School Board Member Tina Certain’s statements to the media about Newberry Community School are misleading

BY AMBER THIBODAUX

GAINESVILLE, Fla. – On February 26, The Gainesville Sun published an article with the headline “Questions remain despite state approval of Newberry charter school initiative.” The article included some misleading quotes from School Board of Alachua County (SBAC) Member Tina Certain regarding statements made during the charter review hearing that took place in Orlando last week.

Did the Charter School Review Commission welcome public comment from both sides?

“School Board member Tina Certain, who attended Wednesday’s meeting in Orlando, told The Sun that an individual who worked for the Charter School Review Commission advised those in favor of the charter conversion not to bother filling out comment cards because a decision had already been made.

“‘I’m very disappointed with the decision,’ Certain said. ‘It was decided before we got there.'”

– The Gainesville Sun, Feb. 26

Certain told the Sun that an individual who worked for the Charter School Review Commission (CSRC) advised those in favor of the charter conversion “not to bother filling out comment cards because a decision had already been made.” The Sun then quoted Certain directly: “I’m very disappointed with the decision. It was decided before we got there.”

However, the CSRC repeatedly encouraged public comment throughout the hearing and specifically invited representatives from both the SBAC and the Newberry Community School Board to address the commission. The CSRC asked numerous questions and deliberated amongst themselves before holding a vote at the end of the hour-long hearing. 

Before the meeting started, Florida Department of Education Director of School Choice Adam Emerson advised the attendees to fill out a public comment card if they’d like to speak during the hearing. 

Brandy Oldman, for example, filled out a comment card, and as she walked up to speak, CSRC Chairman John-Anthony Boggess reminded the attendees: “I would ask anyone else who wants to make a public comment at this time, please receive a public comment card.”

Immediately following Oldman’s comments, Boggess again asked if there were any other public comments for the “Newberry application.”

Prior to Oldman’s comments, Boggess told the attendees: “We will first hear from the Department of Education and the Charter Institute on the review of the application and the recommendation being made to this commission. They will have a combined five minutes to speak. The applicant, if present, also will be provided five minutes to give an overview of the application. The district, with whom the school would, if approved, enter into a charter agreement, will also be provided five minutes to address the commission, only to the input that the district provided during the application period. Throughout all of this, I’m encouraging my colleagues on this commission to ask probing questions – clarifying questions – that are going to be in the best interest of our students here within that school, to probe and to make sure that we have all the facts and information that you need to make the most important decision, and that is the student achievement of our children.”

Following the presentations by both SBAC and the NCS board, Boggess again encouraged the CSRC to ask questions of the applicants of the conversion charter: “It is now our turn to deliberate, and I do want to encourage you to ask questions of the applicant or the review team, the Charter Institute. This is a fact-finding mission, and it is upon us to hear the recommendations from staff to come to a high-stakes decision for this applicant and for this district.” 

Did the vote by teachers meet the threshold for approval?

“Certain also said that an attorney for the Charter Review Commission advised members to proceed with the vote despite acknowledging that the vote held in April would not be valid based on the the rule change approved by the Board of Education in August because it could not be made retroactive.” – The Gainesville Sun, Feb. 26

While the attorney did say that, that wasn’t his conclusion. The issue is that exactly 50% of the Newberry Elementary School teachers voted for the charter conversion, and the relevant Department of Education rule said the vote required a majority; however, the statute says 50% of the vote is sufficient.

James Richmond, Deputy General Counsel for the Florida Department of Education, told the CSRC, “The statute says clearly that at a minimum, 50% of the vote is sufficient to move an application forward. When that statute was initially implemented by the Department of Education, it was translated into ‘a majority vote’ was required. That remained dormant for many years, but this case came along and brought to our attention that the rule deviated from the statute. We immediately moved to amend that rule, but it was after this vote was taken, so we cannot apply that rule retrospectively, as amended. However, in this case, it would still be my recommendation that we recognize the statutory criteria that the legislature has adopted.”

Richmond continued, “The case law is clear, and I believe much of it is cited in the letter filed on behalf of the school. Statutes basically supersede rules when the two are inconsistent. That’s largely because… rules are a result of statutory authority that the legislature has granted to agencies, so agencies are obligated to implement those statutes as written. As you can see here, we’re not always perfect, no one is, and no one recognized this for many years. But when push comes to shove and these matters land before tribunals as well as courts,… the court system has consistently recognized that the statute is the appropriate one to follow. So my recommendation in this matter is that we approve the vote since 50% were in favor of the application.”

After Shawn Arnold, representing the Newberry Community School board, supported Richmond’s position and Amy Envall, acting on behalf of SBAC, said the district’s position is that the charter conversion was not approved, a motion was made to accept Richmond’s recommendation, and the motion passed unanimously.

Is the partnership between the charter school and the City of Newberry legal?

Certain has also challenged the legality of the conversion charter, arguing multiple times during the hearing that the charter should fall under a “municipal” rather than a charter conversion. The Sun attributed the following quote to Certain: 

“A municipal charter is not allowed under the current law. This charter conversion is masquerading as a group of small parents [sic] leading the charge and it is not. The city has pledged a lot of money behind this charter and that is the opposite of how charter schools are funded; they are funded by the Florida Department Finance Program.” – The Gainesville Sun, Feb. 26

Florida Statute 1002.33, which addresses charter schools, does not include any prohibitions against cities being part of a conversion charter effort. Conversion charter schools are defined as “traditional public schools that have been converted to charter schools. The school must have operated for at least two years as a traditional public school (including a school-within-a-school) in a school district before conversion.”

Applications for a conversion may be made by a parent, teacher, principal, district school board, or school advisory council. In the case of the Newberry charter, all three applications were filed by parents of children who attended one of the three Newberry schools. 

According to the Florida Department of Education website, the definition of a municipal charter is as follows: “Charter schools in a municipality are sponsored by local school districts in partnership with a municipality. Such schools enroll students based upon a random lottery that involves all of the children of the residents of the municipality and according to the racial/ethnic balance reflective of the community or other public schools in the same school district.”

The CSRC discussed the issue and concluded that the distinction is whether the governing board is the municipality or an independent board, and in this case the governing body is an independent board that has “partnered” with the City of Newberry. One CSRC member said, “This is not run by or secretly run by the City. On the face of it, I do not see that that is the case. It appears there’s a partnership.”

Certain predicts that the district will need to file a lawsuit

In a February 28 post in the Facebook group “Save Our Schools Newberry” (shown below), Certain commented, “I’m pretty sure we’re gonna have to file a lawsuit.” The post referenced documents reportedly submitted to SBAC regarding the legality of the charter school initiative. 

Certain did not respond to Alachua Chronicle’s email about whether the quotes in the Sun were accurate.