The discussion was about whether BCS' K-3 students can be at Blach. The meeting got off to an inauspicious start, with 3 BCS parents talking about how great the integrated K-8 curriculum is, failing to note that BCS currently has facilities at Egan that support such an arrangement. Preventing K-3 on Blach doesn't eliminate K-8 program integration at all.
Then Joe Hurd's opening statement was typical BCS spin: they "compromised" and accepted the split site... but with two conditions that they unilaterally imposed which had absolutely no discussion or support by LASD or the community (allow 250 K-8 students on site and push out discussions of a long-term solution). They claimed they are the only school in Los Altos split across sites. Untrue. Pinewood is split among 3 and Foothill is split between Los Altos and Palo Alto. And then the lie that attempts to appeal to emotion: "children were locked out of school". Um, no they weren't. The lockout happened well before any kids were in school, and only then because BCS blatently ignored the terms in the FUA for 4 months, thus manufacturing their own crisis.
Mark's opening statement centered around the 5 month public process with substantial community input that resulted in the final facilities offer and FUA. Despite LASD requests, BCS failed to provide any details about the program they intended to implement at Blach. BCS asked for 250 kids at Blach, but LASD didn't have enough space to allot for that many kids.
For LASD, the issue boils down to two things: safety of the students, and ripple effect impact on other students at Blach, and the broader community surrounding Blach.
Joe asked specifically about why the restrictions now when previously LASD had K-6 camp schools at Blach, and Stepping Stones is on site. Mark's answer is those sites were/are designed for younger children. The facilities for the camp school had the necessary furnishings, play structures, bathrooms, etc for that age group. And most importantly they were segregated from the middle school students. The current offer makes heavy use of shared space: fields, library, multipurpose room, etc. Younger BCS kids mix and older Blach kids would have trouble mixing.
Mark was blunt: prop 39 does not require districts to build out new facilities for a charter school, so we chose not to incur that expense to do so. Of course now BCS is willing to pony up the money for the play structures. And Wanny asserts that the big kid furnishings will work for K-3 kids. And Joe asserts the bathrooms are already suitable for younger kids. Funny how conciliatory they are about facilities when it is to their benefit. Also surprisingly no mention of how crowded their space is (compared to all the previous legal filings). BCS is perfectly willing to cram them in like sardines now that it suits them.
LASD made it clear they need specifics of the BCS program. So BCS scrambled during a 15 minute break in private to rough out some numbers: start times, end times, number of students, which grade levels would use the site, etc. They were trying to close, trying to get LASD to say "tell us exactly how you will use the site and we'll let you use it that way."
What they seem to fail to understand is that LASD is under no obligation to do any of this. What exactly is BCS conceding that would make this worthwhile to LASD? As Steve pointed out, this process requires compromise. Just because you ask for something doesn't mean you get it. Unless BCS starts putting some skin in the game, they're not going to get anything they're asking for.