Pearl Creek supporters press board to act on charter as state guidance remains unclear

Supporters of a proposed Pearl Creek STEAM charter urged the Fairbanks North Star Borough School District Board of Education on March 18 to accept and act on their application within a 60‑day timeline they say the state provided — even as district leaders said they have no written direction from the state and the statutory question is unresolved.

The public comment period at the board's regularly scheduled meeting included multiple speakers who said the Alaska Department of Education & Early Development (DEED) had told the district in writing to take up the charter application within 60 days. Blake Esig, a Fairbanks resident who read from an email he said came from DEED, told the board: “Deed believes that the issue, school closure, which led to the proposal being out of sync with the local timeline, were not regular. Hence, it would be prudent for the FNSBSD, to hear the charter as it has been received. The district slash board has 60 days to do so, end quote.”

Why it matters: If the board delays or declines to hear the application and DEED later takes a different view, the state could intervene and approve the charter for the next school year, supporters warned, while the district said that would raise legal and fiscal risks.

District and board responses Superintendent Mike Meinert told the board he had discussed the issue with Commissioner Bishop of DEED and said the commissioner “acknowledged the ambiguity in state statute” and that the question is unprecedented. Meinert corrected statements made in public testimony by saying no written direction has been provided to the district: “No direction has come from DEED to the district in writing,” he said. He added that Bishop told him it was ultimately up to the board to decide how district policy aligns with statute.

Pearl Creek advocates pressed for a prompt board review. Heidi Wood, who identified herself as a Pearl Creek APC representative, gave a timeline of the group's filings and said the APC had requested a board work session per district policy 935.2. “We are inviting you formally and in public to engage and participate,” she said.

Other public testimony and district detail Several speakers described the Pearl Creek program as a place‑based STEAM model they say has produced districtwide programs and urged the board to either approve the charter or hold a work session with APC representatives. Emily Potter, a parent, said the charter is “not a saying we are better. It is saying we are different. An alternative option for families that want to choose a STEAM focus.”

Community members also raised procedural concerns. Blake Esig asked why the district was relying on an oral explanation from a March 4 conversation instead of the written DEED communication he cited. Allison Mohenson, who spoke in favor of considering grant revenue available to charters, invoked Alaska Statute 14.03.255, saying a lease is not strictly required for an application to be complete.

Board action and next steps The board did not take a final vote on the Pearl Creek charter at the March 18 meeting. The board recessed and agreed to reconvene the following evening; no formal action on the charter application was recorded before the recess. Several board members said the situation is legally ambiguous and that DEED’s written position — if provided — would be decisive.

The superintendent said staff will continue to pursue clarification and that the board may decide whether to hear the application within the statute’s 60‑day period or take other options that can be legally justified. Dr. Meinert also told the board he had arranged further conversations with DEED and would report back.

Ending Pearl Creek supporters urged the board to move quickly; district officials said the lack of written state guidance complicates the decision. The board recessed the meeting to continue budget work and planned to reconvene the next evening, leaving the charter's timeline unresolved.