State commissioner tells Fairbanks board to decide on Pearl Creek charter; parents and residents press for review

The Fairbanks North Star Borough School Board was urged by dozens of residents on Tuesday to take up and issue a written decision on the Pearl Creek STEAM Charter School’s application after the Alaska Commissioner of Education remanded the matter back to the local board.

Heidi Wood, chair of the Pearl Creek STEAM Academic Policy Committee, read a May 29, 2025, letter from Commissioner Dina Bishop spelling out that the application remand “was issued under the authority granted to the commissioner in Alaska statute 14.03.252(a)” and directing the board to “issue a written decision that includes all relevant findings of fact and conclusions of law.” Wood read Bishop’s language that a failure to act “threatens to frustrate a charter school applicant’s obligation to exhaust its remedies.”

The commissioner’s letter, read into the record, told the board it should not waive board policy but must nonetheless issue a decision on remand under Alaska statute 14.03.250(b). “Again, she’s asking you to do the job you’ve been elected to do. Please do it,” Wood said, reading the letter.

Pearl Creek supporters told the board they had been unable to meet the district’s October deadline because of the timing of school-closure decisions and said the district’s cost estimates for operating the charter have varied widely. Solomon Pomerantz, who said he lives in Goldstream and has worked with the PCSC group, told the board the district had refused a records request for a 30-tab spreadsheet the administration referenced and that district estimates moved from figures in the millions to much larger numbers across different meetings. “We simply wish to understand where these figures are coming from,” he said.

Several testifiers asked the board to meet with the charter organizers and said the district’s refusal to share budgetary detail had fostered distrust. Scott Shire, who identified himself as supporting official review of the application, said “the board’s refusal to review the application over the past several months has incubated community strife.”

Other speakers pressed legal and process arguments. Christina Turman said a board member told her privately that the board would litigate the charter applicants to stall the process; she recounted being told, “All I know is that if we litigate, we can stall your process long enough that your school can’t open.” Turman said that conversation, which she described as having occurred after the group submitted its application, changed her willingness to engage with the district.

Not all public testimony favored the charter. Beth Zerbes, who said she lives in Ester, urged the board to follow its policy and timeline and argued charters in the district have on average had lower diversity metrics than neighborhood schools, citing district dashboard percentages for nonwhite enrollment at several charters.

Board members and the superintendent did not take a formal vote on the application during the public-comment period. Superintendent Dr. Luke Meinert later told the board it had a work session scheduled to prepare an approved budget and that the district must also plan for possible changes from the governor to the state Base Student Allocation. The board’s next procedural steps on Pearl Creek were not announced at the meeting.

Why it matters: The commissioner’s remand and the public testimony put the board in the position of balancing statutory directions from the state, district policy deadlines and strong neighborhood advocacy. If the board issues a written decision that applicants find unsatisfactory, the matter is likely to continue through state and possibly judicial review.