Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mountain View Renewal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District 49 board renews Mountain View Academy contract amid debate over performance and legal-counsel clause
Summary
After board discussion about Mountain View Academy’s recent test-score decline and repeated improvement-plan status, District 49 approved a five-year renewal using a new contract template that includes section 8.11 to address legal representation when co-respondent claims could create district liability.
The El Paso County Colorado School District 49 Board of Education voted to renew Mountain View Academy’s charter for a five-year term at its November meeting, approving a new contract template that includes a clause (section 8.11) intended to limit district liability in certain legal disputes.
Director Heil raised concerns that Mountain View Academy’s performance had declined — saying the school "went from some of the highest CMAS scores in the district to the lowest" and noting the school had been on an improvement plan "four of the past five years." Heil argued that the board should have considered placing conditions on renewal earlier in the process.
Superintendent Hiltz responded that a school can be in performance in one area and not another, and explained the district’s recent work to create a clearer, updated contract template. Hiltz said the district previously experienced a complaint resolution that resulted in a judgment "over $100,000" against the district when charter and district counsel were different, and the draft section 8.11 narrows the district’s exposure by providing the district priority in counsel selection when both parties are co-respondents.
Brad Miller, who spoke to the contract language, said the template remains broadly favorable to charter autonomy and that section 8.11 is narrow in scope: it applies when both the district and the charter are named and where shared legal exposure could financially impact the district. Miller said the template was developed collaboratively with charter representatives and legal counsel and that the district plans to use this as the standard template for future renewals.
The motion to approve the renewal was moved and seconded and passed on the board floor (recorded voice vote: yes 3, no 1). Board materials note the contract term is five years and that it will be applied as a template for subsequent charter renewals.
