As Steve Jobs once said, “You can’t please everybody.”
There is a new opportunity for the people of Alamogordo to work together to improve high school education. Show your support. Public comment is accepted until 5 pm on the 16th of July, 2024, and may be emailed to charter.schools@ped.nm.gov. We cannot let a destructive, loud minority frighten the Public Education Commission away.
The New Mexico Public Education Commission held a public input hearing in Alamogordo on Thursday, July 13, 2024, to an audience hosted at the Sgt. Willie Estrada Memorial Civic Center. The Founding Committee of the Sacramento School of Engineering and Science Charter School (SSES) was in attendance. Seated as a panel were Founder Cindy Stong, Program Design Consultant Michelle Perry, PhD, Principle Lorrie Black, and Principle Dr. Klump in support.
About 44 interested citizens were in the audience, including several parents, public and homeschooled children, teachers from nearby school districts, Mayor Susan Payne, and Lieutenant Colonel Esther Anderson, the new 846th Test Squadron Commander. Several elected officials and other city and base officials were also present.
An inspection of the sign-in roster suggested exciting aspects. Most in attendance supported the Sacramento School of Engineering and Science Charter School, of which only 20% indicated their desire to speak before the commissioners. Most of the few who registered in opposition elected to speak—both of them.
The event began with a 20-minute presentation led by Cindy Stong, who presented a brief overview of the facts presented to the Commissioners in the charter school application, which persuasively justified the need for a STEM-based charter school in Alamogordo. Stong noted that the MainGate Education Committee continues to develop its vision into an exacting executable plan, the final budget for the facility, and program content. Injected later, Stong noted that precise details for facility, transportation, and meal delivery remain undecided as Federal Funding results for their $2 Million grant application are contingent upon the charter approval. Greater detail will be provided in the launch record report.
The presentation of the vision was persuasive and aspirational, focusing on creating a system of excellence to provide science and technology education. What could have been more apparent to those observing were the ongoing opportunities to enhance the fiscal plan and further develop the information presented as submitted in the original application.
Founding Committee members stated that many details will likely remain unsettled until the end of summer when final grant and facility negotiations can be reported. Their work to assemble a proficient, diverse Governing Board is ongoing. All interested persons are encouraged to apply (Alamocharter@gmail.com). What is less clear is whether a fiscal plan is solid enough for the Commissioners to move the project forward and allow the exceptional Founding Committee members the time to deploy this new educational opportunity for Alamogordo students.
And that is the six-million-dollar question.
After Stong and other members of the Founding Committee presented, the room was opened to public comment. Not surprisingly, it became apparent that sometimes you can never please everybody. One person harkened back to racism in the 1800s, and another implied it was an unconscionable waste to have to purchase additional microscopes.
Hope Morales, the New Mexico Executive Director at Teach Plus, attended virtually and was the initial commenter. She expressed that students deserve a quality education and that charter schools provide access to more options.
Caroline Atkinson, opening in-person communication, stated that she saw no downside to having more educational opportunities like this charter school.
Next, John Davis spoke about how separate is not equal and that money should stay with APS, precluding the need to duplicate purchases of microscopes.
Rep. John Block, speaking of his own charter experience, claimed he wants to give Alamogordo students and parents—a choice like the one he had, which helped build him into who he is today.
Joanne Vullo spoke on behalf of LULAC and, reading from her iPad, spoke to poor advertising by the Founding Committee, seemed to ignore that the development of a diverse Governing Board remains an ongoing and mandatory task, and expounded on the history of inequity and segregation that existed in Otero County in the early 1900’s. Moreover, and what seemed to surprise other attendees, was her assertion that the Sacramento School of Engineering and Science Charter School is only for homeschooled kids, cited discrimination, and that she wants it to be a private school.
Ted Brinegar, a parent of five school-aged youth and associated with Holloman AFB, spoke of the need to master the skill of acquiring skills. His story told of hope for his youngest three and how the two oldest children had to look outside the APS curriculum to learn how to create tangible things and study project management. SSES Charter School is designed to meet the core needs of students who must acquire and master skills.
Nolan Ojeda also spoke of his charter school opportunities and how they helped prepare him for his military service and confidence in public speaking.
Dave Dooling, a former space museum educator, spoke in favor of the charter application and wants to see a mechanism for identifying at-risk students.
Following the few public comments, a number not unexpected given the tendency of Alamogordo residents to avoid unwarranted criticism, the agenda flipped to questions from the Commissioners to the Founding Committee members.
The Commissioner question session proved the agenda’s most exciting and impactful part. Cindy Stong and Michelle Perry fielded most of the undirected questions, asking for details and expansion on the information presented in the charter application. Careful attention was required to glean that the Commissioners were constricted to only those facts presented in the original application—an application published and publicly available on the Public Education Department website for weeks.
Although the list of questions and challenges to the nuts and bolts of how this charter would operate seemed revealing, Founding Committee members responded openly and candidly about the facts presented in the application. The Founding Committee noted several times that the final details on the Governing Council, the scope of the final budget, including the exacting details and final plan for the facility, transportation, and meal delivery, will occur immediately upon receiving the results of the grants requesting $2M+ in private, state and federal funding; unrelated to any state funds which follow each student.
Minor discrepancies were noted in the 350+ page application, including projected teacher-to-student ratios, which Perry acknowledged. Perry added that separate line-item budget accounting exists due to the expectation that some students in the beginning phases might need remediation, class credit recovery, and course evaluation, but the need will decrease as the school evolves. She acknowledged that items will require continuous review during the final planning periods.
Credit goes to the entire MainGate Education Committee, and the impressive application the Sacramento School of Engineering and Science Founding Committee submitted. Positive statements published in the Public Education Department’s Peer Review Comments note that the proposed mission and vision are compelling and unique. The instructional philosophy provides academic rigor with the needed focus on the school’s mission, and including AP and PLTW strengthens the educational framework. Vital to our community, the review also highlights the solid plans for board structure and targeted qualifications, strong internal procedural controls, and the impressive amount of outreach done among the Alamogordo community and businesses.
The meeting concluded with a statement of appreciation for the founding board’s intent and passion. Cautionary statements highlighted that much work needs to be done. Unsurprisingly, concerns over financials, from building to equipment to staffing, will exist until the results of grant approvals are known.
The next step is for the Commissioners to present follow-up questions to the applicant for further comment. In mid-August, a vote will be held to approve or reject the previously submitted application. Again. Public comment is accepted until 5 pm on the 16th of July, 2024 and may be emailed to charter.schools@ped.nm.gov.
