Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Oversight topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union and teachers call on board to hold Saint Hope charter accountable for working conditions
Summary
Speakers representing SCTA and Saint Hope educators urged the board to increase oversight of Saint Hope charter operations, alleging high turnover, low pay and violations of labor and special‑education practices.
Representatives of the Sacramento City Teachers Association and a group of Saint Hope educators used public comment and the employee organizations segment to urge the board to exercise oversight of Saint Hope charter schools and address alleged problems with teacher pay, working conditions and compliance.
Nikki Davis Malevskiy, president of the Sacramento City Teachers Association, criticized uneven oversight across authorizers and cited recent audit findings elsewhere while asking the board to use its authority to hold Saint Hope accountable.
“Less than one month into the school year and the staff there are already starting to quit,” SCTA speakers said. A Saint Hope representative from the bargaining team said the average teacher tenure at Saint Hope is approximately 1.1 years and alleged that staff work substantially longer hours for lower pay and fewer benefits than Sac City Unified employees.
Speakers described alleged bargaining in bad faith, restrictions on union activity, and a lack of timely responses to information requests from Saint Hope leadership. One educator said special‑education and physical‑education requirements were not being followed and said several teachers had resigned in the first four weeks of the school year. “Teachers are not able to pay their bills every month with their current salaries and the health and insurance benefits offered,” the speaker said.
The union asked the board to use its authorizing and oversight powers and to demand transparency and compliance with state labor and special‑education laws. Speakers also requested more accountability from Saint Hope’s board and leadership, and raised questions about a reported $60,000 retainer paid by the charter’s board to initiate a superintendent search.
Board members acknowledged the seriousness of the complaints and said they would assign a board member to lead follow‑up. At the meeting Member Benjamin was designated to take the lead on the Saint Hope oversight discussions because of his ties to the community where the charter operates.
No formal actions were taken against Saint Hope at the meeting. The board’s designation of a member to lead oversight discussions signals an intention to follow up with staff and potentially consult legal and oversight options available to the district as an authorizer.
