The following was sent to Members of the Little Rock School Board and copied to Superintendent Dr. Dexter Suggs on Friday, November 22nd. 

Honorable Members of the Little Rock School Board, 

Because you did not publicly consider nor vote on the following issue, we wanted to be sure you were/are fully informed.

On Wednesday, November 20th, your Little Rock School District Attorney, Chris Heller, informed (via email) Mary Perry, Charter/Home Schools Director of the Arkansas Department of Education, that the District seeks an appeal before the State Board of Education of the Charter Authorizing Panel’s unanimous (6-0) approval of the application of Quest Middle School of West Little Rock.

On December 9th, at the State Board’s next scheduled meeting, it will decide, by majority vote (five of nine members), whether or not to review the decision of the Panel. If the State Board votes not to review the decision, the Panel’s decision is final. If the State Board votes to review the decision, it will conduct a hearing at its January meeting, and the majority decision (five of nine members) made by the Board after the hearing will be final.

The Charter Authorizing Panel, which unanimously approved the application, is chaired by Dr. Tom Kimbrell (Commissioner, Arkansas Department of Education) and consists of the Department’s senior administrative team:

• Mike Hernandez (Assistant Commissioner, Division of Fiscal & Administrative Services)
• Dr. Karen Walters (Assistant Commissioner, Division of Human Resources)
• Jim Boardman (Assistant Commissioner, Division of Research and Technology)
• John Hoy (Assistant Commissioner, Division of Public School Accountability)
• Dr. Megan Witonski (Assistant Commissioner, Division of Learning Services) 
• Deborah Coffman (Chief of Staff)

On behalf of the 306 parents who signed petitions, the 222 who joined our Action Group, the 18 civic, business and parent leaders who submitted Letters of Support, and the overflow crowd who attended our Charter Authorizing Panel presentation, we respectfully request that you direct your attorney to withdraw this request.We will not restate our presentation here, as it is now a matter of public record. Nor will we counter Mr. Heller’s assertions in his appeal request, as we will be afforded that opportunity before the State Board. Instead, we call your attention to the path upon which your attorney is choosing to lead our District. Mr. Heller is asking the State Board to vote on an issue upon which you did not vote. Rather, he seems to be making a unilateral decision to seek appeal with the passive, rather than active, permission of your Board. Seeking appeal by the State Board of Education of the Charter Authorizing Panel’s unanimous decision is a distinctly separate issue from the LRSD Board’s initial vote of October 24th to “not accept” the application, a vote which came six days after the Panel’s prescribed deadline.

Also, neither your attorney, nor our superintendent, nor our Board president, nor any other member of our Board chose to be present for the November 14th presentation before the Panel. Rather, it was left solely to Associate Superintendent Dennis Glasgow to make the unsuccessful case against authorization.

By contrast, when the North Little Rock School District successfully opposed the application of Capitol City Lighthouse Charter, the District was represented by its superintendent, Board president, attorney, Board members, and other District leaders.

Our own Quest presentation team included an overflow assemblage of parents and supporters, as well as the entire senior management of Responsive Education Solutions of Lewisville, Texas, the Charter Management Organization recruited by our parents.

Following the October 24th Board presentation by your attorney and Associate Superintendent Glasgow, the only discussion by the Little Rock School Board regarding the Quest application was as follows:

Mr. Adams: Mr. Glasgow, the Responsive Ed organization, is that a for-profit or nonprofit organization?

Mr. Glasgow: I do not know. I’m assuming it’s for profit, but I don’t know that for sure.

It is illegal for for-profit entities to operate charter schools in Arkansas, and yet your administrator, who should have known better, and your attorney, who did know better, allowed you to vote without correction.

Click here for a complete transcript of your discussion on the issue.

The only opportunity afforded parents to speak in favor of the Board’s supporting or remaining neutral on the application was during the three-minute Citizen Comments portion of the agenda. While your rules forbade interacting with speakers during that time, we offered to be available for the remainder of the meeting to answer any of your questions. None were asked.

Though we vehemently disagreed, we understood why you took your initial position in opposition to Quest. You had an active case before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding charters in Pulaski County and couldn’t very well support or remain neutral on creating a new charter, lest it be perceived as inconsistent with your legal arguments.

Since then, however, your situation has changed. With your historic vote on Monday, November 18th to join the Desegregation Settlement, you have agreed to end your appeals regarding charter schools. And yet, at a time when our District should be binding its wounds and finally getting about the business of educating all of our children, your attorney persists in a fight which will further alienate those who are simply seeking to provide public education for their students where none exists.

Our parents are doing what our District could have done. In fact, three of our State’s public school districts – West Memphis, Pea Ridge and Fountain Lake – are actively partnering with our provider, Responsive Education Solutions, for their conversion charter applications.

Dr. Suggs began his leadership of our District after our Quest Letter of Intent was filed. Ms. Shephard and Rev. McAdoo began their first terms after the submission of our application. Those three leaders have no responsibility for the District’s actions and/or inactions which necessitated parental intervention in the provision of public secondary education for their students. However, they along with each member of the Board, are responsible for the actions and/or inactions of this District going forward.

So, we close as we did before you on October 24th: Parents should have the right to send their child to any school they deem best for their child. As we continue to support your work to become “the best choice,” please end this fight against our efforts to become an “immediate choice.”

We respectfully request that you direct your attorney to withdraw your request for appeal before the State Board of Education.

Sincerely,

Gary Newton
Parent

Reply from Board President Greg Adams (Zone 4) 

Mr. Newton,

Thank you for your email. Our attorney, Mr. Chris Heller, did inform the Board of the submission of the request for review of the decisions of the Panel to the State Board of Education as follow through of the Board’s vote to not support the requests of the recently proposed Quest and Exalt charter schools.

Respectfully,

Greg

Greg Adams
President
Little Rock School Board

Reply to Greg Adams

Greg,

With all due respect, shouldn’t our Board be informing its attorney?

I can offer no more counsel than I did in my original email. The success of our school district is paramount to our parents, so we are deeply disappointed that you, your colleagues and administration have passively chosen to defer your leadership and default to continued divisive action.

Once again, we urge your reconsideration of withdrawing your request for appeal. As at the October 24th Board meeting, I remain available to answer any of your questions and address any of your concerns so you may be afforded a perspective different from those you employ and retain.

Sincerely,

Gary Newton
When Arkansas Learns, Arkansas Earns