May 19, 2014
Commissioner David C. Hespe
New Jersey Department of Education
100 River View Plaza
P.O. Box 500
Trenton, NJ 08625
Dear Commissioner Hespe,
Save Our Schools NJ is a nonpartisan statewide organization of more than 18,000
parents and other concerned residents who believe that all New Jersey children should
have access to a high quality public education.
Save Our Schools NJ submits these comments on the applications to build renaissance
school projects, filed on April 7, 2014 by the Camden Public Schools (Camden) and two
non-profit entities – Mastery Charter Schools (Mastery) and Uncommon Charter
Schools (Uncommon) – with the New Jersey Department of Education (DOE), pursuant
to the Urban Hope Act, N.J.S.A. 18A:36C-1 et seq. (Act) and implementing regulations
N.J.A.C. 6A:31-1.1 et seq.
As the language of the Act makes clear, the scope of the Act is expressly limited by the
Legislature: to authorize Camden to partner with a nonprofit entity to build and operate a
“renaissance school project.” N.J.S.A. 18A:36C-2(e). The Act defines a “Renaissance
school project” as “a newly-constructed school, or group of schools in an urban campus
area” that, upon completion of the school project will provide “an educational program
for students enrolled in grades pre-K through 12 or in a grade range less than pre-K
through 12” to be “operated and managed” by the nonprofit entity. N.J.S.A. 18A:36C-3.
The Act also makes clear that, because a renaissance school is a newly constructed
facility, the essential elements of an application for project approval by the
Commissioner must include, at a minimum, 1) an amended long-range facilities plan
1
from the district that includes the proposed school project; 2) “a description of, and
address for, the initial school facility in which the renaissance school project will be
located;” and 3) “documentation of a funding plan to acquire necessary lands to
construct a renaissance school project thereon.” N.J.S.A. 18A:36C-4.
We have examined the April 7 applications filed by Camden, Mastery and Uncommon
with DOE. As we explain, the applications on their face fail to comply with the requisite
requirements under the Act and implementing regulations and, therefore, must be
rejected.
1) Camden’s Applications Fail to Propose Renaissance School Projects
As discussed above, the Act authorizes Camden to partner with non-profit entities on
renaissance school projects, which are defined as a “newly constructed school, or group
of schools in an urban campus area.” Simply put, in contrast to the State Charter
School Program, the Act only allows for the construction of a new school facility or
facilities to be managed and operated, once constructed, by the non-profit entity.
Furthermore, the Act’s requirements for Commissioner approval of a renaissance
school project fully reflects this core objective. The application must include a resolution
from the district that contains “documentation” of the district “amendment to its Long
Range Facilities Plan pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:7G-4, reflecting plans to construct the
proposed renaissance school.” N.J.S.A. 18A:36C-4b(2). Accordingly, the district must
obtain and submit a DOE-approved amendment that incorporates the new renaissance
school facility or facilities, once constructed, into its district-wide facilities plan for
ensuring district students with safe and educationally adequate school buildings, and
include such amendment in the application.
In addition, the Act’s minimum requirements for an application include: 1) the
description of, and address, for the school facility to be newly constructed; 2)
documentation that the proposed facilities project will meet school building regulation of
either the Department of Community Affairs or the DOE; 3) documentation of the
funding plans for acquiring land and constructing the school project; and 4) identification
of the attendance area from which students will be enrolled, upon completion of the
project. N.J.S.A. 18A:36C-4b.
The Camden, Mastery and Uncommon applications to the DOE filed April 7th contain
none of the basic information, documentation and affirmations required by the Act for
renaissance school projects. The applications do not provide a description of and
address for the projects. They also do not include the essential documentation
mandated by the Act such as the plans for constructing the projects, how the projects
will meet State school building regulations, and the enrollment attendance areas in
Camden to be encompassed by the project. The applications make clear that they do
not present specific school facility projects for approval at all. Mastery, in its application,
baldly states that it “is not including a facilities address in this application” and that they
“are open to facilities options provided by the District.” In its application, Uncommon
2
states that “[w]e do not yet have a proposed address for the initial school facility in
which Uncommon Camden plans to locate, but can affirm that all Uncommon Camden
campus facilities will be located in the required urban campus area.”
Moreover, Camden failed to provide a DOE approved amendment that incorporates the
new school projects into its Long Range Facilities Plan. Instead, the applications in
large part provide information about the experience of Mastery and Uncommon
operating charter schools in other locations outside of Camden and New Jersey. The
applications do not include any of the elements that must provide the details of where
the project will be constructed in Camden; how the construction project will be funded;
compliance with baseline State building codes; and a delineation of the areas in
Camden to be served by the new school, once the project is completed and the building
is in operation.
2) By Failing to Propose Renaissance School Projects, Camden Failed to Provide the
Required Opportunity for Public Input
The Act mandates that applications for renaissance school projects in State-operated
school district such as Camden contain “evidence” that the State District Superintendent
“convened at least three public meetings to discuss the merits of the renaissance school
project.” The application also must contain “written public comments received during
those meetings.” N.J.S.A. 18A:36C-4b(1). This mandate is essential to ensure notice to
communities and neighborhoods, and allow residents, parents and students in those
neighborhoods to understand the details of the project the district proposes to construct
in partnership with the non-profit entity, and how the new school will serve their children,
once the project is completed and operational.
The State Superintendent of Camden failed to include any “evidence” of the required
public meetings where “the merits” of the projects were presented and properly
considered, nor any written comments submitted on the projects. Nor could the
Camden Superintendent do so, since, as discussed above, the applications do not
contain any of the requisite information and documentation of the location, description,
funding and other elements of the actual projects to be “newly constructed.”
Whatever public meetings may have been held by the State Superintendent, they could
not have afforded Camden parents and residents the opportunity to consider, discuss,
and have input on the “merits” of a renaissance school project, as required by the Act.
To the extent the State Superintendent did conduct public meetings on the Mastery and
Uncommon proposals, they were confined to considering Camden’s intention to have
the Mastery and Uncommon, as large charter organizations, operate schools in
Camden, at some location and at some time in the future. Thus, the applications on
their face demonstrate that the public was not afforded the opportunity for careful
consideration and input of renaissance school projects since, at the time of such
hearings, there were no such projects even proposed.
3
3) The Act Does Not Permit Renaissance School Projects in Temporary Facilities
As discussed above, the Camden, Mastery and Uncommon applications do not contain
the basic information and documentation required by the Act for a renaissance school
project. Both Mastery and Uncommon, however, indicate that they intend to partner
with Camden in operating schools in temporary facilities, including, in the case of
Mastery, an existing and operating Camden public school. There is simply no authority
in the Act that would authorize non-profit entities to operate schools, under the
standards for “renaissance” schools established in the Act, on a temporary basis, while
the non-profit entities and Camden search for locations and develop funding and other
plans to construct a new school, at some point in the future. The Act only authorizes
the operation of a renaissance school in a new school facility, contingent on
Commissioner approval and after construction and completion of the project, in
accordance with the express terms of the Act. In short, the Act does not allow schools
to be operated on a temporary basis in temporary facilities, whether those facilities are
in existing Camden public schools or in some other building.
Please accept these comments on the applications seeking your approval of
renaissance school projects in the State-operated Camden district, filed by Camden,
Mastery and Uncommon on April 7, 2014. For the reasons specified above, these
applications must be rejected, as they plainly fail to meet the basic requirements set
forth in the Act and implementing regulations.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Susan Cauldwell, volunteer organizer, Save Our Schools NJ
Executive Director, Save Our Schools NJ Community Organizing
[email protected]
Julia Sass Rubin, volunteer organizer, Save Our Schools NJ
Chair, Board of Directors, Save Our Schools NJ Community Organizing
[email protected]
cc:
Paymon Rouhanifard, Superintendent, Camden City Public Schools
Camden School Advisory Board
Senator Donald Norcross
Assemblyman Angel Fuentes
Assemblyman Gilbert L. Wilson
Mayor Dana Redd
Mastery
Uncommon Schools
4