It would be interesting to hear from him and (others) what they think of the SECOND contract.

BTW, I found Bert Berlin’s attack on Mallard at the forum recently to be mean-spirited and Berlin’s blind-to-the-flaws defense of the FIRST contract (written to please RPS administrators, of course) to be ill-informed and evidence of his willingness to go along with whatever RPS administrators say. Berlin has already demonstrated his ability to flip-flop and say anything he thinks will get him elected.

We definitely do NOT NEED another rubber-stamper on that board! IMHO, of course. Mallard clearly doesn’t make as much NOISE as Berlin, but I appreciate Mallard’s quiet and steady intellect.

The IB primary years programs would not be magnet or application programs. They will be neighborhood school programs. Every child in the school will be an IB student. If, there were not enough in-zone children to fill the school, it could be available under open enrollment.

Clearly, these programs will benefit the children in the chosen schools. Also, they may serve as models for other programs in the future.

As I said, I will seek funding for four IB primary years schools. I see no reason why one of them shouldn’t be in the east end.

Bert

1.) It gives contradictory status on voting for three PH Board members and,

2.) It explicitly requires one RPS board member to engage in activities that can only be described as conflicts of interest.

Maybe some of the current board members can enlighten the public on how these provisions made it past the lawyers and then the Legal Committee. I’m curious as to the justification given. I’m hoping these points were discussed.

http://jonathanmallard.com/an-error-in-the-patrick-henry-contract/

As a candidate for the school board from the fourth district I have promised to add funding to the RPS budget for four IB primary years programs (2 north of the river, 2 south). I expect that one of those programs will be at a school in the Fourth District.

Starting IB primary years programs have nothing to do with the PHI or with any existing or future IB middle years programs. The IB programs I envision will be whole-school programs open to all children in the school’s zone. It will NOT be an honors program, the way the current program at Lucille Brown is run–no applications, no competion. All children in the school will be IB students.

Since admission to these IB programs will be non-competitive, I do not see how they could possibly hurt the PHI (of which I am a supporter). I also don’t see how they effect whether or not another IB middle years program is opened north of the river. If parents in the north want IB at Henderson, I will support that.

If anyone wants to talk more about my plans for IB, call me at 233-3738.

One other point; you say ” education or death.” I have seen hundreds of children die from my community over the last ten years. I can asure you there is nothing pretty about dieing. It was a slaughter really because many didn’t even know what was killing them. I cant come home hollering “education or death” because believe it or not we are trying to live; we’re kinda tired of dieing and see better education and health care as our way out too. I know, its about your Charter school and I should really let you tend to your housekeeping matters because supporting you is not enough; we must support you blindly and be willing to die some more. i see that as the big disconnect between us. You think we like our conditions and are willing to sit and wait; NOW means NOW for everyone.
anyway- open, inclusive and diverse; you promised-Just do It.

At any rate, as it is September 2, so I guess we will soon see how the rest of board reacts to this issue. Maybe they’ll even publish the contract.

Who do these board members think they are? Why can’t reform such that the PHI people want happen within the construct of RPS?

The only reason Braxton (4th), Dawson (2nd), Bridges (1st) and Carr (5th) voted for it is because it is an election year. And, yes, I know Braxton isn’t running again (thank God!). But, we all know who he wants to take his seat.

West (7th) voted for it — and at least he is consistent with saying the system is so broken something has to happen.

Smith(6th)and Wilson(9th)voted against it.

Mimms(8th)was absent.

Wolf(3rd)abstained citing a conflict of interest. Her husband’s law firm did some pro bono work for the PHI people.

Pity, the only one we could count on to to tell us the truth of what is happening — can’t. She had to abstain.

The PHI people want so much to have the chance to make their dream come into being, I worry that they will sign this contract not fully realizing that the terms are unrealistic.

Let me give you an example of how RPS is working against the PHI concerns Westover Hills School. At a time when RPS has more qualified applicants for the middle years IB program at Brown than it has spaces and is currently turning upwards of 100-150 students away each year, RPS administration is considering placng a elementary IB program at Westover Hills.

Now, I would love to see more IB schools throughout the city –north, south east and west — but I find this effort to be working counter to the success of the PHI. Why not expand the middle years program at Henderson Middle [there is PLENTY of room there and it is the only middle school building that has sufficient space] instead of contemplating opening an elementary IB? And what I really don’t get is why this School Board and administration seem to love secrecy so much.

That said, I do not believe for one minute that this lack of disclosure has the the best interests of the PHI at heart. This is just more of the same from a School Board and an administration content to be satisfied with the status-quo.

And, Gray ….. according to the Viginia Code, the Superintendent is SUPPOSED to answer to the SCHOOL Board, not the other way around. Although, it is easy to see why a reasonable person might think otherwise based on the way this board behaves.

Art Burton is right– this process stinks.

Did you know that three of the four charter schools operating in Virginia, have no contract?

It is my opinion (not PHI) that the application really could be the contract, but that is not the case. The contract puts in place accountability deadlines and the like, which is fine. But rest assured, PHI has set the bar high for itself, and wants the school to be outstanding. We want it to be a place that Richmond parents will gravitate to.

I read Burton’s piece as a criticism of how RPS downtown operates.

As a taxpayer and a parent (and a political junkie), I was kinda hoping to hear about the details of the updated PHSI contract. Maybe the online discussions have spoiled me with loads of info prior to the past vote. Will there be updates about these changes before, or after the Board neglects to read the contract?

Richmond has a bad habit of engaging the public and then not making the process public and not giving the public a voice in the final decision-making. I see this over and over again in local nonprofits and boards. Sure, there are some areas that demand discretion and privacy (dealing with personnel, for example), but I don’t understand why this is the case here.

Many good points that Art makes need to be addressed. But two points that I stand by are these:

1. The Patrick Henry Initiative is not part of any percieved conspiracy of secrecy. We would like as many folks at the table and involved in the sucess of the charter school as are possible. We did not choose the process for which the contract was written. That said, we went through many stressful and burdensome revisions in the contract paying very close attention to the concerns that were raised BY ALL THE SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS on the night of the vote, May 19th 2008. Would a more public format have changed the outcome of the contract and final application revisions? In my opinion, no. [OK, that was probably more than one point]

2. Art says that the charter school needs to succeed, and that is absolutely true. This opportunity to have “a jewel in the crown of RPS”, is historic for the Richmond and our children, and that is the best argument for moving forward. The opening of and the success of the charter school are essential to paving the way for other innovative approaches to learning, and engaging families, and demonstrating that old school buildings still have lots of life left in them, other than that of yuppy condo projects (sorry to all offended yuppies).

In closing, the School Board meets on 9/2 to sign the contract. We fully anticipate that will happen. They will have reveiwed the contract, and application by then. If Art Burton truly believes that the charter school must succeed, I ask him as a fellow citizen to be there in support, and not in opossition.

I find it interesting that despite multiple efforts to reach out to many civic leaders involved in education that until recently, few had ever attended a PHI meeting, which have always been open to the public.

Again, we want to succeed. We need to succeed. But making waves at this late time could make it very hard to open sooner rather than later, if at all. If you want to see the charter school succeed, and if we get the contract, please go to our website, come to a meeting, and be part of something bigger than any piece of paper.

Give us education or give us death, is not exactly what Patrick Henry said, but we are saying it now.

Now, this is a new concern.