School board member responds to concerns

Dear Mrs. Gossett,

I received your letter to school board members that was also published as a letter to the editor in the Frontiersman. I am genuinely sorry that your perception of my actions at the school board meeting, along with some other board members, was one that led you to conclude that Academy Charter School is not supported.

The board, as a group and as members individually, has a deep and pervasive interest in what is best for all students in the district. I base this statement on my having served nearly two years on the board and watching the group in action through nearly 50 meetings, work sessions and the problem solving of what is best for children on many difficult issues.

The acquisition of the 20 acres of land adjacent to Academy Charter School became a much more complex issue than the resolution presented at the June 24 meeting encompassed. The resolution supporting acquisition of the land was written and placed in the board packet prior to having the school district’s attorney being able to fully review it. Just before the meeting, the board received information from the district’s attorney that discouraged the board from adopting the resolution. I’m going to quote from the attorney’s letter to board members because I believe it gets right to the heart of why the board could not adopt the resolution you spoke on.

The attorney says:

“One troubling aspect of the preliminary paragraphs of the Resolution and the actual Resolution itself is that it targets a particular piece of property. That could be construed to violate the Borough’s rules on site selection.

“Site selection for any school buildings is governed by Borough Code Section 19.08.020. Under this provision, a school site selection committee must make all recommendations to the Borough Assembly regarding any sites requested. Once such a request is received, the Committee must follow a very specific process.”

The letter also says:

“There is other language in the Resolution that implies that when and if the Borough purchases property, that it will be Academy Charter School’s property to do with as it pleases. This has raised a question with some board members as to “ownership” of the property. Neither Academy Charter School nor the District would ‘own’ the property.”

Ultimately, the committee referenced in the last paragraph must request a joint report from the planning and land use director at the borough and the superintendent that sets forth suggested school sites considering a number of factors.

Then, the committee must hold a public hearing and only then can recommend a site to the planning commission, school board and assembly.

I hope this response to your letter gives you some insight as to why I and perhaps other board members made the statements we did. I apologize for coming across as harsh and not caring about Academy Charter School, you and your son. I want to hear from constituents of the school district and all points of view. Please know that I’m happy to hear Academy is a good match for your son and I want to see that continue. Offering choice across the district to students and parents is a strength of our district.

Susan Pougher

Wasilla