During my time on the school board one of my committee assignments has been the Charter Matters Committee, which I now currently chair. I’ve used my position on the school board and now as a committee chair to achieve major policy victories around charter schools in Oakland, of which there are two that I think are the most significant.

First, based on our conversations and good working relationship, superintendent Johnson-Trammell appointed me as the school board liason to the committee that created the new 3-year strategic plan. I used my role to ensure there was no language supporting nor referencing charter schools (I also scrubbed all of the language referencing school closures and ensured the plan centered Black and Brown students and community schools). For the first time in almost 20 years, charter schools are now officially no longer a part of the strategic plan for OUSD, and it’s because I intentionally maneuvered to make those changes.

As the chairperson of the Charter Matters Committee I was able to push forward and get unanimous board approval on a revision to the OUSD Board Policy on charter schools, which are the governing rules on how OUSD approves, renews and interacts with charter schools. We needed to update the board policy on charter schools due to changes in state law from AB 1505, so I also used it as an opportunity to change the intent and orientation of the policy to reflect the pro public education platform that I was elected on.

The old version of BP (Board Policy) 0420.4 Philosophy, Goals and Objectives - Charter Schools began with,

“The Governing Board believes that charter schools provide one opportunity to implement school-level reform and to support innovations that improve student learning, especially for low-achieving students, and to expand educational choices for parents and pupils within the public school system. (cf. Education Code, 47601”

Which clearly stated the previous board’s support if not our right solicitation of charter schools and at least partially explains why Oakland had the highest rate of charter schools (almost 30%) in California.

After pushing the new policy through the Charter Matters Committee, and a unanimous vote by the school board on 6/29/22 to approve the revised policy, it now reads,

“The Governing Board is committed to ensuring quality and equity for all Oakland students, both in the District schools that OSUD operates and in the charter schools that OUSD authorizes. The Board recognizes its ongoing responsibility to provide high quality authorization that is responsive to the needs of all Oakland Families.

An overview of the guiding principles underlying the Board’s review of new petitions, renewal petitions, and material revisions is provided below. Detailed policies and procedures related to new petitions, renewals, and material revisions are provided in Staff Handbooks, updated annually and posted on the Office of Charter Schools website.

NEW PETITION REVIEW

In recognition that the Board is focused on the health and sustainability of existing Oakland schools, the Board is not actively seeking new charter petitions. Potential petitioners interested in collaborating with the District to open a new District program are encouraged to consult with OUSD’s Chief Academic Officer. For any new petitions submitted, the Board encourages a strong emphasis on serving a high- needs student population and serving the interests of the entire community in which the school is proposing to locate.”

This new revised policy clearly states that the board is not seeking new charter schools, and correctly implies, that going forward OUSD will no longer welcome school privatization as our official policy but will instead focus on “the health and sustainability of existing Oakland schools”.

I have been able to change the official stance of OUSD towards charter schools, by changing board policy and the 3-year strategic plan. Because of my relationships, institutional memory, and knowledge of ousd policy issues, I was able to make it official policy that charter schools are ni longer welcome as part of our public school district.

And we accomplished this without any fights nor protests, and because we did it quietly there was little opposition and unanimous board approval, even the charter friendly members voted for them.

On top of these changes, during my time on the school board there have been no new charter schools, no new charter co-locations (prop 39), and the number of charter schools and charter school enrollment are down roughly 10%.

I do not believe that charter schools are public schools. They receive public dollars but they are privately managed by their own governing boards. If you support pushing back against the privatization of public education and prioritizing our traditional public neighborhood schools, I have the experience and track record to continue the fight to fulfill the promise of a quality public school in every neighborhood.

There is a lot at stake in this year’s school board elections but it is first and foremost a referendum on school closures specifically on whether six schools, Brookfield, Korematsu, Grass Valley, Horace Mann, Hillcrest (6-8), and Carl B Munck will be closed at the end of the school year in May.

It nothing changes the six schools will be closed due to a 4-2-1 school board vote at the February 8th school board meeting despite huge community opposition, protests, hunger strikes, and over 2000 people attending the zoom school board meetings to express their opposition to school closures.

The silver lining is that 3 of the 4 school board directors who voted to close schools this year are not running for re-election and thus will no longer be on the board in January.

Many of us have been working for years to replace the pro school closures board. It’s important that we elect the right people going forward to ensure that the school board rescinds the current school closures plan and moves away from the school closure policies of the last twenty years.

School improvement should be done through school redesign and strategic funding, not closures and privatization.

I’m proud of my role in fighting against school closures over the last ten years and especially during my time on the school board. I released the list of schools under threat of closure to the community which allowed us the opportunity to organize against them which in turn forced the pro closures school board members to scale back their plans. Because of our work the final list of schools to be closed was greatly reduced, most of the closures were pushed back to year two so we have an opportunity to rescind them with a new board in January, and no schools in my district were slated to be closed.

It feels like people have forgotten what’s at stake in these elections, literally the fate of six schools. I think we need to elect school board directors who understand the issues, have a track record of working with the community around these issues, and have the experience in moving policy to get things done.

If you are against school closures I hope you will support our campaign for school board in District 4.

Here’s an edited video (15 min) from the February 8 2022 special school board meeting where the board voted on the current school closures plan.