MEETING NOTES

Advisory Commission on Charter Schools

An Advisory Body to the State Board of Education

California Department of Education

CSUS Regional and Continuing Education Center

515 L Street, Classroom D

Sacramento, California

Monday, February 25, 2002

MEMBERS PRESENT

Mark Kushner, Chair

Steve Barr

Tom Conry

Linda Frost

Beth Hunkapiller

Marta Reyes

Jan Sterling*

Johnathan Williams

MEMBER ABSENT

H. Wes Pratt

* Jan Sterling is the State Superintendent of Public Instruction’s designee.

PRINCIPAL STAFF TO THE ADVISORY COMMISSION

Greg Geeting, Assistant Executive Director, State Board of Education

Eileen Cubanski, Administrator, CDE Charter Schools Office

Call to Order. Mr. Kushner called the meeting to order at 10:11 a.m.

Flag Salute. Mr. Kushner asked Mr. Geeting to lead the members, staff, and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Organizational Matters. Mr. Kushner indicated that the principal purpose of the day’s session would be to review and to make recommendations on the determination of funding requests that were not acted upon at the meeting of February 20, 2002. He also indicated that generally the Advisory Commission would proceed by listening to presentations on individual requests in the order speakers had signed up. Barring unusual circumstances, the plan will be to take action on recommendations immediately after receiving presentations and having discussion on the individual requests. The plan outlined at the previous meeting (of waiting until all presentations had been received before taking action on recommendations) did not seem practical upon further reflection.

The Advisory Commission members were reminded that they had acted upon recommendations regarding 40 requests at the February 20, 2002, meeting. Thirty were recommended for 100 percent funding, and 10 for 95 percent funding.

Ms. Cubanski reviewed with the members the various groupings of additional materials that had been distributed to them. Mr. Kushner provided some contextual information for the benefit of the audience, explaining the task before the Advisory Commission and the actions that had been taken to date to implement the nonclassroom-based instruction provisions of SB 740. He asked Mr. Williams to be the “process checker,” and Mr. Geeting to be informal timekeeper.

Introductions. The members of the Advisory Commission introduced themselves along with CDE staff. Customarily, Mr. Kushner has invited audience members to introduce themselves, but dispensed with that custom this day because of a very large audience being in attendance.

Review of determination of funding requests. Mr. Kushner invited Ms. Cubanski to provide a brief explanation of the CDE staff recommendation on each request, following which the charter school’s representative(s) would be provided approximately seven minutes to make a presentation. Then, the Advisory Commission would discuss the request and, ultimately, make a recommendation. He indicated that Mr. Geeting would provide informal timekeeping to help keep the group moving along, but that he planned as chair to be flexible and ensure that presenters had a reasonable opportunity to make their points and that members had a reasonable opportunity to air their concerns before settling on a recommendation.

The Classical Academy (#199). Robert Goode and Cameron Curry. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: nature of the program; salary schedule; facility; architect’s fees; high API; teacher contact time with students; accountability; loan documentation; and reserves.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Conry moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 6-2. [Ms. Hunkapiller and Ms. Reyes voted against the motion.]

West Sonoma Charter School (#273). Keri Smith. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: the school’s governing board composition and potential conflicts of interest; teacher salaries (went up this year, will go up more next year); management contract (termination on June 30, 2002, based on action taken in December 2001); special education costs more than expected; reduction in funding this year would “force us to close”; ADA (lower than expected this year); 292 students and 35 teacher (about have are part-time); pupil-teacher ratio (about 15:1).

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Ms. Sterling moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Ms. Frost seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-1. [Ms. Hunkapiller voted against the motion.]

Keyes to Learning (#85). Lee Ann Stangl. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: nature of the program; spending below both 50 percent and 70 percent tests; district runs the school’s finances; part-time staff; seven full-time teacher-coordinators; difficult for school to get information from district office regarding finances; schools pays $110,000 to district each year; hard to know where these funds are going, how they are being used; approximately 300 ADA, roughly 16 percent of the district’s ADA.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Williams moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Ms. Frost seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Natomas Charter School (#19). Charlie Leo and Ting Sun. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: description of the program, non-credentialed faculty who are professional artists to provide the program’s arts focus; including the non-credentialed faculty would increase above the 50 percent level.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Ms. Hunkapiller moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the revised recommendation of CDE staff. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were less than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue. However, the school has an arts focus, and a number of instructors are professional artists who are not credentialed. Taking this (and other mitigating information) into account, the school is deserving of approval at the 100 percent level. Ms. Frost seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Sierra Charter School (#136). Lisa Morasco and Mike McDonald. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: part-time teachers; salaries and benefits; no conflicts on governing board; pupil-teacher ratio; contract issues (working to resolve); new management team; district insists on enforcing contract by which it received 10 percent of revenues, charter school has to live with it.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Ms. Sterling moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

The Camptonville Academy (#165). Janis Jablecki. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: the time line for making this presentation was very tight; could provide more data if more time was available; stipends for teachers; review document is in error regarding Axis for Learning contract; school is still on old funding formula this year; block grant system will result in some reduction in funding next year; salary schedule; ending management contract this coming June; salaries will be going up; CSRA contract includes some instruction-related services; vendor-provided courses; and reserve.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Ms. Hunkapiller moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Conry seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-1. [Mr. Kushner voted against the motion.]

Gorman Charter School (#285). Waldo Burford. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: the school’s governing board and potential conflicts of interest; last year’s audit; the school creates individual learning plans for students; much attention is paid to individualized instructional materials for students; the schools spends as much as four times as much on instructional materials as non-charter schools; the school has 1,356 students; the approximate pupil-teacher ratio is 17:1; the chartering district has 110 students; reserves are up now, but were down in the past; student achievement is very high; if a reduction is imposed, “kids pay the price”; school’s contract with CSRA is now the subject of litigation; school plans to take over business services and instructional materials ordering; contract instructional services.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Ms. Frost moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Lunch Break. 12:29 – 1:06 p.m.

District charges to charter schools. Ms. Hunkapiller indicated her dismay at the instances the Advisory Commission was seeing of districts levying charges to charter schools in excess of the statutory cap. She suggested that the Advisory Commission have a hearing devoted to this matter and develop recommendations for consideration by the State Board. Chartering districts need to respect the maximum allowance for oversight; any other charges need to be related specifically to services received by the schools.

Academy for Career Education (#183). Claudia O’Leary. The presentation and discussion were primarily focused on the school’s governing board.

· RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The school (1) submitted a request that is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete”; (2) provided evidence of spending at least 50 percent of the public revenues received (in 2000-01) for the salaries and benefits of certificated employees; and (3) provided evidence of otherwise meeting the criteria set forth in the Emergency Regulations approved by the State Board at the January 2002 meeting. Moreover, both the Advisory Commission and CDE staff concluded that the school presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Ms. Frost seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Circle of Independent Learning (#152). Mary Musgrove. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: description of program; salary expenditures are up this year (over the 50 percent test this year); district services explained; schools has a split-day program with district; extra-curricular activities in district are available to charter school’s students; special education costs included in district contract; facility repair costs; reserve from last year being used this year; serves high-risk youth (unstable ADA, therefore justifying higher reserve).

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Kushner moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were less than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue. However, the school provided substantial information demonstrating a portion of the funds reflected as administrative services were in fact instructional services, and otherwise presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 5-3. [Mr. Conry, Ms. Frost, and Mr. Williams voted against the motion.]

Charter School of San Diego (#28). Mary Bixby. The presentation and discussion were focused primarily on an error made by the school in the calculation of its pupil-teacher ratio.

· RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were more than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue, and the school presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Ms. Reyes seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

New Jerusalem Charter School (#171). Mary Vink and Dennis Boyer. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: facility issues (paying off the facility in a single year, debt is “an issue” in our area, county office recommended that course of action); explanation of program (hybrid); adding teachers; this school has helped bring students back into the public schools; technology; contracts include some instruction-related costs.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff at the time of the Advisory Commission meeting. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were less than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue. However, the school provided substantial information demonstrating a portion of the funds reflected as administrative services were in fact instructional services, and otherwise presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Kushner seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 5-3. [Mr. Conry, Ms. Frost, and Mr. Williams voted against the motion.]

River Valley Charter School (#120). Bill Wellhouse and Kamran Azimzadeh. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: explanation of the program (hybrid); college preparatory, junior and senior high school; operates independently of district, but contracts with district for services; facilities issues (how costs were allocated to school); high API (9); chartered by Lakeside Union (Elementary) School District; 155 students; explanation of services provided by district.

• MOTION FAILS: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were less than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue. However, the school provided substantial information demonstrating a portion of the funds reflected as administrative services were in fact instructional services, and otherwise presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Ms. Reyes seconded the motion. The motion was defeated a vote of 2-6. [Mr. Barr and Ms. Reyes voted in favor of the motion.]

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Conry moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 6-2. [Mr. Barr and Ms. Reyes voted against the motion.]

Twin Ridges Home Study Charter (#26). Lisa Corr. The presentation and discussion focused principally on the fact that audit issues had been resolved.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Williams moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff at the time of the Advisory Commission meeting. The school (1) submitted a request that is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete”; (2) provided evidence of spending at least 50 percent of the public revenues received (in 2000-01) for the salaries and benefits of certificated employees; and (3) provided evidence of otherwise meeting the criteria set forth in the Emergency Regulations approved by the State Board at the January 2002 meeting. Moreover, both the Advisory Commission and CDE staff concluded that the school presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Ms. Hunkapiller seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Muir Charter School (#255). The discussion focused principally on the fact that this charter school serves the CCC and met the 50 percent test.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Conry moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff at the time of the Advisory Commission meeting. The school (1) submitted a request that is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete”; (2) provided evidence of spending at least 50 percent of the public revenues received (in 2000-01) for the salaries and benefits of certificated employees; and (3) provided evidence of otherwise meeting the criteria set forth in the Emergency Regulations approved by the State Board at the January 2002 meeting. Moreover, both the Advisory Commission and CDE staff concluded that the school presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Eleanor Roosevelt Community Learning Center (#395). Klara Gast and Sara Templin. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: start-up cost issues; a hybrid program; started with 21 students; budget readjusted based on 35 ADA; chartered by the Tulare County Board of Education; some services provided by county, including special education.

• MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF SECOND: Mr. Conry moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff at the time of the Advisory Commission meeting. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. The motion did not receive a second.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were less than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue. However, the school provided substantial information demonstrating a portion of the funds reflected as administrative services were in fact instructional services, and otherwise presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Kushner seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-1. [Mr. Conry voted against the motion.]

Break. 2:33 – 2:47 p.m.

Antelope View Home Charter (#344). Paul Keefer and Sonja Cameron. The presentation and discussion were focused primarily on the pupil-teacher ratio (corrected information provided).

· RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Williams moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were more than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue, and the school presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Modoc Charter School (#279). Ron Flenner. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: excess reserves; opened in January 2000; a hybrid program; fast growing, started with 140 ADA, now has 400; CSRA has provided great assistance, including the provision of some instruction-related services; pupil-teacher ratio; per-student costs; two-tier salary schedule now in place; teacher are mostly full-time now; stipends provided for learning center teachers; audit issues; services provided by district; school now exploring whether to take over some CSRA-provided services, it now has more “infrastructure” to absorb additional administrative workload.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Shasta Secondary Home School (#256). Lynn Peebles. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: higher salaries now being paid; now have same salary schedule as chartering district; moving away from per-student basis for paying instructors, will have all salary-basis next year; no audit findings; no contracts over $50,000; now paying about $47,000 to district for instruction-related services; might reach 50 percent level this year depending on how some costs are allocated; facilities reserve; MOU with district; purchasing property this year.

• MOTION FAILS: Mr. Conry moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The motion failed passage by a vote of 4-4. [Mr. Barr, Ms. Hunkapiller, Mr. Kushner, and Ms. Reyes voted against the motion.]

Later in the meeting, the Advisory Commission revisited this request and, following further discussion and the presentation of additional information by Lynn Peebles, took the following action.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Kushner moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were less than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue. However, the school provided substantial information demonstrating a portion of the funds reflected as administrative services were in fact instructional services, and otherwise presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 6-2. [Mr. Conry and Mr. Williams voted against the motion.]

Prosser Creek Charter School (#144). Lisa Corr. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: number of employees (42); new salary schedule (similar to Tahoe Truckee district); 6-70 percent certificated employees; STRS benefits.

· RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Kushner moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were more than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue, and the school presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Conry seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Horizon Instructional Systems (#15). Jeff Clanton. The presentation and discussion included the following topics: the school’s interaction with IEM; revenues; contract expenditures, percentage that are instruction-related; now doing both instruction and management; number of certificated employees.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Conry moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Choice 2000 Online (#15). Written materials submitted. The discussion included the following topics: facilities issues and excess revenues.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Ms. Frost seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Consolidated Recommendation. A consolidated recommendation was made encompassing the following schools’ requests. Mr. Geeting reminded the members that they had received information regarding the Visions in Education Charter School (#248) at the February 20 meeting.

Alternative Educational Learning Center............................................................................. 361

Bitney Springs Charter School........................................................................................... 177

California Charter Academy – Orange............................................................................... 297

California Charter Academy – Oro Grande........................................................................ 387

California Charter Academy – Snowline............................................................................. 377

Charter Oak........................................................................................................................ 51

Desert Sands Charter School............................................................................................. 411

Elk Grove Charter School.................................................................................................... 27

HomeSmart Kids of Knightsen........................................................................................... 324

Julian Charter School......................................................................................................... 267

Mattole Valley Charter School........................................................................................... 159

Mid Valley Alternative Charter School................................................................................. 88

New Hope Charter School................................................................................................ 286

Premiere Education Charter School.................................................................................... 316

Sanger Hallmark Charter School........................................................................................ 257

Visions in Education Charter School................................................................................... 248

West Park Charter Academy............................................................................................... 44

Yuba County Career Preparatory Charter............................................................................ 92

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve these schools’ requests at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendations of CDE staff. The requests are (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In each case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason (in each case): The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Conry seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Valley Business High School (#172). The school formally withdrew the request.

California Charter Academy (#262). Written materials provided. The discussion included the following topics: about 400 of the school’s 2,600 students are local conservation corps members; the school has a very low percentage of revenues expended on certificated salaries and benefits; there are audit findings of concern.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Ms. Hunkapiller seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Heritage Family Academy (#216). Written materials provided. The discussion focused principally on the fact that the written materials appeared to present nothing new to explain the low percentage of revenues expended on certificated salaries and benefits.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Ms. Frost seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Liberty Family Academy (#160). Written materials provided. The discussion focused principally on the fact that the written materials appeared to present nothing new to explain the low percentage of revenues expended on certificated salaries and benefits.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Ms. Hunkapiller moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

New Millennium Institute of Education (#163). Written materials provided. The discussion focused principally on the fact that the written materials appeared to present nothing new to explain the low percentage of revenues expended on certificated salaries and benefits.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Kushner moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Ms. Frost seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Pacific View Charter School (#247). Written materials provided. The discussion focused principally on the fact that the written materials appeared to present nothing new to explain the low percentage of revenues expended on certificated salaries and benefits and the excess revenues.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Ms. Frost moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Eagles Peak (#305). Written materials related to IEM provided. The discussion focused principally on the fact that the written materials appeared to present nothing new to explain the high contract among to the district and to the management companies.

· RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level. California Department of Education staff recommended approval at the 100 percent level at the time of the Advisory Commission meeting, but may revise that recommendation prior to the State Board meeting. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level would reflect a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for 2000-01 reflected extraordinary contract amounts to the chartering district and to private organizations. The relationship of these contract expenditures to instruction was not clearly evident. Taking into account the totality of the information presented, the school did not provide compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to demonstrate the extent to which the contracts with the chartering district and the private organizations result in instruction being provided to students. Mr. Conry seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Dehesa Charter School (#419). Written materials provided. The discussion focused principally on the fact that the written materials appeared to present nothing new to explain the low percentage of revenues expended on certificated salaries and benefits.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Conry moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Westwood Charter School (Lassen) (#399). No new materials provided. The discussion focused principally on the fact that the there was no adequate explanation of why such a low percentage of revenues had been expended on certificated salaries and benefits.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Barr moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 95 percent level in accordance with the recommendation of CDE staff. The request is (in the view of the Advisory Commission and CDE staff) at least “substantially complete.” In this case, the 95 percent funding level reflects a reduction (from the full funding requested) within the meaning of Education Code section 47634.2(b)(4). Therefore, reasons for the reduction are to be stated and, if appropriate, a description of how any deficiencies or problems may be addressed is to be included. Recommended Reason: The charter school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits were below 50 percent of its public revenues in 2000-01, and (taking into account the totality of the information presented) the school did not present compelling evidence to justify funding in 2001-02 at the 100 percent level. One way in which the deficiency or problem could be addressed would be to expend a greater percentage of public revenues for certificated salaries and benefits in this and forthcoming fiscal years. Ms. Reyes seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of the members present.

Wheatland Charter Academy (#370). Written materials provided. The discussion focused principally on the issue of start-up costs skewing the normal pattern of expenditures in 2000-01.

• RECOMMENDATION APPROVED: Mr. Kushner moved that the Advisory Commission recommend that the State Board of Education approve this school’s request at the 100 percent level, even though CDE staff had recommended funding at the 95 percent level (with mitigating factors to be considered). The school’s expenditures for certificated salaries and benefits in 2000-01 were less than 50 percent of the school’s public revenue. However, the school provided substantial information demonstrating its 2000-01 expenditures were skewed by start-up costs, and otherwise presented sufficient evidence (taking the totality of the request into account along with any other credible information that may have been available) that the 100 percent funding level is necessary for the school to maintain nonclassroom-based instruction that is conducted for the instructional benefit of the student and is substantially dedicated to that function. Mr. Barr seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 5-3. [Mr. Conry, Ms. Frost, and Ms. Sterling voted against the motion.]