they have the numbers of teachers. the clerical support to and multiplied out. we don't get the same numbers. it does not mean that we're going to be bankrupt by any stretch of the imagination, but we don't have the same numbers. it is not articulated clearly. there are charter school association templates better very straightforward. most of them are plugged in and execute. i can tell that it is not a formula driven. we have different numbers. that is my biggest concern.

commissioner yee: when you say you have different numbers, how far off are they? i can't read this it is so small, but how much are they stated? >> in yaear one, i'm looking at the benefits page. i'm not sure exactly what you have in front of you. it is listed ont he pet -- on the petition. the my calculations, it would be 639,154. similarly, it is vs 665,000. 656,000 vs 693,000.

so on. they are not huge differences, but it makes me wonder where we are missing here. those are the kinds of things that make me think that it is not where it needs to be in order to have confidence that we would be able to have -- you would have the [unintelligible] commissioner yee: i don't want to go through item for item, but to get a sense, is there someone

in the group that can respond to that particular item? >> if you are answering the question that has come out. we want specifically the differential explanation. >> we develop to the budget based on the previous history. our benefit based on previous histories, quite a lot of our teachers don't take the benefits. we give them incentives. they kind of joint their spouse. commissioner yee: rather than doing average cost of a full- time, you're using actual figures?

>> the budget is very conservative. our current year, the revenues are also lower. we are very conservative. we have received the nonprofit status. commissioner wynns: i don't want to -- and not speaking for other members of the board, the members of the curriculum

committee that voted in favor of the positive recommendation voted against the charter. the deficiency is unrelated to the presentation of the curriculum. this is really difficult work that the staff has done here. it is possible for us to understand. i know is very difficult, and i appreciate the work does -- that has been done. i am unable to support this. i think that we have an ongoing history with the school. i think there is an issue about

this being submitted as renewal. the committee was about how you are new here. we're not responsible for anything that happened before. frankly, i still don't think -- we have the additional burden that is submitted to us as a renewal of a school that does have a very difficult history not only politically but lots of other issues in the community and with the school district. what of the things that has been a difficult in recent years, this school like other charter schools, we don't hold the charter. they have come to us as flirting with the idea of giving up their charter and coming under district management. we have made a lot of

concessions in the interest of trying to pursue -- not just wanting them back, but what does it mean for the district? i also think that this administration has put a lot of effort and staff time into trying to work with her school's that have told us that they are considering making a move like that. for me, that this kind of one of the more recent ongoing complications that we have had at the school. i appreciate that there are people that live in our community that like the school and worked there. in the complex community, there are people -- frankly, i don't

see anything in this new submission that addresses of the of the concerns i have before. i will not be supporting this. i will be supporting the resolution to deny the charter. commissioner maufas: i am in agreement with vice president yee. their questions will have to ask that there is no real chance here for dialogue we have to listen to -- i will try to ask some questions. first, i am looking at the member of the curriculum committee. it was quite strong.

this is a running operating the school. running today, of all students, families and teachers, children are learning. i am on the little -- i can't get my mind around it. it doesn't look like the same thing going forward. can you give me some explanation on this curriculum? it says here that you don't believe you can implement it. is that a recommendation from the wall? >> page 8. at the top of page 8.

the first listed reason -- >> thank you, commissioner maufas. to clarify, demonstrably, that would be the overarching program. the specific findings are included underneath that particular crowns for the nile. there is also another citation on the rental process that specifically cites an unsound educational program. this is the broader context that might include financial rationale. it might include other programmatic elements. we did not include the actual curriculum or the educational program.

>> what is letter l? the district to choose not to attend the charter school? what is that? >> that is the boilerplate answer that is put there. of a transition out. -- how they transition out. >> the separate items, again, they are boiler plate items that are not filled out. >> at the beginning, these packets are fairly comprehensive. the actual recommendations and staff findings start on page 4.

we are just reciting for your purposes to see what the general scope is. >> you made mention that you thought it was clear that something else was submitted to the states in regards -- >> we can't review anythingd ifferen -- anything different. my conversation, when they sent a formal letter of request for review to the district, she was asking me about the petition itself because she was referring to certain sections that i did not have on hand. it was not part of the original petition that i had. my assumption -- it was different from the one we

actually reviewed. in the process itself, what ever petition that we reviewed the that was submitted on september 15, it was submitted to the state on appeal. when the review those findings, they are looking at a petition, but if it doesn't matter, that is where the phone call was made. we started doing citations, it was not the same petition they were referring to. i can only guess that based on the legal review, because it was a different petition, they requested that this new petition be resubmitted and

reviewed in the local district. >> all of that information is what the state saw? >> yes. commissioner norton: yeah. i had a question where you talked about employee rights in the staff commentary? is that common to have that kind of language in interpreting our own policies and procedures? where teachers can take unpaid leave to work at the charter school? is that common? >> it is not common for the charter school to represent that information or any interpretation of our policies or procedures. with our locally authorized charter schools, we do describes -- we have a section around employee rights.

it is very distinct. our policies and procedures, our rights and the charter schools. the charter schools do not propose - - for example. the charter schools cannot make promises to that employee if they return. >> that language is problematic. we can reach agreement with our bargaining partners. we can make certain concessions and offer that to the charter schools. they say that teachers who leave will be a credit when we return here. that is the sole discretion. that will have to be eliminated from this petition.

commissioner norton: were we to vote to issue the charter, that would have to be changed? would the board have to amended prior to a vote in favor? >> yes. >commissioner norton: with our other charter schools, do we have language similar to this? is the unusual piece that the languages here in the charter application rather than in the district? >> there is always a section in the petition itself that would describe it. with the understanding of what the district's policy is and what procedures are. >> we have that language and we have discovered that the language is, in fact, in some other mlu's. the language has to be amended and clean up as the charter's come before the district. it has to be consistent with the

language of the petition. it should be clear to stay in that it is in the district of the discretion whether or not we want to allow such a concession. commissioner norton: you know, this is a tough one for me. i did support this petition at the curriculum committee. i felt this was -- there were some good things happening for kids. i also did not support a petition when the board voted on february 8 because of the deficiencies in the budget. i still continue to see that they want the best for kids. i have got an e-mail from families that believe this is a good program for kids.

i was trying to think, i don't remember and the time that i have been on the board that i have seen the staff recommended denying a renewal before this one. it has happened since you have been on the board? [talking over each other] a renewal petition does seem to have a different standard from the staff. it does make me think very seriously when i have recommendation for the nile. -- denial. i'm just sort of talking out loud, i think. i am troubled by some of the budget deficiencies that have identified. i know that we are all facing an absolute terrible budget outlook.

this is a very tough one for me. president mendoza: before we continue, there is a lot of chatter going on. if you don't mind taking your conversation outside, that is great. it is hard for us to concentrate on what is happening with all of the chatter in the back. commissioner murase: i have questions for staff. what is the length of the proposed charter? what is the time line in the next couple of months? i want to understand the universe of options. if we reject, there is an opportunity to apply for a state charter? are we talking about his standing a school? what the consequences of that? there is such a thing as a

provisional charter. they point out that they can benefit from several months of working back and forth with the community. gosh i can certainly answer the first question, the term being requested. customary is five years for renewal. the next question, was that the provisional question? timeline. it was requested by may 10, only knowing that therir may board meeting was 11 and 12. a fast track to the state board for final decision. this is based on the recommendation of the state charter school division.

the final one, i would pass over to legal. >> it requires a five-year renewal. president mendoza: commissioner maufas and commissioner fewer. commissioner maufas: i don't expect an answer because we are in the process of discussing this. as you can see, we are in the midst of a bit of a struggle with questions and process. because renewal seems inappropriate, it just is. you look like a new entity trying to start off using the same name, but you are doing something different than the previous associations. because this renewal has

constrictions, we are restricted by that. the idea of renewing for five years is not something that i would be in favor of. as you are trying to get traction on what you're trying to do, there is a learning curve to do it on your own. i think we desperately need the help of the district and i don't think you can get it in the five-year plan. that means you do something without really coming back and getting assistance. my question is, is there a possibility when they are sent back to us to reapply? is that in the mix at all? are we still wrangling the application -- renewing the application period? you're shaking your head yes.

>> our obligation is to follow the procedures and protocols with and the renewal process. we have to focus on the issue at hand and the review parameters. yes, we have to stick to the renewal process. commissioner fewer: i don't see this as a renewal, i see this as a new school. we have charter positions before us. we have responsibility that is going to be sound -- they are

struggling around this decision. perhaps they did not have ample time to discuss the budget and financial issues. as chair of the budget committee, i would suggest that if you're feeling so conflicted about it, i would be willing to call an emergency budget committee meeting if other members of my committee are agreeable also. to have a more in-depth conversation on it. i realize we are a lot of very short time line. i don't think we can add anything on to lead. >> you need an answer by may 10

. commissioner fewer: you need it by the 10 or on the 10? >> for the state to agendize, tehhey need it by the 10th. their meeting is the 11th and 12th of may. commissioner fewer: we have another meeting may 3. we could vote at that meeting if you wanted to agendize it. the budget committee would have to meet asap on this. >> could you call a special

meeting after the meeting which has already been noticed? >> the 28th you mean? may 3? >> you would have your budget meeting prior and we would have a special meeting after the closed session. >> when would we hear this item at the budget committee meeting? >> it would be a special budget meeting. >> you can have any meeting you like at any point, you just need 24 hours to post an agenda. from a brown act perspective, if

you chose to do that, you can post the special meeting at a few want. >> correct me if i am wrong, is that 24 hours' notice? we could notice a special meeting after our budget meeting on the twenty eighth and be here until midnight? is that correct? so i'm just going to put that out there. if members of the budget committee wants to augment that, they can view the full to order. -- charter. >> it is a special ed redesign

meeting. we have a closed session to talk about employee layoffs. it will be a long night. i would like a yes or no vote and not a lot of discussion. but providing information in the meeting to have a very clear and distinct a session. that was my children telling me what to say. >> i accept the recommendation to have a special meeting on thursday. >> we are not adding this item

to the existing budget agenda, but we would be calling a special meeting right after. that would be the whole board, it would be a special meeting? it doesn't matter. we would vote on may 3. the only worry i have about may 3, i always worried about special ed not getting the time that it needs. if we can do that peace first and if we have to do a vote after, i want to do the special ed first on that agenda. >> this would be at the end. >> just a concern. i know what our timeline is. may 3, which is a week before the tenth, may not -- i'm not certain one week is enough time to fast