Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Queen Anne's County board upholds superintendent recommendation and denies Queen Anne's Classical charter application
Summary
The Queen Anne's County Board of Education voted to adopt the interim superintendent's recommendation to deny the charter application from Queen Anne's Classical Charter School, citing deficiencies in academic planning and operational capacity; the board encouraged reapplication and outlined negotiation and facility contingencies.
The Queen Anne's County Board of Education on Sept. 10 voted to adopt Interim Superintendent Dr. Kibler's recommendation to deny the charter application from Queen Anne's Classical Charter School (QACCS), after a public presentation and extended board questioning about capacity, community support and legal timelines.
Board members cited gaps in the application and in follow-up materials as the basis for the recommendation. Interim Superintendent Dr. Kibler told the board that "that recommendation for denial is based on the application that was submitted ... it's based on the deficiencies that the team found," and that the review considered the application, the capacity interview and subsequent follow-up communications.
QACCS representatives, led by Ashley McClay, president of the charter school's board of directors, made a 40-minute presentation describing the group's mission, timeline options and requested waivers. McClay summarized the charter model and state context: "Maryland charter schools are public schools which are operated by independent nonprofits," and said the group would be willing to delay opening to 2027 to meet capacity requirements. She described planned outreach, including a direct-mail campaign funded in part by county commissioners, petition signatures she said exceeded 200 (but included some out-of-county supporters) and a short survey in which early respondents indicated interest.
Board members asked repeatedly about the application's demonstration of parental enrollment commitments and community need. Several expressed concern that letters of support received so far included relatively few parents who would currently enroll students, calling the issue a "chicken-and-egg" problem: applicants said parents are unlikely to commit before a facility and an opening date are known. McClay said the group planned targeted outreach to preschools, libraries and community centers and that the initial opening cohort would be small — under 100 students, with about 20–22 students per class.
The presentation also covered waivers and buyback services the applicants had requested, including curriculum waivers, procurement and building-use waivers, and a waiver the applicants agreed to withdraw after questions about personal electronic devices. McClay said waivers are typical for Maryland charter schools and that the charter agreement would specify quarterly financial reviews, audits and a five-year authorization term.
Board members raised legal and procedural questions, including whether the 30-day negotiation period for a charter agreement — referenced in a state board opinion — could be extended. Legal counsel noted the state board has said charter agreements should be completed within 30 calendar days from the approval decision, though both sides could potentially agree to a longer timeline.
After discussion, a board member moved to accept the superintendent's recommendation to deny the application. The motion read in part: "I move we adopt the recommendation of the interim superintendent and the charter school application review committee to deny the application of the Queen Anne's classical charter school due to significant and substantiated deficiencies in academic planning, operational capacity, and demonstrated need." The motion was seconded and the board voted: Bent, Eichler and Motherland voted to uphold the recommendation; Capes and Dreyer voted against. The board's motion carried, and the superintendent's recommendation to deny the application was upheld.
Board members and the superintendent urged the applicants to address the identified deficiencies and said reapplication would be welcome. Dr. Kibler noted the review team would be available during any rework: the superintendent's letter encouraged the applicants, if denied, to return in a year after strengthening the application. The board also discussed contingencies the charter agreement could include — notably facility suitability and timing — and members said some waivers could be negotiated individually if the board were to change course in the future.
The board adjourned its open session at 5:45 p.m.
