Deja vu all over again (BCS)

There's an important difference between BCS and LASD. The LASD board is elected by the public. We have to answer to the public, and everyone registered to vote in our district has a say in who serves the children of our community.

Like all charter schools in the state, BCS, on the other hand, appoints their board. I'm sure the legislature, when they created this structure, was thinking it would be important for charter schools to have boards that are consistent with the school's vision. IN this case, though, I struggle with the notion.

From a purely economic perspective, charter schools are tax-payer funded. As a matter of principle, I like to see the people who spend tax payer money to be answerable to the same taxpayers. In the case of the charter school, they aren't really accountable to anyone- not even the parents whose children attend the charter school. I'm not suggesting that they've done anything financially improper- just that when taxpayer dollars are spent, taxpayers should have some say in how the money is spent.

More concerning to me, though, is that there's little turnover within the BCS board. There are three members of the BCS board whose terms expire this year. I was disappointed to learn that the BCS Board is planning to reappoint those same members to another 4-year term.

When I first took office, I met with several members of the BCS Board. Each one of them delivered the same message. they said that they each were hopeful that the new blood on the LASD board might be a way to improve relations between our two Boards. I'm saddened, then, that they've chosen to re-appoint the same people to their own board. Apparently the BCS Board felt that LASD was the only party that needed to change.

I'm not directly criticizing the three BCS Board members in question. I've worked with two of them and met with the third. We certainly don't see eye to eye on a number of issues. But still, if "fresh blood" is good for LASD, why isn't it good for BCS?