Judge Considers Bullis' Motion Against LASD

For those expecting a resolution in the Bullis Charter School case Monday, or full-throated arguments debating what form a solution should take, the court hearing in Santa Clara County Superior Court that afternoon had neither.

Parents, school board members from BCS and LASD, Los Altos and Los Altos Hills city council members and lawyers for two amicus groups filled Department 2 in Judge Patricia M. Lucas’ court.

Lucas, after extensive questioning of lawyers on all sides did not rule from the bench, so all parties now simply await her decision.

“I was hoping we’d talk about the substance of the case,” said BCS attorney Arturo Gonzalez. Nonetheless, “we’re prepared to abide by the court’s ruling.”

During the hour and a half proceedings, the judge said she was concerned about whether the court had the jurisdiction to rule on any of what she was being asked to do by Bullis Charter School (BCS). BCS had asked the judge to compel the school district to give it one of four existing school campuses—Almond, part of Covington, Gardner Bullis or Santa Rita—by 2013-14 school year and to negotiate with BCS over getting a larger share of Egan Jr. High in the 2012-13 year.

Lucas asked BCS lawyer Gonzalez how it was that theconcerning the specific circumstances of 2009-2010 BCS facilities, could be used to address specific circumstances of the 2012-13 year? Had the facts stayed the same, three years later?

Gonzalez argued that they had, that the major difference is that the BCS had significantly more children—100—but much of everything else, school campus acreage, for example, was the same. Los Altos School District attorney Ray Cordozo, however, contended that many things had changed since then, and urged her to "make them follow the ordinary path” in this instance, which is to file a new case, based on those new circumstances.

Among them, BCS had expanded two more grades. The district’s offer this school year includes Blach Intermediate School, which was not part of the calculations examined in the 2000-10 case.

“What am I supposed to do with the fact that we have junior high schools now?” the judge asked Gonzalez.

“For starters, you can pretend the middle school doesn’t exist,” Gonzalez said, arguing that the court had jurisdiction as it concerned BCS’ K-6 grades that were part of the space calculations in the 2009-10 suit.

“ How can I pretend the junior high schools don’t exist?” Lucas asked.

The judge asked the two lawyers from the two amicus groups whether they had anything to offer on the jurisdiction issue.

Audra S. Ibarra, lawyer for a parents’ group called the , told the judge that the idea of giving up one of four schools had not even been part of the 2009-10 lawsuit and the subsequent appellate court decision. If it had, parents would have immediately filed to intervene, she said. To consider compelling the school district to give a school to BCS now would mean that parents would be left out in the cold, she said. 

After one last round of questioning, Judge Lucas was done.

One thing appeared clear. Courtrooms could be a fact of life for a long time. Gonzalez said he'd advise his clients to file another lawsuit because the facts are strong, the facts are compelling."

“This is a very long process and we’re fully committed to a positive ending, “ said Anne Marie Gallagher, a member of Bullis Charter School board. “Changing public institutions is hard.”