It appears that the way to sanction an illegally granted, failed charter school that violated state procurement and open meeting laws, opened a month late and with half the projected enrollment and which the Commissioner of education deemed “no longer viable” is to shake one’s finger at it sternly and require better paperwork….
http://www.wickedlocal.com/glo…
http://www.doe.mass.edu/lawsre…
To be fair, there likely had to be a probationary framework established prior to revocation anyway, and based on the history of this organization, they will likely find it challenging to live up to the modest expectations of the Commissioner’s list.
Failure to comply would cue up the potential for summary revocation at the end of the period, so perhaps this is merely a way to save a bit of face by letting the kids finish the semester before pulling the plug.
It does beg the question whether the AG will enforce the law and whether the IG will continue to query whether it is acceptable to spend state and federal funds on a school (and their contracts) that has been determined to be in violation of the law.
The bitterly scathing tone of Chester’s long list of “conditions” runs counter to their relatively modest nature, and suggests to me that he either doubts this outfit capable of following all items on the list or hopes they will hang themselves in the effort.
<
p>It should also be noted, relative to enrollment issues, that children are being removed from the charter voluntarily by their parents as days go by and the experience of attending this school replaces the idea.
<
p>It seems an internal PR campaign to support the charter has run smack dab into the contrary opinion of other enrolled students/parents, who, without Chester’s intervention, the DESE vote, or the actions of anyone representing the city or the organized opposition, want to leave the school, just two weeks into the experience.
<
p>Talk about scathing.
…that nobody want to piss of rich people in Gloucester until after the election.
It appears that the BESE has endorsed Commissioner Chester’s recommended probation schedule for the GCACS – link above — with the caveat that failure to comply will result in summary revocation at the end of December. At a meeting where the very fate of their school was to be decided, 2 of the 7 GCACS board members were in attendance – the Exec. Director who was arguably pleading for his job/contract and one other. Their Chair was absent from the meeting — mind you this is the same one who believes that they just need to agree to disagree on the findings of the Attorney General who determined that their construction contracts were granted illegally…
<
p>Keep in mind that this school opened almost a month late with barely half their intended enrollment figures… is still in the sights of the IG and AG — how do we pay for illegal contracts in the Commonwealth?? — and who, at their board meeting last night, on the eve of their BESE trial, could muster only 4 board members for a 45 minute meeting that didn’t actually address any of the compelling issues facing their school — including the budget which is now based at most on 70 students and not the 95 or 120 they expected.
<
p>If this is the model for how charters are approved and monitored this coming year with 25 potential applicants is going to be a doozy….
Obligatory Animal House reference? Check.
At least Animal House was funny — this is just a tragedy all the way around….