BREAKING NEWS: Valley Oak Charter School Withdraws Appeal of DJUSD Denial

Share:
VOCS PLEDGES TO REFILE A PETITION WITH DJUSD FOR 2009-10

The Vanguard received a copy of a letter from Mike Egan of the Valley Oak Charter School (VOCS) Founding Group to County Superintendent of Schools Jorge Ayala.

In it the VOCS announces they are withdrawing their appeal of the DJUSD’s denial of our charter petition. They also announce that they “will refine the petition, consolidate our efforts and resubmit a new petition to DJUSD in order to be able to implement the school we have contemplated in the 2009-10 school year.”

Late last week, the County Office of Education in a Summary Report recommended the County Board of Education reject the charter petition, however, they also offered to have additional dialogue in order to bridge the gap between the proposal and concerns of County Staff. Given the late date however, it would have been difficult for VOCS to accommodate that request.

“We have reviewed the Yolo Countv Office of Education Summary Report Regarding Charter School Petition(s) Appeal Provided by your office. While we appreciate Associate Superintendent Legnitto’s offer for additional dialogue, given the preliminary conclusions contained in the Report, the time left before the Board meeting on the 2oth and the type of charter school we desire to establish in the community of Davis, we do not believe an appeal would be the appropriate course to take at this time.”

Given the concerns raised by both the county and DJUSD, the petitioners suggest that they will go a different route.

“While we disagree with many of the conclusions contained in the report, and believe our petitions are viable, it is clear that neither the DJUSD Board nor the YCOE Charter School Review Team is prepared to agree. Under the circumstances, even if we were to be authorized by the Yolo County Board of Education or by the State Board of Education, within the current environment of opposition it would be difficult to meet the expectations of our community, our parents, or our staff. Instead, we will continue to work with charter development groups in considering the ostensible reasons for denial contained in the DJUSD resolution and in the YCOE Report. We will refine the petition, consolidate our efforts and resubmit a new petition to DJUSD in order to be able to implement the school we have contemplated in the 2009-1 0 school year.”

The petitioners also reiterated their goal of providing “a unique school for a unique neighborhood.”

“We believe that VOCS is designed to serve an ethnically, linguistically and economically diverse community unique in Davis, that the staff that support the school have created a strong collaborative culture that should be maintained and that VOCS is a proven educational model designed from a shared vision of success for all students. We remain committed to our mission, to those objectives, and to that goal. To have a school that does anything less would be a disservice to the community, students and staff who have supported the VOCS effort.”

The Vanguard remains a strong supporter of both Valley Oak and the Valley Oak Charter School. We are greatly saddened by this news as we have been following this issue for well over a year now and have come to know and appreciate many of the families, children, and teachers that make Valley Oak such a great school for all involved. During these trying times of budget crises, the Vanguard wishes to remind the school board of DJUSD that the future of these wonderful children are in your hands. Many of these students are among the most vulnerable in this entire district and Valley Oak afforded many of them a place not only to learn, but a place where they could excel. We should never let these children and these families down. Sadly this closes a chapter now in the history of this great school district, it is my hope that that chapter can be reborn in the coming years and that we can fulfill our commitment to educate all of our children–including those most vulnerable.

—Doug Paul Davis reporting

Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

40 thoughts on “BREAKING NEWS: Valley Oak Charter School Withdraws Appeal of DJUSD Denial”

  1. from the Darkside

    Good Luck to Valley Oak, they are going to need it.

    I have a couple of thoughts.

    Some have suggested recalling the school board is not what is needed right now. Maybe that is true.

    So let’s wait till the crisis is over, then recall em’

    The question of recall boils down to one fundamental question: Do you trust the current school board to spend $ wisely in any shape manner or form in such a way we will not go down this road again.

    I do not.

    Why do I believe this?

    Let’s put it this way: does the school board show signs of fiscal mismanagement, even now, when the ship is sinking?

    It does.

    They maintain a brand new school, Margaret Mongomery, is necessary, but emerson/Valley oak which have served West/Central Davis for years are “too expensive.”

    They whipped out the credit card for Hammond’s six figure salary without hesitation.

    Why do they need a fancy new superintendent to preside over schools that are closing while they pay him a hansome amt?

    They whipped out the credit card for Hush $ for Murphy. They didn’t exactly fight to find a cheaper option. Yet when Valley Oak supporters want to save their school, they fight like hell, and suddenly the $ issue is important.

    Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)

    People have said, how will recalling the school board save $?

    Simple, it will save the $ that is sure to be wasted by the school board in the future, that’s how.

  2. from the Darkside

    Good Luck to Valley Oak, they are going to need it.

    I have a couple of thoughts.

    Some have suggested recalling the school board is not what is needed right now. Maybe that is true.

    So let’s wait till the crisis is over, then recall em’

    The question of recall boils down to one fundamental question: Do you trust the current school board to spend $ wisely in any shape manner or form in such a way we will not go down this road again.

    I do not.

    Why do I believe this?

    Let’s put it this way: does the school board show signs of fiscal mismanagement, even now, when the ship is sinking?

    It does.

    They maintain a brand new school, Margaret Mongomery, is necessary, but emerson/Valley oak which have served West/Central Davis for years are “too expensive.”

    They whipped out the credit card for Hammond’s six figure salary without hesitation.

    Why do they need a fancy new superintendent to preside over schools that are closing while they pay him a hansome amt?

    They whipped out the credit card for Hush $ for Murphy. They didn’t exactly fight to find a cheaper option. Yet when Valley Oak supporters want to save their school, they fight like hell, and suddenly the $ issue is important.

    Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)

    People have said, how will recalling the school board save $?

    Simple, it will save the $ that is sure to be wasted by the school board in the future, that’s how.

  3. from the Darkside

    Good Luck to Valley Oak, they are going to need it.

    I have a couple of thoughts.

    Some have suggested recalling the school board is not what is needed right now. Maybe that is true.

    So let’s wait till the crisis is over, then recall em’

    The question of recall boils down to one fundamental question: Do you trust the current school board to spend $ wisely in any shape manner or form in such a way we will not go down this road again.

    I do not.

    Why do I believe this?

    Let’s put it this way: does the school board show signs of fiscal mismanagement, even now, when the ship is sinking?

    It does.

    They maintain a brand new school, Margaret Mongomery, is necessary, but emerson/Valley oak which have served West/Central Davis for years are “too expensive.”

    They whipped out the credit card for Hammond’s six figure salary without hesitation.

    Why do they need a fancy new superintendent to preside over schools that are closing while they pay him a hansome amt?

    They whipped out the credit card for Hush $ for Murphy. They didn’t exactly fight to find a cheaper option. Yet when Valley Oak supporters want to save their school, they fight like hell, and suddenly the $ issue is important.

    Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)

    People have said, how will recalling the school board save $?

    Simple, it will save the $ that is sure to be wasted by the school board in the future, that’s how.

  4. from the Darkside

    Good Luck to Valley Oak, they are going to need it.

    I have a couple of thoughts.

    Some have suggested recalling the school board is not what is needed right now. Maybe that is true.

    So let’s wait till the crisis is over, then recall em’

    The question of recall boils down to one fundamental question: Do you trust the current school board to spend $ wisely in any shape manner or form in such a way we will not go down this road again.

    I do not.

    Why do I believe this?

    Let’s put it this way: does the school board show signs of fiscal mismanagement, even now, when the ship is sinking?

    It does.

    They maintain a brand new school, Margaret Mongomery, is necessary, but emerson/Valley oak which have served West/Central Davis for years are “too expensive.”

    They whipped out the credit card for Hammond’s six figure salary without hesitation.

    Why do they need a fancy new superintendent to preside over schools that are closing while they pay him a hansome amt?

    They whipped out the credit card for Hush $ for Murphy. They didn’t exactly fight to find a cheaper option. Yet when Valley Oak supporters want to save their school, they fight like hell, and suddenly the $ issue is important.

    Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)

    People have said, how will recalling the school board save $?

    Simple, it will save the $ that is sure to be wasted by the school board in the future, that’s how.

  5. Rich Rifkin

    If VOCS does not open in the 2008-09 school year, it is probably sunk forever as a neighborhood charter school.

    Why? Because the neighbors will now send their kids to Korematsu and North Davis or some other school and by doing that most will lose interest in changing schools again a year or two later.

    If VOCS ever opens (in 2009 or later), it will have to be some kind of a magnet charter school, attracting kids from around town with a program unavailable at all of the other schools. A technology focus seemed to be that in papers of VOCS, but I always saw the main thrust of VOCS as a recreation of Valley Oak, primarily serving its neighborhood.

  6. Rich Rifkin

    If VOCS does not open in the 2008-09 school year, it is probably sunk forever as a neighborhood charter school.

    Why? Because the neighbors will now send their kids to Korematsu and North Davis or some other school and by doing that most will lose interest in changing schools again a year or two later.

    If VOCS ever opens (in 2009 or later), it will have to be some kind of a magnet charter school, attracting kids from around town with a program unavailable at all of the other schools. A technology focus seemed to be that in papers of VOCS, but I always saw the main thrust of VOCS as a recreation of Valley Oak, primarily serving its neighborhood.

  7. Rich Rifkin

    If VOCS does not open in the 2008-09 school year, it is probably sunk forever as a neighborhood charter school.

    Why? Because the neighbors will now send their kids to Korematsu and North Davis or some other school and by doing that most will lose interest in changing schools again a year or two later.

    If VOCS ever opens (in 2009 or later), it will have to be some kind of a magnet charter school, attracting kids from around town with a program unavailable at all of the other schools. A technology focus seemed to be that in papers of VOCS, but I always saw the main thrust of VOCS as a recreation of Valley Oak, primarily serving its neighborhood.

  8. Rich Rifkin

    If VOCS does not open in the 2008-09 school year, it is probably sunk forever as a neighborhood charter school.

    Why? Because the neighbors will now send their kids to Korematsu and North Davis or some other school and by doing that most will lose interest in changing schools again a year or two later.

    If VOCS ever opens (in 2009 or later), it will have to be some kind of a magnet charter school, attracting kids from around town with a program unavailable at all of the other schools. A technology focus seemed to be that in papers of VOCS, but I always saw the main thrust of VOCS as a recreation of Valley Oak, primarily serving its neighborhood.

  9. Anonymous

    A number of Birch Lane Montessori parents are quite serious about starting a Charter Montessori school. That was the original plan back in 2001, bringing a charter Montessori here, and they were pretty far along in the process. The school board panicked about the loss of ADA and convinced the parents involved to start a magnet Montessori program within the district. Now with the Montessori-credentialed teachers being laid off (to be replaced by senior, though not Montessori, teachers)parents are feeling awfully betrayed. Maybe they should hook up with some VO parents.

  10. Anonymous

    A number of Birch Lane Montessori parents are quite serious about starting a Charter Montessori school. That was the original plan back in 2001, bringing a charter Montessori here, and they were pretty far along in the process. The school board panicked about the loss of ADA and convinced the parents involved to start a magnet Montessori program within the district. Now with the Montessori-credentialed teachers being laid off (to be replaced by senior, though not Montessori, teachers)parents are feeling awfully betrayed. Maybe they should hook up with some VO parents.

  11. Anonymous

    A number of Birch Lane Montessori parents are quite serious about starting a Charter Montessori school. That was the original plan back in 2001, bringing a charter Montessori here, and they were pretty far along in the process. The school board panicked about the loss of ADA and convinced the parents involved to start a magnet Montessori program within the district. Now with the Montessori-credentialed teachers being laid off (to be replaced by senior, though not Montessori, teachers)parents are feeling awfully betrayed. Maybe they should hook up with some VO parents.

  12. Anonymous

    A number of Birch Lane Montessori parents are quite serious about starting a Charter Montessori school. That was the original plan back in 2001, bringing a charter Montessori here, and they were pretty far along in the process. The school board panicked about the loss of ADA and convinced the parents involved to start a magnet Montessori program within the district. Now with the Montessori-credentialed teachers being laid off (to be replaced by senior, though not Montessori, teachers)parents are feeling awfully betrayed. Maybe they should hook up with some VO parents.

  13. Elaine Roberts Musser

    I am very disappointed in this latest turn of events, but not surprised in light of the concerted opposition the VOCS proponents have had to face. However, in light of the decisions being made by the current School Board (closing Emerson w/o obtaining any public input), I would encourage opening charter schools wherever possible. Funding control must be taken away from the school board/district, and put into the hands of stakeholders (parents and teachers). Only then will you get true accountability. I would concur with observations made by “from the darkside”, that the current School Board has not shown themselves to be particularly competent.

  14. Elaine Roberts Musser

    I am very disappointed in this latest turn of events, but not surprised in light of the concerted opposition the VOCS proponents have had to face. However, in light of the decisions being made by the current School Board (closing Emerson w/o obtaining any public input), I would encourage opening charter schools wherever possible. Funding control must be taken away from the school board/district, and put into the hands of stakeholders (parents and teachers). Only then will you get true accountability. I would concur with observations made by “from the darkside”, that the current School Board has not shown themselves to be particularly competent.

  15. Elaine Roberts Musser

    I am very disappointed in this latest turn of events, but not surprised in light of the concerted opposition the VOCS proponents have had to face. However, in light of the decisions being made by the current School Board (closing Emerson w/o obtaining any public input), I would encourage opening charter schools wherever possible. Funding control must be taken away from the school board/district, and put into the hands of stakeholders (parents and teachers). Only then will you get true accountability. I would concur with observations made by “from the darkside”, that the current School Board has not shown themselves to be particularly competent.

  16. Elaine Roberts Musser

    I am very disappointed in this latest turn of events, but not surprised in light of the concerted opposition the VOCS proponents have had to face. However, in light of the decisions being made by the current School Board (closing Emerson w/o obtaining any public input), I would encourage opening charter schools wherever possible. Funding control must be taken away from the school board/district, and put into the hands of stakeholders (parents and teachers). Only then will you get true accountability. I would concur with observations made by “from the darkside”, that the current School Board has not shown themselves to be particularly competent.

  17. Anonymous

    I am a parent of a Valley Oak student and a preschooler entering kindergarten in the fall. I am saddened by the decision of the VOCS, but also relieved to know where my children will be going to school in August. The uncertainty has been difficult for our family and I dreaded a long summer waiting for word about appeals to the state. My children need to become attached to another school and group of children.

    I fear that Rich Rifkin is correct that it will be difficult to get most of us to attend VOCS in future years once we have settled into our new schools. I wish the charter well.

  18. Anonymous

    I am a parent of a Valley Oak student and a preschooler entering kindergarten in the fall. I am saddened by the decision of the VOCS, but also relieved to know where my children will be going to school in August. The uncertainty has been difficult for our family and I dreaded a long summer waiting for word about appeals to the state. My children need to become attached to another school and group of children.

    I fear that Rich Rifkin is correct that it will be difficult to get most of us to attend VOCS in future years once we have settled into our new schools. I wish the charter well.

  19. Anonymous

    I am a parent of a Valley Oak student and a preschooler entering kindergarten in the fall. I am saddened by the decision of the VOCS, but also relieved to know where my children will be going to school in August. The uncertainty has been difficult for our family and I dreaded a long summer waiting for word about appeals to the state. My children need to become attached to another school and group of children.

    I fear that Rich Rifkin is correct that it will be difficult to get most of us to attend VOCS in future years once we have settled into our new schools. I wish the charter well.

  20. Anonymous

    I am a parent of a Valley Oak student and a preschooler entering kindergarten in the fall. I am saddened by the decision of the VOCS, but also relieved to know where my children will be going to school in August. The uncertainty has been difficult for our family and I dreaded a long summer waiting for word about appeals to the state. My children need to become attached to another school and group of children.

    I fear that Rich Rifkin is correct that it will be difficult to get most of us to attend VOCS in future years once we have settled into our new schools. I wish the charter well.

  21. wdf

    “Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)”

    That actually came from an idea presented as a letter to the editor (seemingly a student?) in the Enterprise a few days before that meeting.

    I think Ms. Lovenburg threw it out there, in part, to get the district staff to respond to the idea. I didn’t get the impression that it was something she was going to push hard for.

    I, too, was curious about that idea because in my high school (different city/state), we had to pay for parking. So it’s not entirely from the realm of the ridiculous.

  22. wdf

    “Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)”

    That actually came from an idea presented as a letter to the editor (seemingly a student?) in the Enterprise a few days before that meeting.

    I think Ms. Lovenburg threw it out there, in part, to get the district staff to respond to the idea. I didn’t get the impression that it was something she was going to push hard for.

    I, too, was curious about that idea because in my high school (different city/state), we had to pay for parking. So it’s not entirely from the realm of the ridiculous.

  23. wdf

    “Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)”

    That actually came from an idea presented as a letter to the editor (seemingly a student?) in the Enterprise a few days before that meeting.

    I think Ms. Lovenburg threw it out there, in part, to get the district staff to respond to the idea. I didn’t get the impression that it was something she was going to push hard for.

    I, too, was curious about that idea because in my high school (different city/state), we had to pay for parking. So it’s not entirely from the realm of the ridiculous.

  24. wdf

    “Then Lovenburg suggests the students need to save the district with parking fees. (And I thought the school board was there to serve the kids?)”

    That actually came from an idea presented as a letter to the editor (seemingly a student?) in the Enterprise a few days before that meeting.

    I think Ms. Lovenburg threw it out there, in part, to get the district staff to respond to the idea. I didn’t get the impression that it was something she was going to push hard for.

    I, too, was curious about that idea because in my high school (different city/state), we had to pay for parking. So it’s not entirely from the realm of the ridiculous.

  25. Anon

    I like the idea of parking fees. I live halfway between the high school and the university and, every day, see parents biking to work while their teens drive to the high school. Why? It costs money to park at UCD; it doesn’t at the high school. Environmental Economics 101: put a price on activities that hurt the environment. We may to provide exceptions for those living south of the freeway and, of course, for the disabled…but why not parking fees??

  26. Anon

    I like the idea of parking fees. I live halfway between the high school and the university and, every day, see parents biking to work while their teens drive to the high school. Why? It costs money to park at UCD; it doesn’t at the high school. Environmental Economics 101: put a price on activities that hurt the environment. We may to provide exceptions for those living south of the freeway and, of course, for the disabled…but why not parking fees??

  27. Anon

    I like the idea of parking fees. I live halfway between the high school and the university and, every day, see parents biking to work while their teens drive to the high school. Why? It costs money to park at UCD; it doesn’t at the high school. Environmental Economics 101: put a price on activities that hurt the environment. We may to provide exceptions for those living south of the freeway and, of course, for the disabled…but why not parking fees??

  28. Anon

    I like the idea of parking fees. I live halfway between the high school and the university and, every day, see parents biking to work while their teens drive to the high school. Why? It costs money to park at UCD; it doesn’t at the high school. Environmental Economics 101: put a price on activities that hurt the environment. We may to provide exceptions for those living south of the freeway and, of course, for the disabled…but why not parking fees??

  29. Anonymous

    The reason you do not charge parking fees is that the lot is city-owned and is multi-use. It is not owned by the school district so they would not get any revenue from parking fees. If the city lot charged fees for parking then the library lot would be impacted necessitating fees at that lot as well. All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…

  30. Anonymous

    The reason you do not charge parking fees is that the lot is city-owned and is multi-use. It is not owned by the school district so they would not get any revenue from parking fees. If the city lot charged fees for parking then the library lot would be impacted necessitating fees at that lot as well. All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…

  31. Anonymous

    The reason you do not charge parking fees is that the lot is city-owned and is multi-use. It is not owned by the school district so they would not get any revenue from parking fees. If the city lot charged fees for parking then the library lot would be impacted necessitating fees at that lot as well. All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…

  32. Anonymous

    The reason you do not charge parking fees is that the lot is city-owned and is multi-use. It is not owned by the school district so they would not get any revenue from parking fees. If the city lot charged fees for parking then the library lot would be impacted necessitating fees at that lot as well. All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…

  33. Rich Rifkin

    “All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…”

    All of that street parking is already restricted to permit holders. So your scenario would not happen.

    I think the idea of asking people who are consuming a limited resource (parking spaces) to pay for the privelege with meters is a good one. The procedes from the lot between Davis High and the Veterans Memorial Center could be divided by the city and the school district.

    Further, I think it makes sense to have metered parking on the neighboring streets, perhaps exempting residents with permits. It’s the same idea: a limited resource can be fairly rationed by charging a fair price.

    Any streets in town which don’t have excess demand don’t need meters or parking permits. But those that do, ought to have them. That is far fairer than letting people either hog them all day without paying for them or prohibiting all people who don’t happen to live in the neighborhood.

  34. Rich Rifkin

    “All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…”

    All of that street parking is already restricted to permit holders. So your scenario would not happen.

    I think the idea of asking people who are consuming a limited resource (parking spaces) to pay for the privelege with meters is a good one. The procedes from the lot between Davis High and the Veterans Memorial Center could be divided by the city and the school district.

    Further, I think it makes sense to have metered parking on the neighboring streets, perhaps exempting residents with permits. It’s the same idea: a limited resource can be fairly rationed by charging a fair price.

    Any streets in town which don’t have excess demand don’t need meters or parking permits. But those that do, ought to have them. That is far fairer than letting people either hog them all day without paying for them or prohibiting all people who don’t happen to live in the neighborhood.

  35. Rich Rifkin

    “All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…”

    All of that street parking is already restricted to permit holders. So your scenario would not happen.

    I think the idea of asking people who are consuming a limited resource (parking spaces) to pay for the privelege with meters is a good one. The procedes from the lot between Davis High and the Veterans Memorial Center could be divided by the city and the school district.

    Further, I think it makes sense to have metered parking on the neighboring streets, perhaps exempting residents with permits. It’s the same idea: a limited resource can be fairly rationed by charging a fair price.

    Any streets in town which don’t have excess demand don’t need meters or parking permits. But those that do, ought to have them. That is far fairer than letting people either hog them all day without paying for them or prohibiting all people who don’t happen to live in the neighborhood.

  36. Rich Rifkin

    “All that would end up happening is that students and the general public would park in the surrounding neighborhoods to use the two schools, Community Park, Veterans Memorial Center, library, pool, etc…”

    All of that street parking is already restricted to permit holders. So your scenario would not happen.

    I think the idea of asking people who are consuming a limited resource (parking spaces) to pay for the privelege with meters is a good one. The procedes from the lot between Davis High and the Veterans Memorial Center could be divided by the city and the school district.

    Further, I think it makes sense to have metered parking on the neighboring streets, perhaps exempting residents with permits. It’s the same idea: a limited resource can be fairly rationed by charging a fair price.

    Any streets in town which don’t have excess demand don’t need meters or parking permits. But those that do, ought to have them. That is far fairer than letting people either hog them all day without paying for them or prohibiting all people who don’t happen to live in the neighborhood.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for