Two more groups have applied for friend-of-the-court standing in the Bullis Charter School-Los Altos School District litigation over facilities space.
Underscoring the broader stakes involved in the dispute over “reasonably equivalent” space for charter schools under Proposition 39, the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) filed for amicus curiae standing Monday, followed by the California School Boards Association (CSBA) on Tuesday.
A week ago, the Huttlinger Alliance for Education, a parents group representing the interest of district students, filed an application for amicus curiae. Amicus curiae is defined as "one (as a professional person or organization) that is not a party to a particular litigation but that is permitted by the court to advise it in respect to some matter of law that directly affects the case in question."
The CSBA, representing about 1,000 governing boards of Kindergarten-12th grade schools and county boards of education throughout the state, argued that the case will have “direct and profound” on the members of CSBA.
The school administrators association, representing 16,000 school leaders across the state, argued that it has a “compelling interest” in the matter, and a desire “to resolve this very important question of what standard school districts should follow in their attempts to comply with Prop. 39.”
The school administrators association highlighted the trust necessary to be placed in school administrators who must balance all the interests of students in carrying out facilities sharing, and that the court should rightly give deference.
“The law in this area is straightforward: Allow school administrators to strike a balance within the existing legal framework. California law requires that when, such as here, a facilities offer is the result of a careful and reasonable analysis, the Courts should not intervene.”
The school boards association urges to the court to reject BCS’ demand that the school district provide a school for its express use, and that the district must consider program, fiscal and operational concerns as well as the impact that a decision has on families.
"One issue before the Court is particularly disconcerting: Whether Prop. 39 should be interpreted in such a manner as to compel a school district to close a neighborhood school—with the resulting displacement and disbursement of hundreds of students—in order to provide the charter school with exculsive use of this site," wrote Dina Harris, attorney for the California School Board Association and the Education Legal Alliance.
The brief urged the court to deny the BCS request to exclusive use of a school site, calling it "overreaching."