Jackson-Madison County Board denies Jackson Museum School charter application, cites gaps on special populations, staffing and transportation

The Jackson-Madison County Board of Education voted on April 30, 2025, to deny the charter application submitted by Jackson Museum School, with the board giving the applicant 30 days to submit an amended application addressing stated deficiencies.

Board members said the denial followed a review-team evaluation and a capacity interview that rated parts of the application as "partially meets standard," particularly in sections covering special populations, personnel/human capital, professional development and transportation. The board attached stipulations for reconsideration; if those are not satisfied and the application is denied again, the applicant may appeal to the state charter commission.

The board’s review team found that the application met or exceeded standards in several academic and operational areas but “partially met” standards for special populations, personnel/human capital, professional development and transportation. The resolution read during the meeting listed specific concerns the committee said were missing or inadequately defined, including child‑find procedures for students with disabilities, detailed plans and budgets for related services, concrete procedures for identifying English learners, and a realistic transportation budget for daily attendance and special education needs.

Public comment mirrored the split in the review. Supporters of Jackson Museum School described the proposal as a community-rooted option that would target minority and economically disadvantaged students and add an arts-integrated program. Andrea Temple, a proposed board member for Jackson Museum School, told the board, "I believe that the school that we are proposing will be an asset to the community and district, offering a learning model that can address families seeking a different learning style for their students." Dr. Delita Johnson, another prospective board member and executive director of the Jackson Arts Council, said the school’s arts curriculum would help students process emotions and encouraged a “yes” vote.

Opponents urged the board to protect the district’s public schools and cautioned that the district should prioritize improving capacity before authorizing charters. Victoria Toon of the newly formed Jackson-Madison County Voters Council urged the board to "stand in your commitment to public education and vote no on the resolution for the charter school." Harold Carter of the NAACP said the organization has not supported local charter schools for more than a decade and urged continued investment in the public district.

During the hearing, the applicant’s lead representative said the vote before the board was strictly whether the application met state authorization standards and emphasized flexibility on implementation details. "This vote is not whether or not public charter schools should exist in Jackson," the applicant said during her presentation, adding that the board retained local authorization authority and that her group sought to be collaborative with the district.

The board read a formal resolution that enumerated the review team’s findings and the areas requiring clarification or correction. The resolution specified that the applicant has 30 calendar days from receipt of the denial to submit an amended application; the review team would then have 60 days to review the amendment and the board would have 60 days to act. The resolution also cited the Tennessee Public Charter Schools Act of 2002 and state rules (see authorities).

By roll-call at the meeting the board approved the resolution denying the application with stipulations for reconsideration. The transcript records the roll‑call as recorded at the meeting (listed here as read aloud at the vote): Barbara Walden — yes; Shane Moore — yes; Jason Compton — yes; Andre Darnell — yes; David Gall — yes; Glenn Gall — no; James Johnson — yes; Andrea Givens Moore — yes; Marcia Moss — yes. The resolution text and the review-team notes cited specific, itemized deficiencies the board required the applicant to address before reconsideration.

Next steps: under state law, the applicant may submit an amended application within 30 days; the district review team and board then have set windows to reconsider. If the board denies the application a second time, the applicant may appeal to the state’s charter commission.

The board’s decision does not itself create or change district policy; it records the board’s determination that the specific application, as submitted, did not yet demonstrate sufficient capacity in the identified areas to be authorized locally.