November 2nd you will be able to vote for THREE candidates

Question #3: Where do you stand on adding, or not adding, Charter schools into the District? Explain your supporting reasons? Some of the community interpreted the transfer of teachers from Piru to other schools as reprisal for supporting the Charter. What is your interpretation and opinion of the transfers?

Tony Prado: For the purpose of clarification, being the only candidate who is a current Board Member, I am not speaking for the Board or the School District. Also, my duties and responsibilitiles as a Board Member require me to speak carefully regarding school employees and their rights.
My opinion, on the first part of this question is very simple, if the desire for a charter school is parent-driven and a majority of the parents want a charter school, then I would support it. The fact is, the Piru Charter School issue was not parent-driven nor were the majority of parents in favor or it. Also, the Spanish speaking parents were ignored, the Piru English speaking community was ignored and the District was ignored. There was little or no concern as to how it would effect the teachers in the District or the students in the District. The Charter was an ill-conceived idea by a small selfish group of individuals.
There was an Emergency declared at Piru Elementary School. The teachers at Piru School were divided. Feelings and emotions by the teachers were very strong. There appeared to be a lack of courtesy and respect by those for and against the Charter. Effective teaching and learning were in danger in the classroom. Action was necessary and with the recommendation from the District staff an emergency was declared. The Board voted in favor of this emergency.
Today the environment at Piru Elementary School is calm and peaceful. Effective teaching and learning is taking place.

Dave Wilde: Last year I had the opportunity to be on the Piru campus at least once a week working with one of our second year teachers. I can tell you for certain that there was a lot of tension between the two groups of staff members. Even after the California State Board of Education turned down the charter group the tense atmosphere continued. I had a number of concerns. Two are very important. The first is whether a positive learning environment could be created and maintained for the students of Piru under those conditions. The second is whether affective collaboration between instructors in an effort to improve instruction could exist. With those huge concerns in mind I don't think the district had any choice but to move some people around. Those individuals involved still have jobs including benefits. I think we would all agree that the well being of the Piru students comes first.
I have no real feelings about charter schools in particular. I do, however feel that providing parents with a choice is important. A couple of years ago a committee was formed of parents and district staff to discuss ways to improve our schools and the idea of magnet schools and academies was talked about. With budget problems some of those ideas have been put on the back burning, but I would love to see them re-explored. Schools to address gate students and those with special interests in math, science, arts, and language skills would be great for our community of students.

Kim Rivers: I feel FUSD has a great opportunity at collaboration with instructors who are striving to foster academic excellence. It is the duty of a Board that when any discussion, proposal or formal petitions for a charter are brought before them, they consider whether it will enhance the educational options already offered within FUSD. Both California State law and policies of VCOE encourage charters as a way to improve academics, and expand educational options.
To transfer teachers involuntarily FUSD had to declare an emergency and invalidate a section of the certificated contract. How did this action benefit students? To invalidate a labor contract is a serious action, which I know has many district personnel concerned. I feel that this action was taken to prevent any further efforts by these teachers to create a charter school within the District, a right that California Law grants to a majority of certificated members at any school. As a Board member it will be important to me that the District has the highest regard for the legal rights of staff at all levels and that the actions by the District, and ultimately the School Board never leave the District vulnerable to legal action.
I am also concerned about the environment created by Board decisions. It may be hard for employees of FUSD to question a policy, proposal or action, or to suggest something new, if there is a culture that uses reassignment, termination or any other form of intimidation to prevent collaboration. www.votekimrivers.com

Lucy Rangel: Because of the manner in which the Piru Charter proposal was handled by the Petitioners and the District this past year, I would not be in favor of a Charter school in our district at this time. This controversial issue caused division in our district among parents, staff, administration, and our communities of Piru and Fillmore. I would, however, be in favor of a Charter school or even a Magnet school in the future. It takes a great deal of time planning and organizing any type of public educational institution if it is to be successful. Collaboration with the District is a must; and of course, the parents, staff, and community must be supportive of this concept. Everything planned must be in the best interest of all our students.
As far as the transfer of teachers from Piru to the other schools, I can certainly understand why some of the community interpreted these transfers as reprisal for supporting the charter. Since I was not in attendance at all the meetings regarding the Charter proposal, I do not know all of the details. My opinion, however, is that the District was aware of the potential effect that the State’s decision would have not only on Piru School, but also on the entire community. From previous meetings, they also had known that the school climate had already been affected. They should have taken immediate steps to facilitate recovery for all parties. Then, perhaps, the transfer of teachers would not have been necessary.

Mark Austin: California state law has promoted the creation of charter schools (which are public schools) primarily to increase learning opportunities for low-achieving students. This has been done by encouraging and allowing for the creation of charter schools to use innovative teaching methods. In others words, to think outside the box. The state intended to create competition within the public school system by allowing charter schools to innovate and thus provide an educational alternative. Adding charter schools within the boundaries of the Fillmore Unified School District (FUSD) would allow for the provision of unique educational programs. This alone would result in competition between charter schools and the FUSD schools for students. The addition of charter schools would cause the FUSD to scrutinize itself internally and externally, and would force the FUSD to improve the overall quality of education or continue to lose students and funding to charter schools. But the real issue is not whether charter schools should be added in the FUSD. The issue is that existing schools within the FUSD are not meeting the grade.
The involuntary transfer of four teachers to other schools seems to be related to their support of the Piru Elementary School Charter. One merely needs to review the Resolution adopted by the FUSD (June 3, 2010) - that links the involuntary transfers to the Charter attempt. The Charter is mentioned numerous times within the Resolution and is used as the primary reason to declare an emergency circumstance, thus allowing for the transfers. www.votemarkaustin.com