Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Funding Blue Oak topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chico Unified board delays decision on $1.001 million Measure C request from Blue Oak after marathon debate
Summary
The board heard a detailed pitch from Blue Oak Charter for $1,001,000 of remaining Measure C funds, including backup plans using leased portables and reliance on Prop 2/Prop 39 outcomes. Trustees debated financial risk, timing and student impacts and took no final action, scheduling further review at a special meeting.
Blue Oak Charter School asked Chico Unified’s board for $1,001,000 from the district’s Measure C facilities fund to help bridge financing for a proposed permanent site and to deploy leased modular classrooms if state funding does not materialize. Julie Kissel, presenting the application update, said Blue Oak has secured some private financing but still faces a funding gap tied to the outcome of a pending Prop 2 state application and the district’s Prop 39 facilities process.
Blue Oak board member Tricia (self‑identified) described a contingency plan to put leased modular portables on a newly purchased site and estimated that site work and initial delivery would require several million dollars in addition to the $1,001,000 request. “That will kinda bridge that gap to allow us that backup plan if we don't get Prop 2,” Tricia said, adding that leased portables would be a temporary step while the school pursues longer‑term funding.
Supporters argued the grant would enable Blue Oak to reduce an unsustainable commercial lease currently costing roughly $55,000 a month and avoid placing Chico Unified students in shared facilities under Prop 39 arrangements. Susan Divenighetti of Blue Oak told the board the additional funds would make the portable‑on‑site option feasible next school year and allow time for architectural and site work if Prop 2 funds arrive.
Opponents and some trustees raised timing and equity concerns: without firm assurances from the state or signed agreements with the charter’s landlord, several trustees said the board could be committing money without guarantees that the charters’ plans would come to fruition. One trustee warned that allocating the funds now would not necessarily prevent disruptions next year and could complicate district facility planning.
During final debate, a substitute motion to allocate the full $1,001,000 to Blue Oak failed on a roll‑call vote (Robinson: no; Landau: aye; Konkin: no; Olsen: no; Ace: aye). The board ultimately took no final action and directed staff and Blue Oak representatives to return with additional documentation, including a written landlord extension and a cost breakdown for the portable plan, at a special meeting or workshop before the district acts further.
What’s next: The board asked administration and Blue Oak to provide a feasibility packet for a special meeting that includes the landlord’s written confirmation on lease extension, detailed site‑work and modular delivery cost estimates, and a clarified timeline showing whether portables could be in place before any rent escalation. The board also requested an outline of any preliminary Prop 39 offer the district will make (deadline for a preliminary offer: Feb. 1).
