Hundreds of Rocketship parents, students and supporters, wearing purple shirts, attend the Antioch School Board meeting at the Lone Tree Elementary auditorium, Wednesday night, April 10, 2019.
“A blatant abuse of power” – Rocketship’s VP of Operations.
New school risking loss of charter “is really premature” – Superintendent Anello
By Allen Payton
The Rocketship Delta Prep charter school in Antioch, which opened their brand new, $16 million school last fall, was issued a second notice of violation by the Antioch School Board over what they claim was a failure to fulfill state reporting requirements agreed to in their Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Rocketship and the district. During a contentious board meeting, attended by hundreds of Rocketship parents and supporters, the motion passed on a 3-2 vote with Trustees Crystal Sawyer-White and Ellie Householder opposing. Resolution 2018-19-26 to Approve Issuance of Second Notice of Violation
The reporting requirements in the MOU adopted on June 27, 2018, include both financials and student enrollment projections.
Rocketship responded to the first notice of violation with 900 pages of documents.
However, a separate report, labeled the 2nd Interim Report was due March 15 and according to both Rocketship representatives and the district’s attorney, Scott Holbrook, it was received on time.
But, then the Rocketship board voted to revise that report on March 28 and submitted their Revised 2nd Interim Report on April 1st, within two weeks, which is allowed, according to Rocketship representatives.
However the revised report, according to Holbrook, negated the March 15th report, causing the district to be late, thus triggering the opportunity for the new notice of violation.
The details supporting the information in the Interim Report were included in the 900 pages of documents in response to the first notice of violation. But, that’s not acceptable to Holbrook or Superintendent Stephanie Anello.
“This is not about the education…it is a violation of law, a violation of timeline. It’s about the contractual obligation in the MOU. It’s nothing personal,” Anello said.
Two board members weren’t having it.
“Can’t the two attorneys meet and communicate? I don’t understand why we’re going back and forth. It’s time consuming and there are attorney fees, here,” said Sawyer-White to a loud round of applause.
No District Staff Have Visited The School
“Stephanie, you’re the district staff point person,” Householder stated. “Have you…visited Rocketship?
“The MOU requires a visit once a year and that’s set up for May,” Anello responded.
Rocketship Delta Prep’s new $14 million charter school in Antioch. Photo by Hilbers Inc.
“Doesn’t the MOU go both ways?” Householder asked. “I’m just trying to be honest. It’s April and we’ve issued two NOV’s and nobody in our…you know it seems it should go both ways. It’s this idea about good faith. I see several points where AUSD is not acting in good faith, as well.”
According to the resolution, the March 28 report projects the school will be fiscally insolvent in the 2019-20 school year, with an ending balance of -$645,394.03. That amount is greater than what was projected in the charter petition adopted by the school board in 2017, according to Holbrook.
Deficits were projected for Rocketship’s first three school years, explained Marie Issa Gil, Rocketship’s Regional Director.
“We refuted the allegations of insolvency,” said Jerry Simmons, Rocketship’s attorney. “We find it interesting that the school district’s independent auditor…did this audit…it demonstrates the school is not fiscally insolvent.”
The report also projects the school has 10 more students than was projected last year, for a total of 396 students according to the March 28th report. However, that’s a decrease of 24 students from the March 15 report.
According to the resolution, “The 2nd Interim Report failed to include any supporting documentation, and/or supplemental or narrative information explaining the projections. The 2nd Interim Report fails to specify any ‘5%’ set aside of reserves for economic uncertainty as required by the MOU, and contradicts the budget submitted with the Petition when the Charter was approved by the Board which projected a surplus.”
The resolution also states, “the March 28 Revised 2nd Interim Report appears to be a complete and total reworking of the March 15 2nd Interim Report with a multitude of revenue, expenditure, and enrollment alterations” and that “the 2nd Interim Report, the Revised 2nd Interim Report also failed to include any supporting documentation, and/or supplemental or narrative information explaining the new projections.
Additionally, the March 28, 2019 Revised 2nd Interim Report includes significant changes to the Charter School’s enrollment assumptions, again with no supporting documentation or narrative information explaining the new projections.”
However, Householder speaking of the details in the 900-page report asked Holbrook “Why is this threaded throughout. It says there’s no supporting documentation. How can we say that?”
The enrollment issue was not mentioned as a concern by the board members.
No Violations, An Abuse of Power
Members of Rocketship’s leadership spoke on the matter before the board deliberated.
“The second notice of violation deals with three issues. But none of them are violations,” said Carolyn Davies Lynch, Vice President of Operations for Rocketship. “We submitted the financial report on March 15, on time. The budget revisions were submitted within two weeks. Our revised report does not equal a late report. To label it a violation is simply not true.”
“Third, the notice states the 5% reserve sits in a line item other than the district staff would like to see. But state law nor education code requires it sit in any line item. This is not a violation,” she reiterated. “The second notice of violation is a blatant abuse of power.”
“We expect district staff will have questions on our submission. That’s how we operate with other districts,” Lynch continued. “I urge the board to reject this latest notice of violation and direct staff to work with Rocketship for the benefit of students in the Antioch community.”
Rocketship representatives, parents and supporters claim their students have improved multiple grade levels since switching to the charter school, last fall. But, the Board President Gary Hack and Trustees Diane Gibson-Gray and Mary Rocha pointed out that the matter before the board had nothing to do with academics, just financial reporting.
Anello Hasn’t Met With Rocketship Leaders
Gil also claims the district staff, specifically Superintendent Stephanie Anello, was sending the notices to the school address instead of Gil’s office and has refused to meet with her to rectify the situation.
Anello responded, “We sent one letter to the school. The rest were sent to the correct people.”
During her remarks, Gil noted that “AUSD is the only authorizer that refuses to meet with Rocketship directly. Every other authorizer Rocketship works with, including the California Department of Education, holds regular meetings with Rocketship to answer their questions, resolve any concerns, and work together in good faith partnership.”
Gil later shared that “per the MOU, all correspondence should be mailed to Rocketship Public Schools, 850 Twin Dolphins in Redwood City. In the documents from the District there were at least five different mailings sent to Rocketship Delta Prep at 1700 Cavallo (the school’s address). Just this week, I received another envelope at 1700 Cavallo Drive. The District has not cared that they are still failing to follow their MOU.”
Regarding the fiscal issues and not willing to meet, Anellos responded, “if it deals with public money, all of our conversations need to be in public. The remedy is to put it before the board. Produce the documents, then we can sit down and talk about it.”
Anello’s greatest concern is the financial impact on the district from the projected deficit Rocketship is facing.
“As the charter authorizer the district can be responsible for any debt they might incur,” she stated. “If we didn’t document it and let the public know that wouldn’t be responsible.”
Gil said Rocketship is willing to provide a hold-harmless agreement for the district, like they’ve done for other districts where Rocketship schools are located.
Parents and other Rocketship supporters believe the district is being petty and focusing too much on process rather than results.
“Assuming the district will de-charter the school is really premature,” Anello responded. “It looks like we’re being arbitrary, but I believe the public expects us to be fiscally responsible. The least thing I want is for Rocketship to fail.”
Rocketship supporters also have complained the school’s representatives weren’t given the time they needed to explain things at the last two school board meetings.
However, according to Holbrook, the district has 60 days to review the documents provided by Rocketship. Then the school board will hold a public hearing at which the trustees and Rocketship representatives will have the opportunity for questions and answers.
“I think this is a little drastic…pump the brakes a little bit,” Householder said, making one last attempt to convince her colleagues to not pass the resolution. “This is our community. These are our people. I’ve only been here four months and I’m constantly being given these ultimatums… ‘you have to make this decision or the world’s going to fall apart.’ I ask the Superintendent to be transparent. We need to pump the brakes. Our kids are suffering.”
But her arguments fell on deaf ears as Rocha made the motion, Gibson-Gray seconded it and Hack voted with them to adopt the resolution issuing the second Notice of Violation. That triggered another 30-day timeframe for Rocketship to respond and then another 60-day clock at the end of that, in which the district has time to review the response and hold a public hearing on the second notice of violation.
by Sandra Torres
