S.-3 20-0605 Approval by the Board of Education of a Charter School Facilities Agreement between District and Aspire Public Schools, Inc., a California non-profit public benefit corporation ("Aspire") operating Aspire Berkeley Maynard Academy (the nonprofit corporation and the Berkley Maynard Academy, for use of the facilities (formerly Golden Gate Elementary School) located at 6200 San Pablo Avenue, Oakland, CA 94608-2228, for a term of fifteen (15) consecutive fiscal years, commencing on July 1, 2020 and ending on June 30, 2035, subject to earlier termination as set forth in this Agreement ("Initial Term"), for annual rent as set forth in Section 3 of Agreement.
Kim Davis and Sam Davis have highlighted the shortsighted nature of making significant financial incentives to charter schools through these favorable leases. I agree with them and reiterate their points. Please stand up for public education and prepare these leases so that they favor and nourish the public school district in its own efforts to serve all Oakland students.
short term: this seems like voting on something important but not urgent when we clearly have other crisis to address at OUSD first (and/or you are trying to get this done under the radar) longer term: this seems to compound the budget issues OUSD faces without thoughtful solutions on how to remedy all problems this might generate
As a constituent and OUSD parent, I ask that you either reject this proposal outright, or at least postpone the vote. Tonight's vote is ill-timed, and the public is unable to meaningfully participate.
The merits of this particular school aside, this lease is a horrible deal for OUSD, which should not be closing district schools while providing practically free rent to charter schools. In addition to setting the stage for numerous future charter school leases, a critical decision like this should not be made during a pandemic, when circumstances are rapidly changing and there is a lot of uncertainty about the future in terms of budget, and when the public at large is almost certain not to be able to participate or offer input (or, likely, even know about it). This board needs to take a stand for ALL Oakland students, not just charter students, and vote no.
I am a teacher at Berkley Maynard Academy and have been part of the BMA community for 8 years. BMA's family community has strong generational ties to Oakland, and we serve many students who's parents/grandparents attended BMA when it was Golden Gate Elementary. The school has been recognized nationally for the growth and excellence of our Black and Brown students. Our students are future leaders, and deserve a building and learning space that is reflective of their potential and ability to take on leadership roles in our world.
This Board and the District's executive level have acted in the interests of those they are beholden and not for the interests of the children they use as verbal shields to justify their legislative actions. Under the cover of an epidemic, this Board who has declared high and low to anyone who would listen that they are selling, or renting properties for the income they would derive and to put said income back into the education of our children, is in fact not doing that at all. They are leasing for 40 years a property to a school with a very bad record of serving kids well; with a lease at less than market price; and are going to upgrade the property for the lessor. A vote in favor of this proposal is a vote diminishing funds for all our children, which the district already cut for 4th year in a row. How dare you do this under the cover of the epidemic when most families are juggling new normals of everything in our lives. You are all deplorable public servants.
These attachments do not appear to have changed over the past two weeks. Surely the concerns about the lease that have been raised by the community should be answered. Surely some additional comparison charter least costs and calculations could be provided. For example, what would the average cost for a private facility based on the calculations by the California Charter Association? OUSD's own consultant spoke of the value to a charter school of stability via a long term lease in a facility designed as a school. Surely Berkely Maynard should pay something for that value, something over the Prop 39 amount.
These attachments do not appear to have changed over the past two weeks. Surely the concerns about the lease that have been raised by the community should be answered. Surely some additional comparison charter least costs and calculations could be provided. For example, what would the average cost for a private facility based on the calculations by the California Charter Association? OUSD's own consultant spoke of the value to a charter school of stability via a long term lease in a facility designed as a school. Surely Berkely Maynard should pay something for that value, something over the Prop 39 amount.
Kim Davis and Sam Davis have highlighted the shortsighted nature of making significant financial incentives to charter schools through these favorable leases. I agree with them and reiterate their points. Please stand up for public education and prepare these leases so that they favor and nourish the public school district in its own efforts to serve all Oakland students.
short term: this seems like voting on something important but not urgent when we clearly have other crisis to address at OUSD first (and/or you are trying to get this done under the radar) longer term: this seems to compound the budget issues OUSD faces without thoughtful solutions on how to remedy all problems this might generate
As a constituent and OUSD parent, I ask that you either reject this proposal outright, or at least postpone the vote. Tonight's vote is ill-timed, and the public is unable to meaningfully participate.
The merits of this particular school aside, this lease is a horrible deal for OUSD, which should not be closing district schools while providing practically free rent to charter schools. In addition to setting the stage for numerous future charter school leases, a critical decision like this should not be made during a pandemic, when circumstances are rapidly changing and there is a lot of uncertainty about the future in terms of budget, and when the public at large is almost certain not to be able to participate or offer input (or, likely, even know about it). This board needs to take a stand for ALL Oakland students, not just charter students, and vote no.
I am a teacher at Berkley Maynard Academy and have been part of the BMA community for 8 years. BMA's family community has strong generational ties to Oakland, and we serve many students who's parents/grandparents attended BMA when it was Golden Gate Elementary. The school has been recognized nationally for the growth and excellence of our Black and Brown students. Our students are future leaders, and deserve a building and learning space that is reflective of their potential and ability to take on leadership roles in our world.
This Board and the District's executive level have acted in the interests of those they are beholden and not for the interests of the children they use as verbal shields to justify their legislative actions. Under the cover of an epidemic, this Board who has declared high and low to anyone who would listen that they are selling, or renting properties for the income they would derive and to put said income back into the education of our children, is in fact not doing that at all. They are leasing for 40 years a property to a school with a very bad record of serving kids well; with a lease at less than market price; and are going to upgrade the property for the lessor. A vote in favor of this proposal is a vote diminishing funds for all our children, which the district already cut for 4th year in a row. How dare you do this under the cover of the epidemic when most families are juggling new normals of everything in our lives. You are all deplorable public servants.
These attachments do not appear to have changed over the past two weeks. Surely the concerns about the lease that have been raised by the community should be answered. Surely some additional comparison charter least costs and calculations could be provided. For example, what would the average cost for a private facility based on the calculations by the California Charter Association? OUSD's own consultant spoke of the value to a charter school of stability via a long term lease in a facility designed as a school. Surely Berkely Maynard should pay something for that value, something over the Prop 39 amount.
These attachments do not appear to have changed over the past two weeks. Surely the concerns about the lease that have been raised by the community should be answered. Surely some additional comparison charter least costs and calculations could be provided. For example, what would the average cost for a private facility based on the calculations by the California Charter Association? OUSD's own consultant spoke of the value to a charter school of stability via a long term lease in a facility designed as a school. Surely Berkely Maynard should pay something for that value, something over the Prop 39 amount.