Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Renewal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SF school board declines to renew New School petition locally, denies expansion request
Summary
After hours of testimony from families, staff and opponents, the San Francisco Board of Education voted down staff’s local renewal recommendation for New School San Francisco and approved staff’s recommendation to deny a material revision expanding the charter; commissioners cited equity, demographics and facility funding concerns.
The San Francisco Board of Education on Sept. 24 declined to approve a local renewal of the New School of San Francisco’s charter as a K–5 school and separately voted to deny the school’s material-revision request to expand into middle grades.
The board considered two staff items: SP19625 SP1, recommending approval of a K–5 renewal for New School (to serve 288 students at 655 DeHarrell Street for five years beginning July 1, 2020), and SP1999-10 SP2, recommending denial of a proposed material revision adding grades 6–8 because the petition did not demonstrate the capacity to serve middle-grade English learners or meet material-revision requirements. After public testimony that included school founders, parents and students urging local authorization and dozens of minutes of commissioner questioning, the board took two roll-call votes. The first vote on the staff recommendation to renew the K–5 configuration failed; the chair announced, “That’s 6 nay votes. It fails.” The second vote — to adopt staff findings and deny the material revision — carried by a 6–0 roll call in support of the denial.
Supporters of New School described academic outcomes and an inclusive, inquiry-based model. A school leader said the school’s 2018–19 embargoed test results showed “81% of our students meeting or exceeding standards in ELA and 71% in math” and noted the school’s co-teaching model and services for students with disabilities. Parents and students told the board that New School provides continuity, strong special-education support and a community that keeps some families in the city; speakers referenced 251 letters submitted in support.
Opponents — including district commissioners and community advocates — raised equity and resource concerns. Commissioners cited the school’s demographic profile (board staff reported the petition’s demographic summary as roughly 52% white, 11% socioeconomically disadvantaged, 10% English learners, and 7% students with IEPs) and warned that an expansion could redirect enrollment-funded dollars and physical space under Proposition 39 to the charter, particularly in the Southeast sector. A board member warned that approving a K–8 expansion “would take about $600,000 more per class of 60 students” from the district’s middle-school funding pool.
Board members also pressed New School on procedural history: whether the 2014 petition and subsequent state review resulted in a K–5 authorization and whether the school had accurately represented its enrollment preferences and special-education plans. Staff and school representatives acknowledged some data differences and said certain enrollment preferences (including a proposed 33% floor for free-and-reduced-price-lunch applicants) depend on self-reporting at application and subsequent verification.
Because the board did not approve the local renewal, the petition remains eligible to proceed to the state board appeal process under state charter law. District staff had recommended local approval of the K–5 renewal but recommended denial of the material revision. The board’s formal motions were recorded as: failed approval of SP19625 SP1 (renewal K–5) and approved adoption of staff findings to deny SP1999-10 SP2 (material revision denial).
The board returned to its regular calendar after the votes and moved on to other business.
