Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Charter Schools topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves accounts payable amid dissent over cyber-charter payments

Parkland School Board · February 10, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board approved the accounts-payable list but several members registered no votes for cyber-charter school payments and used the meeting to highlight concerns about cyber-charter performance and state funding mechanics.

During the accounts-payable vote, several board members explained they would vote against line items that sent payments to cyber-charter schools while approving the rest of the bills. Board member Perrotta said he would not support the cyber-charter payments and cited performance statistics for Commonwealth Charter Academy, including a reported 64% graduation rate and low test proficiency figures. “We are approving $239,000 tonight to go to Commonwealth Charter Academy, which has a graduation rate of 64 percent, has an English proficiency rate of 11 percent, a math proficiency rate of 4.7%,” Perrotta said.

Another board member explained why a simple board-level withholding is not a practical remedy: withholding payment would prompt legal action or cause the state to recoup funds from the district. “If 5 of us vote no to not pay the cyber charter schools… the state would take it out of our state funding,” a member said, explaining the practical constraints around local control of those payments. The board approved the accounts payable list after discussion; several board members used their recorded votes and remarks to emphasize the problem and call for broader policy change at the state level.

Why it matters: cyber-charter tuition payments are a statewide policy issue that affects local district budgets and student outcomes. Members used the local vote to draw attention to performance metrics and to signal a desire for state-level reform while recognizing the legal and financial constraints on local action.