Friday, January 20, 2012

Of Course

I got all of 6 hours to enjoy the fourth denial of Tikun Olam.  I went out to dinner with my closest co-conspirators, our kids and our husbands to celebrate.  And then I came home and read Jessica Calefati's piece in the Ledger:

Noticeably absent from today’s list were proposed charter schools in high performing suburban districts like Highland Park, South Orange-Maplewood and Montclair.
Good so far, keep going...
In recent months, parents, teachers and elected officials in these communities have rallied to block the controversial schools from opening. Christie and Cerf have both said charters are not necessarily needed in the suburbs, and this round of approvals clearly reflects that thinking.
Or it reflects that the suburbs have gained so much momentum in their battle against unwanted charters that the NJDOE was terrified to approved EVEN ONE charter in the suburbs and risk an even greater backlash.  But OK, keep going...
Sharon Akman of Highland Park, who has applied four times to open a charter high school focused on Hebrew language instruction, said this latest denial would not end her quest for approval.
Akman said "of course" she would submit a fifth application.
Great.  Just great.  Total buzz kill.
Wonder how Sharon Akman will clean up her application after Michael Winerip and Chris Rodda have exposed it nationally for the mess that it is?  


  1. Maybe we should introduce a bill to require communities to come up with a certain number of signatures from that community for a charter school application so that a charter school can't be applied for like a business but as something that demonstrates a demand in that community. Or some other way to show the demand for such a school in any given community.
    Gus Menezes, Edison

  2. I propose a vote during school elections on the approval of charters in ANY district. Not only that, each separate charter should be individually voted upon. Further, full financial disclosure of that charter's administrative costs (including superintendents, caps anyone?) and how much tax dollars they are taking from the local district must be made. Transparency and full disclosure, what a concept! If these charters are so altruistic, then what's the problem? If these charters are so good for the community, why fear a vote?