.
If AEA is so great then why aren’t the parents willing to drive to their school that is open within legal boundaries?!?
Joyce, your response indicates that you are either ill informed or biased. Parents currently drive their kids from distant locations to the AADUSD campus and from the SCV and beyond to the AEA Valencia campus. Two basic questions remain unanswered however: Why are there an increasing number of parents switching to charters, private or home schooling and why doesn’t NSD approve a charter school? Joyce, are you willing to answer these two questions truthfully, or are you a unionized teacher and part of this attempt to crush competition in the public school system?