Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants charter school flexibility to revise transportation arrangement after survey and debate
Summary
After a lengthy debate and failed amendment attempts, the board unanimously directed the superintendent to negotiate charter‑language allowing Phoenix International School of the Arts to assume responsibility for its transportation (special‑education transportation exempt) and implement changes for the 2026–27 school year, pending a services agreement or other operational details.
Phoenix International (PISOTA) presented survey results showing most families who responded would still try to attend the charter if district transportation changed and that many would consider paying a fee. The school argued that aligning transportation language to the state per‑pupil transportation allocation ($550) and switching to a usage‑based model would improve sustainability.
Miss Jackson, the charter operator, asked for flexibility to contract transportation services or to be responsible for purchasing transportation so the charter can operate sustainably. She said the survey indicated families would "make an effort" and that a usage‑based model would allow the school to match service to demand while preserving enrollment choices.
Board members expressed concern about the district’s $4.5 million transportation shortfall, differences between per‑pupil funding and actual costs, and the timing of any change given near‑term planning for routes and bus purchases. Trustee Hancock said he could support giving the charter flexibility but opposed immediately reducing the district subsidy without a clear operational plan. After several proposed motions and amendments, the board voted unanimously to give the superintendent authority to develop workable charter language to permit PISOTA to be responsible for its transportation beginning in school year 2026–27, while preserving district obligations for students with IEP‑mandated transportation and requiring any services agreements to be at cost.
The superintendent cautioned that certain direct‑service models would require additional buses and lead time (manufacturer lead time commonly requires November orders for August delivery) and that staff would need to know how the board wants to account for potential additional costs if the district continues to subsidize some service for the 2026–27 year. The motion that passed directed staff to negotiate specific contract language with the operator and return the amended charter language for board approval as required.
Next steps: superintendent and charter operator to negotiate language and service agreements; staff to identify fiscal impacts, routing and equipment needs and to return to the board with an amended charter or service agreement before implementation.
