DCSD BoE Undermining Trust. Again. School Board President’s Backroom Politics with Charter School on December Agenda
It was eyebrow-raising, to say the least, during the November 19th Douglas County School District Board of Education (DCSD BoE) meeting, when Board President (and apparent chief agenda-decider) Christy Williams unilaterally placed an item on the upcoming December meeting agenda.
The item was a requested release of authorization for a charter school, John Adams Academy, within DCSD’s boundaries. This particular charter school, which has not even submitted a charter application to DCSD, is asking to bypass the established application process and instead appeal directly to the Colorado Charter School Institute (CSI).
Under Colorado state law, if a charter school would like to open in an area where a current school district operates, the school must receive permission, or authorization, from the existing district. John Adams Academy wants to operate within DCSD’s boundaries, which include all of Douglas County and a small portion of Elbert County. Because John Adams Academy does not appear to want to operate under the supervision of DCSD, they are asking to be “released” from their authority, which if granted, would open up the opportunity for them to instead be authorized by the CSI.
To be clear, if DCSD releases this charter to CSI, there would be consequences for students and families in the DCSD community. Charter schools authorized by CSI in Douglas County are not regulated by DCSD policies (an example is Ascent Classical Academy, which was released by DCSD in 2019 because it did not comply with the district’s policy against arming teachers and staff). Operating as a CSI-authorized school within DCSD’s boundaries also means that if something goes wrong – i.e., financial mismanagement, poor academic outcomes, or operational issues – Douglas County taxpayers have zero recourse.
And adding insult to injury, this charter seeks to operate in Sterling Ranch, an area where DCSD already has plans to open a neighborhood school, which will be funded by the recently passed bond initiative (5A).
Talk about undermining the will of the public!
Where’s the Transparency?
The decision to add this item to the agenda was not only eyebrow-raising, it was downright shady.
The rest of the BoE learned of the agenda addition, not through internal communication from Williams, but on social media! It is way out of line for the Board President to circumvent established protocol to accommodate the request of an individual community member (Ellie Reynolds) through back channels.
Reynolds is the current CEO of the Douglas County Economic Development Corporation, which earlier this year underwent a merger and rebranding of Northwest Douglas County Chamber and Economic Development Corp. According to Reynolds’ LinkedIn Profile, she is a graduate of and Advisory Board member for the Leadership Program of the Rockies and also serves on the board for Ready Colorado, a conservative-led school choice advocacy organization.
Her LinkedIn profile also mentions participating in a lecture series with far-right conservative organizations including Hillsdale College, Heritage Foundation, and the CATO Institute. Reynolds’ social media accounts include photos of herself alongside Donald Trump, Mike Johnson, and Lauren Boebert, heaping over-the-top praise on all of them.
Based on her career choices and who she surrounds herself with, it is fair to assume that Reynolds’ advocacy for John Adams Academy suggests an alignment with the far-right extremist movement to privatize public education. And Williams’ willingness to provide her a platform at a BoE meeting outside of the established process is unsettling.
Influential and powerful community members should not receive special treatment, especially when it comes to transparency and accountability in our public education.
The Bigger Picture: A Breach of Trust
This single act of political favoritism could have ripple effects that stretch far beyond one charter school. Let’s not forget, just over a month ago, DCSD achieved the hard-fought victory of passing a bond measure after three consecutive years of effort. That bond, supported by polling data and finally earning public approval, was intended to fund essential district improvements, including a new neighborhood school in the very area this charter school seeks to occupy.
If the BoE releases this charter school to CSI, it effectively paves the way for it to siphon students and resources from the planned neighborhood school in Sterling Ranch. DCSD endured three years of trust-building with the public and three difficult bond campaigns, and it appears that the BoE majority is willing to undermine it all for political favors.
A Disrespectful Contradiction
Meanwhile, DCSD is juggling the delicate task of consolidating elementary schools due to declining enrollment in some areas, while addressing growth in others. Allowing a new charter school in a growth area – right after the community passed a bond to fund a neighborhood school – is more than tone-deaf; it’s downright disrespectful to taxpayers.
For families navigating the closure of their local schools, this decision is a betrayal of the trust the district is asking them to have in their decision-making. Why would one circumstance be subject to data-driven facts, while another is allowed to be influenced by political special interests?
A Lose-Lose Decision
The BoE has backed itself into a corner. If it releases the charter to CSI, it risks alienating the very voters who made the bond possible. If it refuses, it risks angering the Board President’s political allies, the ones who felt emboldened enough to demand this release and secure an agenda item without going through the proper channels and established processes. These supporters are not shy about leveraging their political party’s endorsements and financial backing to wield their influence on the majority board directors. A quid pro quo!
The majority board directors are all up for re-election next year, and it will be interesting to see how these political alliances will play out. And let’s not forget, the bond funding measure was approved by 59% of the Douglas County voters; if this charter release request is granted, it could impact not only the school board election, but future mill levy and bond initiatives in the district.
It’s a Question of Integrity
At its core, the issue isn’t just about this one charter school. It’s about the integrity of the BoE, its commitment to transparency, and its responsibility to the community.
The DCSD BoE needs to clarify a few pressing questions:
Can it legally bypass the application process to release a charter school from its authority? And should that even be an option?
What is the driving force behind this charter’s eagerness to avoid DCSD oversight before it has even applied?
When will the BoE majority realize that it needs to stop allowing political favors to dictate its agenda?
Williams and the other majority directors must honor the voters’ voices over political favors and recognize that releasing this charter school from DCSD authorization is an abdication of their sworn responsibility to the students, staff and families in the district.
