SCUSD Observer

Sacramento, California

One more year on facilities use

One of our community members reports a small but important change to the Sac Charter facilities use agreement passed last night at the school board meeting.

The agreement was amended to expand the district’s intent regarding future use of the St. Hope/Sacramento Charter High School campus from just the co-location of other educational programs on the site to PURSUING OTHER USES FOR THE SITE BEGINNING NEXT YEAR INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CO-LOCATION.

This is potentially key because it opens everything up: co-location of other educational programs (which many observers feel is the politically-expedient yet ultimately unworkable path), but also relocating programs to more appropriately-sized campuses.

Board president Bell and VP Kennedy both spoke of the need and commitment to fully engage and include the community living within the boundaries of the old Sacramento High School as essential to making any sound decision as to the use of the campus going forward (next year).

Last night the entire board voted to put everything on the table. Whether the board keeps the Superintendent’s feet to the fire is so critical here as is how the entire community responds…will they insist on true engagement and asserting their voices and interests?

Up to this point and for the past seven years, the bulk of the work has been shouldered by a small group of determined and vigilant parents who never gave up on the notion that the comprehensive high school campus at 34th street belongs to Sacramento City Unified and not St. Hope.

Thank you to Lori Jablonski


One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. As I listened to the St. HOPE Charter community during the break it is obvious that there is a lot of work needed to facilitate a genuine conversation. Despite the Board’s more authentic conversation which resulted in a consensus there is a lot of resentment and entitlement which will frustrate fruitful community engagement. Let’s hope the incoming Chief for this area is up to the challenge.

    This unnecessary wound to public education has festered for too long. The St. HOPE Charters have their niches. However their inability to attract sufficient numbers and diversity of in-district students indicates the fairness of a smaller site for the high school and unification of the K-8 program at one site.

    To me this sense of fairness and unification seemed evident to the thinnest of board majorities last night and will need much work to nurture in the coming elections. Mighty forces will be trying to frustrate this progress from a false claim of equity and neighborhood commitment. May the determined numbers from a wider perspective grow.

    Leo Bennett-Cauchon

    August 6, 2010 at 7:30 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: