Board approves two charter facility agreements, postpones one amid heated debate over Malcolm X and Bayview placement

The Board of Education considered three facilities‑use agreements under Proposition 39 and split the votes to allow separate actions for each petitioning charter.

Mission Prep’s agreement to occupy the former San Francisco International High School/Bryant Elementary facility at 1050 York Street was presented by the district facilities office and approved by roll call.

A heated exchange followed over New School’s request. Staff said the district’s Prop 39 process had initially offered Malcolm X Academy as a preliminary site; after community feedback from Malcolm X and additional administrative review the offer was changed to Enola Maxwell/colocation with SF International. Commissioners and community members questioned the timing and notification: several said the board first learned of the change later in the process and asked why they were not given an earlier opportunity to weigh in. Some commissioners warned that placing a larger charter in Malcolm X could accelerate attrition and create conditions for closure; others said withholding the offer risked legal challenge because charters that meet the Prop 39 criteria are entitled to reasonably comparable space. Deputy Superintendent and legal staff advised the board that the district had obligations under Prop 39 and that the facility‑use agreement memorializes business terms that help the district (per‑square‑foot charges, shared‑space rules).

Because the legal posture and timing raised questions, President Walton moved to postpone action on New School to allow the board to get legal counsel advice; the board voted to postpone action on New School while proceeding with the other agreements.

The board then considered 1Purpose’s request to expand space at Bret Hart Elementary. Commissioners debated the effect of adding charter classroom space at a school that several members said is showing improvement and rising enrollment. After discussion the board approved the 1Purpose facilities‑use agreement; the roll‑call result showed a majority in favor with one recorded no vote from the president.

District staff said the New School offer as presented to the board was for a one‑year occupancy and that future site offers could change year to year under Prop 39. Legal counsel told the board that refusal to meet Prop 39 obligations when the petition meets the statutory criteria could expose the district to court action; the counsel recommended discussing specific legal risk in closed session if the board wanted detailed legal advice.

Board members asked staff to return with clearer briefings and to consider a broader policy discussion about recurring Prop 39 placements and district process earlier in the cycle.