Bullis Charter Renewal: Yes or No?

As the (BCS) renewal comes up for a vote at 5:30 this evening, Wednesday, Oct. 5, at the Santa Clara County Board of Education meeting, opinions are abounding as to the merit, or lack thereof, of the school’s charter.

asserting that the school does not serve socioeconomically disadvantaged students in violation of its charter, stirred up a range of emotions in the community both for and against this week.

At the bottom of this article, you can voice your own opinion in the Patch poll.

Last week's Patch article garnered comments from BCS parents defending the school.

“Hmm, as a parent of a 5th grader at BCS, I have to say that Song's comments appear inaccurate at best, bitter and spiteful more likely. To claim that BCS is not a value to the bigger community it to ignore the facts,” said Marshall Jackson.

He later ticked off reasons BCS does help the community at large: “…BCS trains teachers of socioeconomically disadvantaged students, BCS gives to schools in 3rd world nations, BCS invites socioeconomically disadvantaged students to participate in it's activities. BCS does (and has always) shared its success and recipe with all of those who can benefit.”

Another parent called BCS “a fabulous hub of learning.”

Yet the letters sent from citizens to the board of education are mostly negative, with opinions ranging from calls to revoke the charter, to an acknowledgment that the school is here to stay, but should be held accountable.

“Bullis Charter School is private, but publicly funded, exclusive elementary/middle schools—shame on them for taking public funding that would otherwise go to more needy schools across this county,” wrote Rose Filicetti, a former member of the Mountain View Whisman School Board.

Joe Seither, co-president of the Los Altos Education Foundation writing representing himself only,echoed Filicetti’s comment about Bullis being a private, yet publicly funded school, and told board members in emails that he wants to see BCS go fully private, or fully public without a charter.

 “Bottom line, BCS simply does not conform to either a traditional or charter public school model. After eight years of this divisive affair in our community, I would like to see BCS go fully private—or fully public—through loss of its (county) charter.”

He clarifies that he does not advocate the dissolution of BCS. “It delivers a good product and has achieved critical mass, and therefore should be sustained privately by its community without public support.”

Part of the “divisive affair” he alludes to are the nearly eight years of fighting and legal wrangling that has gone on between BCS and the Los Altos School District,

Both Seither and Jay Gill, co-chair of Keep Los Altos Schools Strong, Yes on E, commented to board of education members how divisive the campaign was, blaming BCS community members for waging an anti-Measure E campaign. The measure won 67 percent "yes", to 33 percent "no".

“Though opposition figures tried to paint themselves as objective observers interested in only improving LASD, they were in reality a group closely tied to BCS and interested in mainly splitting the district the district because of historic differences over facilities and the more recent district decision not to share parcel tax revenue with BCS.”

Santa Clara County Board of Education President Joseph Di Salvo told Patch last week that he believes BCS will get a new charter, but school officials will have to agree to improve its outreach to socioeconomically disadvantaged students.

Tonight will be the test, when both sides get a hearing before the board votes. The meeting is at the Santa Clara County Office of Education, 1290 Ridder Park Dr., San Jose.

Attached to this article are the PDFs of the agenda, staff report and correspondence.

Now here's your chance. What do you think? Vote in the poll, and/or leave comments in our comments section below.