Charter School History Lessons, Joseph A.

Hawkins

I was involved with the first Montgomery County public charter school application, a proposal to
open the Jaime Escalante Public Charter School, a secondary school with less than 400 students in
grades 7-12. That first charter school application was submitted to the Montgomery County Board of
Education on September 13, 1999. On March 14, 2000, the Board voted to reject the application. A
second Escalante application was submitted to the Board on March 1, 2001, and more than a year
later that application also was rejected by the Board.

I’m now on the Global Garden Public Charter School Board, an entirely different group that applied
to open a public charter school in the county. Last summer (2010), the Global Garden application
was rejected by the Board. Global Garden’s appealed its rejection to the Maryland State Board of
Education. In a recent Gazette editorial (“Endorsement interference,” 2/2/2011), the merits of that
appeal were discussed.

But instead of taking issues with the Gazette’s viewpoint on the appeal, I thought since I have been
involved with two entirely difference applications, it might be interesting to compare experiences.
Here is what seems different:

• Public dialogue is out. The Escalante group was provided lots of opportunities to explain its
school in public. We had multiple scheduled Board discussions. And as I recall events, those
Board exchanges were true dialogues. Board members did not ended up where we wanted
them to end up, but we got lots of face time. MCPS now seems to be telling charter
applicants that presenting anything at the Board table is out. No dialogue. No discussion.
Why are charter applicants being frozen out of public face time?

• Access to Board members is out. In addition to the public dialogues, the Escalante group
was given a lot access to Board members, as well as to other elected officials (I had to get
businessman Abe Pollin to arrange a meeting with Doug Duncan, then the County Executive,
but Duncan met with us). Board members talked to us directly. We lobbied openly (after all,
it all about counting the votes). Now Board members hesitate to meet with applicants. A few
Board members said they cannot talk or meet privately. Citizens lobby the Board for
everything. Why are charter applicants being told they cannot have such access?

• No review by a panel of outsiders. The second Escalante application was reviewed by an

outside panel of experts. The outside review was a suggestion made by the Escalante group.
We thought the wrong people were on the panel, but the fact is MCPS was smart enough to
use outsiders. It appears as though no such impartial review will take place for current charter
school applicants. That is a shame because this is a region with some of the most highly
qualified charter school experts in the nation. Surely MCPS can muster up a panel of experts.
Why wouldn’t MCPS and the Board tap into such expertise?

Recently, a friend—someone who knew I was involved in two different applications over more than
a decade—asked me if I thought a public charter school would ever open in Montgomery County. I
dodged the question. Honestly, I’m not sure. I think, however, I would answer the question if I
simply had more faith in the application process, including a willingness by the Board to engage with
applicants.

1 |Page
 Charter School History Lessons, Joseph A. Hawkins

Jaime Escalante Public Charter School

Timeline

9/13/1999, First full application submitted to Board of Education.

11/3/1999, “Charter school before board,” Gazette. Board President Reginald Felton has said the
project would be approved only if organizers can convince the board that the school would provide a
unique service. Otherwise, he said, creating a charter school could signal a loss of faith in the school
system and drain resources from it.

11/9/1999, Board meets to discuss application; Board votes 4-4 to table decision. The Board instructs
MCPS staff to aid applicants with finding a facility. See 11/10/1999, “Board meeting leaves charter
school in limbo,” Montgomery Journal.

2/8/2000, “Charter Schools Gaining Ground,” The Washington Post. Maryland’s first charter school
bill moves toward passage.

3/3/2000, “Plan for southeast consortium may block charter school’s path,” Gazette. Board President
Reginald Felton wanted to hear a more economical charter proposal that would target an even more
specific group of students, ‘a kind of alternative academic program for under 100 students,’ he
said. Organizers could even lease commercial office space or a storefront, he added.

3/14/2000, Board votes 5-3 to reject application.

6/22/2000, “Escalante folks irked by plan,” Montgomery Journal. A building (Montgomery Hills)
deemed unfit for use by a proposed county charter school soon may be leased to a private school in
Northwest Washington, prompting outrage from organizers of the planned charter school.

9/29/2000. “Charter backers garner reprieve: state says board owes explanation to Escalante group,”
Montgomery Journal. The Maryland State Board of Education found the Montgomery County school
board did not follow some of its own rules when it rejected a proposal to create what would have
been the county’s first charter school in March.

10/4/2000, “Charter group gets a chance to appeal,” Gazette. The Montgomery board wrote to the
Escalante group, explaining that its charter application had been denied. Board President Patricia
O’Neil of Bethesda said in the letter that board members gave their opinions before the 5-3 votes on
March 14 rejecting the application, and she said the applicants could view a videotape of the
meeting.

10/13/2000, “Foundation gives grant to charter group,” Gazette. The Walton Family Foundation last
week awarded a $10,000 planning grant to a group trying to establish Montgomery County’s first
charter school. The Arkansas organization founded by Wal-Mart magnate Sam M. Walton and his
wife, Helen, also said the Jaime Escalante Public Charter School Steering Committee could get
$100,000 or more if the group wins a formal charter from the Montgomery County Board of
Education.

3/1/2001, Second full application submitted to Board of Education

2 |Page
 Charter School History Lessons, Joseph A. Hawkins

5/29/2001, “Panel probes charter school application,” Montgomery Journal. School officials will not
release the panel’s report, currently in its draft stages, for at least three weeks. Weast will use the
final version to make a recommendation to the Board of Education, which is scheduled to act on the
charter application July 26. To help develop a facility plan, the Escalante group has partner with the
National Council of La Raza, the nation’s largest constituency-based Hispanic organization. NCLR
would lend the school a planning grant of up to $50,000, according to the terms of a March 30
agreement. Upon local approval, it also would be eligible for a grant up to $150,000. Further grants
up to $100,000 each, as well as loans, could follow.

6/27/2001, “Charter school group gives charges to panel,” Gazette. Article about the outside panel
The Jaime Escalante Public Charter School group—which hopes to open the first independently run
public school in the county and the state in fall 2002—last week gave school officials a 13-page
supplement to the lengthy application it submitted in March. The group supplemented its application
because it had only one scheduled meeting with the blue ribbon panel, and the applicants had no
prior knowledge of the panel’s questions. Hawkins said. School system officials last year supplied
questions before meeting the Escalante group, he added.

10/24/01, “Planned charter school gets surprise reprieve: Maryland project wins a month to find
space, The Washington Post. Supporters of a proposed charter school in Montgomery County won
unexpected support yesterday but no firm approval when the Board of Education granted then an
additional month to find a place to house their program and private sources to fund it. In a 5 to 3
vote that surprised even the backers of the proposed Jaime Escalante Charter School, the board
offered to help the group find an existing middle and high school to house a program designed for
average students, most of them minorities. Board member Walter Lange concurred that the Jaime
Escalante school concept is worth exploring but cautioned that he would support it only if it does not
drain money from existing programs.

3/12/2002, Board vote denies charter.

3/22/2002, “Montgomery board slams door on opportunity for students, Gazette (editorial). “It was
interesting to watch the political posturing during the March 12 board meeting. Steve Abrams would
vote “no” on the application only if denial were based on a lack of funds, and he wanted the policy
withdrawn. But the policy is not the problem. Although Superintendent Weast has yet to publish
regulations to implement the policy, he had established a process for application to be evaluated by
an outside panel of “experts.” In the case of the Escalante application, no panel member had any
practical experience with charter schools, and one—a banker—confessed that he knew little about
education and nothing at all about charter schools.

------------------------------

The Escalante group did appeal the rejection of its second application. There are lots of dates
between the final rejection and complete dissolution of Escalante on 8/8/2005.

There is one specific thing worth pointing out. And it is very important. Escalante settled its appeal.
There was a promise by MCPS to purse and establish a KIPP school in the county (I have a copy of
the 5/20/2003 letter from MCPS Chief Operating Officer making this promise). MCPS even

3 |Page
 Charter School History Lessons, Joseph A. Hawkins

promised to establish a KIPP work group, and include members of Escalante on the group. A KIPP
school was never established.

4 |Page