Letter to Trustees Regarding the Approval of the MacArthur Park Charter Petition
The Board’s January 8th vote to approve the MacArthur Park Charter School petition compels me to write, as the decision raises serious questions about governance, equity, and trust in professional expertise.
What troubles me most is not just the outcome of the vote, but the manner in which it was reached. In accordance with the California Education Code, district office staff conducted a thorough analysis of the charter petition and concluded it should not be approved due to statutory, fiscal, and programmatic concerns. Their analysis made clear that approving the petition would reverse the financial savings achieved through the closure of Prestwood, introduce new and ongoing costs during a period of fiscal recovery, and ultimately undermine the district’s ability to provide stable educational services.
To see four of five trustees set aside that professional analysis, particularly given the district’s fragile financial position as a Basic Aid district with many fixed costs, was astonishing and disheartening.
District staff further determined that the proposed charter would substantially duplicate programs already offered by the district, including STEAM programming, and that the district has sufficient capacity to serve students in the geographic area affected by the Prestwood closure. These findings call into question the rationale for approving a new charter school when the district is already able to meet students’ educational needs through existing programs and sites.
District staff exist to provide expertise, safeguard the district’s long-term stability, and ensure that decisions are grounded in law, data, and equity. When their analysis is dismissed so readily, it raises serious questions about the integrity of the decision-making process and the role of evidence in governing Sonoma Valley schools.
I also feel compelled to address the impact this decision, and the surrounding discourse, has had on district educators, particularly at El Verano School. After working for 18 years alongside colleagues I highly respected at Flowery School, my position was eliminated, and I accepted another position at El Verano. While the transition was initially challenging and stressful, I have since been consistently impressed by the talent, experience, and dedication of the staff. These educators are thoughtful, skilled, and genuinely committed to their students and families.
For that reason, I was disheartened to hear El Verano students referenced in a manner that reduced their school to test score outcomes, particularly given that El Verano serves a majority Latino population and a large number of English Language Learners. Such comments, made publicly by a trustee, undermine educator morale and reinforce harmful narratives about schools that serve diverse communities.
The district invited Prestwood families to visit other elementary schools as part of the closure process. Up to this point, only one Prestwood parent, who also teaches there, visited El Verano. Beyond this single visit, there has been no apparent interest in learning about El Verano and what it offers students. This lack of engagement is difficult to reconcile with claims that existing district schools cannot meet families’ needs.
Equally concerning is the broader implication of the charter approval itself. There is a growing and difficult-to-ignore perception that support for this charter is driven, at least in part, by a desire to avoid increasingly diverse school communities. As both a parent and an educator, I value diversity as a lived experience. My own children’s education in a multicultural school shaped them in lasting ways. They are now adults who value collaboration and cultural understanding, qualities that developed because they learned alongside classmates from many backgrounds. The Board’s support of an effort that appears to insulate a group of children from Sonoma Valley’s unique diversity is profoundly saddening.
Public schools are one of the few remaining spaces where children from different cultures, languages, and life experiences learn together. Decisions that fragment that shared experience under the banner of “choice” risk undermining equity, inclusion, and the collective responsibility we have to all students, not just those with the loudest voices or greatest access.
I urge the Board to reflect carefully on the message this vote sends to district staff, educators, and families who believe in strong, inclusive neighborhood schools. Transparency, accountability, and respect for professional expertise must remain central to your work as trustees.
Thank you for taking the time to consider my perspective.
Sincerely,
Justina Montano
Very well said. Unfortunately, money and connections, as they often do in institutional decisions, still prevail in the face of facts and simple logic. The fix is in, and it’s blatantly obvious.