Answer to “Mis-statements”

Answers to misleading statements made by a commenter on Next Door.

Nextdoor is not an echo chamber. Posts reach 14,000+ people. Any one of those people can post their opinion on this topic. Neither side of this issue can ban or delete other’s posts. The site is moderated by a third party.

Fact:  Most ND leads are active Stand leaders, and themselves post pro-Stand comments and do not moderate neutrally (as Next Door requires). Most leads allow angry, vitriolic, falsehoods as answers to non-Stand person posts.

None of those things can be said of the blogs and Facebook pages where RVC supporters are posting now. RVC’s voice has faded on Nextdoor organically because the strength of their argument was lacking.

Fact:  RVC support on ND is rare because of the cruel, false, and relentless attacks Stand wages on RVC supporters. Stand does only one thing – intimidate (bully) RVC and any parents who consider taking their children there. It appears that the district has delegated Stand as their negotiating arm.

The argument boils down to “Just be OK with us hurting you and your kids and taking more than our fair share.”

Fact:  The charter does not hurt RVSD children. Nothing about their education has changed since RVC was established. The money follows the student and so do the expenses. It’s a false attack meant to scare parents out of considering the charter for their own child(ren) and it’s not based in fact.

Now, in certain cases, like with families who feel they have no choice due to their child’s special needs, maybe most could get on board with the request to “just be OK with it” (after all, a greater share of public education resources already goes to meeting the needs of special needs children and most are perfectly fine with that). But, as of now, RVC is not a school for special needs children. It is mostly a school for people who want choice and don’t think public school is good enough for them. It is not surprising that the majority of families with children on Nextdoor are not OK with being hurt so that others can make that kind of choice.

Fact:  The majority of people posting about this issue on ND are bullies and embrace falsehoods to engage in a win/lose proposition instead of urging their leadership to save money and engage in mediation.

And even if that’s not true and many actually are OK with RVC on a philosophical level, there is another layer going on here. The Prop 39, the relentless lawsuits and the constant, unnecessary draining of our resources is probably angering many people who might otherwise be able to shrug off the normal financial loss to their child’s school that comes with the existence of a charter.

Fact:  There are no “relentless lawsuits,” but there have been legal responses to the district refusals to engage in professional mediation. How else should differences be resolved?

So when you add it all up, it makes sense that Nextdoor has become rather one-sided. It’s not bias or toxicity or hate, like RVC supports claim. It’s simply that most people are not cool with what RVC is doing. The harm is real and they haven’t justified it.

Fact:  The toxicity and hate supported and promoted by Stand is recognized across the community, and people often remain silent because Stand has been very successful at intimidation and bullying.

This site does not censor anybody’s comment.
If the comments don’t follow our simple rule to  Behave Yourself  –  (Personal attacks will be taken down), then we take down the comment.
Simple, easy to remember, no censoring, just gone. We allowed you to post anonymously not stupidly. The Marin IJ allows you that outlet.

One other thing: It’s our site so we define Behavior. 

 

107
Leave a Reply

Your name and email are not required to comment.

avatar
24 Comment threads
83 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
87 Comment authors
AnonymousAnonymousAnonymous-EditorAnonymous Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Interesting thing about NextDoor is that there is no anonymity. Also it can be pretty harsh. I had no idea that neighbors could be so quick to anger. It’s also a massive platform for opinions and ideas. Many who are members are not members of other social media platforms. Personally I love the posts of animals being reunited with their owners. But you are wrong about Paul Asper. He’s pretty popular amongst his neighbors. I should know…

- Editor
Guest
- Editor

The reference to Paul Asper was deleted because it wasn’t meant to be a criticism and may have been misunderstood.

John D
Guest
John D

Smart because if you know Paul Asper at all you would know that he loves the discussion and is the number one cheerleader for free speech. He was also VERY critical of RVC (along with some seething comments about the school, leaders and teachers) and had he not just moved his kids to RVC you would most certainly be using him as another kind of example. He is still critical of RVC, actually. He has said that he enjoys the conversation, and has been in the discussion since day one. He is all over ND actually. He is not one… Read more »

BD
Guest
BD

Just yoUr guess . Sure .

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Totally agree with much of the above and CANNOT believe that they think people’s disengagement means that they’re right. Overwhelming majority of people think their echo chamber is a CESSPOOL and lots of people recognize that Stand supporters make up most of the “moderators.” That word is a joke when it comes to what they’re doing.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Well to be fair – moderators are not paid and they just receive a bunch of guidelines. I find them to be pretty neutral. I think we need to recognize that most of the families in this district are pretty decent people. Demonization of either side is just plain wrong. I say engage with your neighborhoods. Say what you want to say. It can be a lion’s den though…. a little thick skin may be required. But that is the nature of the beast with these social media platforms.

Julie Quater
Guest
Julie Quater

I’ve found that most families in this community are wonderful people. That’s what is so sad about the ugliness. I’ve talked to so many people who are proRVC, antiRVC or neutral who all agree that what’s happening is unacceptable.

TB
Guest
TB

Encourage all blogs opposing Stand and the RVSD leadrship tactics to stick around as long as Stand does. Let there be Nextdoor and as many outlets as people want . It certainly sheds some new light.
Trolls are in every debate . Anonymous or not .

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I know dozens of people (including me) who have ended their Next Door accounts because they were sick and tired of all the anti-charter stuff. Stand people have made it their LIFE to fight RVC, but most people just don’t care that much.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

That is incorrect. Many people do care. They just don’t care to write on social media.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

You would be surprised how many people actually really DON’T care. Just talked to a woman tonight–highly educated, kid at Brookside, another at White Hill who really had almost no idea about the charter school issue. Her kids are doing fine, she’s busy with work, and she has other things to occupy her time. As she said, “I think everyone deserves a free education that meets their needs.” She’s really not pro- or anti-charter. She just doesn’t really care about the issue, and there are many more like her.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Stand’s behavior, both online and out in the community, is definitely nasty. It’s bullying. They constantly try to get people to think that RVC folks are bad people. It just isn’t so. They are just people who believe in something different. On Next Door, anyone who is neutral or pro-RVC is jumped on immediately if they speak up. A couple of brave souls kept trying to represent RVC’s voice, but must have realized that it wasn’t worth the hassle. I, for one, would rather have my kid in a school where the adults don’t engage in nasty online dialogue than… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I think this view of “everyone must be bad” needs to stop. Reality check: there are many people just like you or I that are concerned with what is going on, but do not engage in any nastiness.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Point taken. Not everyone is “bad.” But the really vocal leaders of Stand–the small group who are relentlessly trying to poison this community with hate, bullying and intimidation–give the rest of the folks who just want to support their schools a really bad name. A lot of people see Stand magnets on cars and have a very negative reaction because of the actions of a few.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I disagree. I read the comments – mostly cogent arguments. I suspect you see poison because you disagree with the content?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

This is what I believe is poisonous: rather than arguing in a board room or in a court room, Stand puts signs at children’s eye level so kids have to see the message “we hate your school” every day. Trust me, it’s hurtful. Those signs have been up for a year and a half. Why? Because Stand is relentlessly trying to keep parents from enrolling their children at RVC. They hand out “don’t sign an Intent to Enroll form” information to parents who are coming to visit RVC and see for themselves if it’s a good fit for their family.… Read more »

fence Sitter
Guest
fence Sitter

^^^”Stand’s behavior, both online and out in the community, is definitely nasty. It’s bullying. They constantly try to get people to think that RVC folks are bad people. It just isn’t so. They are just people who believe in something different.” Hmm, was that comment an attempt to get one to believe that Stand folks are bad? Do you really believe that a huge portion of this community is bad? One could say the same about RVC folks and this blog and FB page. I personally don’t believe that any (or most) are nasty. I believe that BOTH are fighting… Read more »

AF
Guest
AF

You are obviously not a fence sitter – and I would ask this: when Stand and RVSD were both invited to discuss the facts at the IJ online “symposium,” why did both refuse to attend? It was an opportunity for a rational, civil debate of the facts. RVC and the county superintendent both showed up unafraid to engage, but they had to find someone in San Rafael willing to have a civil discussion from the other side.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

The information Stand is putting out is not all factual, but they repeat their pat phrases so often that people start to believe it. Case in point: Go Public, not Charter. Without a doubt, charter schools ARE public schools. That is a true fact, as defined on the website of the State Department of Education. So when Stand’s basic slogan is a lie, one should question whether the rest of their stuff is true.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

“Why did they make their decisions? Why do they justify the lawsuits, the continual low enrollment, why can they not relocate, why are they not actively pursuing their own location? These are the things that I would like to see from RVC.” A couple of years ago, people from RVC tried to post answers to questions like these on Next Door, but it was totally unproductive. The same ten people kept “yelling” at them no matter what was said, so nothing could be heard. RVC started posting FAQs on its website instead, but it was hard to keep up with… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I read NextDoor and I actually see parents posting under their real names. There is surprisingly next to no personal attacks. Whereas look at this blog. It specifically targets people in a nasty way. Either way both sides need to realize that being nasty will not help. What will is voting. I for one want to see this prop 39 that was entered in the 11th hour by Reed Hastings, repealed. It has caused nothing but divide in this and other districts. Pitted families against families. Charters have a place in the education system. Prop 39 has been nothing but… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Think about it. Our government at the behest of the arms industry takes a huge chunk of our hard earned cash for the biggest military in the world by far. Then those billionaires give us prop 39 and watch with glee as we ordinary families fight over the limited resources they have left us with. Look at the bigger picture.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

The facts were clearly outlined in MCOE’s presentation on charter schools. Link is on the Stand Against Things We Don’t Like page. Basically it was a complete repudiation of virtually everything RVSD has done and Stand has agitated for. The facts are that the laws spell out everything RVC is entitled to….NO ONE is telling Stand not to protest out legislators and lobby to change laws. But from the outset you’ve targeted individuals and families’ choices — and followed Bagley’s lead to pit factions against one another.

MCOE Charter Presentation

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I wonder if you can tell me why the county also denied RVC their charter? AF? Poster above? Anyone else? You say that the county outlines this yet they also denied RVC. I would like to know your take on why? I am a Stand supporter and I don’t just follow anyone. I say what I believe and I believe what I do from doing a tone of research and talking to MAP/RVC/RVSD/Community members. I don’t agree with what RVC leadership has done. I don’t “follow Bagley” even if I do agree with his decisions. I also don’t target or… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Mary Jane Burke always follows the home district. She is a political actor and will not contradict a district or she’d have been dealing with Stand’s wrath and massive capacity to take up all the oxygen in the room as though the charter issue is The Absolute Most Important Thing Ever during a campaign season.

And then, after the election was behind her, her shop put on a charter workshop that basically made it clear that what not to do was to act like RVSD.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Hmm, that says to me that you haven’t done your homework. Why did the county turn down the RVC charter?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

IMPORTANT TO NOTE: This blog is not sponsored by RVC. Neither is the Facebook page people have referred to. Anything official from RVC is on their website or in their board meetings. These online platforms are created and maintained by individuals who are not officials from RVC.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

So why the inflammatory posts smearing Heather and Bagley? Do you think this helps your cause?

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

If you find something we post is incorrect, point it out in your comment and we’ll try and correct it.
No one was smearing anybody, Bennett or Bagley. Everything posted about their “actions” and “statements” is true. A smear would be to say something that’s untrue. There’s a difference.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

We just post the facts along with the documentation. We also allow anybody (even people with overly aggressive attitudes) to comment here (up to a point). As I said., if you find something that’s incorrect bring, your evidence (you’ll have to do better than your comment above, though). Cheers.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

The tone of the posts are nasty.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Just more lies and make believe. Consistent with all the other make believe — screws in tires, projections about RVC families. All built on lies and projections.

On the other hand STAND member posts actual violent hatred on NextDoor – and what does Stand do, immediately remove names “because they feel threatened” making it difficult to identify the threatened as a Stand Member. Ah, but there are screen shots. Just like there are names don the faux “Stand nominating committee”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Isn’t it kind of ridiculous that any of that is happening in our community?

I also wonder how much of it is being done by teens who are sick and tired of it all?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

“Everyone knows” is not factual.

Yes, photos get shared around, but that doesn’t mean something is “sponsored” by anybody. It doesn’t mean people from RVC don’t read stuff on social media like everyone else, and even comment on it. But it’s definitely not sponsored by RVC.

If you want info from RVC, go to their website or their Facebook page.

Truth
Guest
Truth

I would say that this site and the Facebook page is a representation of RVC and that RVC and they speak for RVC. Andrea Sumits is on that Facebook page posting and she is THE founder of RVC. What say you about that? And before you answer consider the below. You continually claim that Stand speaks for the district…I mean you have nicknamed them Standistrict, no? Hate to break it to you but Stand is hundreds of people in this community. So, perhpas we can agree that both are a group of supporters? I would ask that you stop your… Read more »

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

This site doe not represent the RVC. Unlike you, we have found that the deceit, harassment and general bad behavior has come from district leadership, not from the charter. So you can consider us representative of community members pointing out those failures of RVSD leadership. And in that vein, Stand does speak for the district. In fact, Stand is the only voice representing the district. And how would anyone know that they were “hundreds?”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

This site is full of nasty defaming posts from RVC. Wouldn’t it be better to talk about the real issues around setting up your school? Why aren’t your parents here talking about win win solutions instead of being nasty about people on a personal level?

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

You can save your typing a bit by remembering that this site does not speak for the charter. We speak against the behavior of Stand, the RVSD board and the superintendent who works for them when they don’t tell the truth and when they don’t demonstrate even the loosest definition of leadership. And we provide the documentation.

We also print the facts about the California law regarding Charter schools. We document our statements. We recommend commenters do the same. Like, why aren’t you “talking about win win solutions?”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Who moderated that IJ online “symposium”?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Here’s the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtqhBehJu2s&feature=youtu.be

It’s from the Marin IJ Forum series.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Spotswood? Has he been impartial in this discussion?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

He was pretty impartial until Bagley took it upon himself to attempt to intimidate him. Bonehead move.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Did you mean to write “spoken”? Either way, I guess it is just a matter of opinion, isn’t it? I believe that Spotswood has never been impartial and I believe that based on his writings. Not hard to read between the lines.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Yeah there lies the problem — what YOU believe be the truth and then presenting it to unsuspecting peoplenas The Truth, when all it is are the projection of your own imagination. Stating that someone has “close relationships” when you actually know nothing is just more peddling your fantasies and projections as truth

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Nope, actually I know that those relationships go way back. Regardless of relationships, because many “good” journalists can have relationships and still be impartial, that is not the case with Mr. Spotswood. So, it is still my opinion that he is not impartial based mainly on his writings. As it is your opinion that he is impartial.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Spotswood writes a column. It’s his opinion, not impartial journalism. He has certainly reached out to people over the years and formed relationships. I have no idea if he has relationships with the people you mention; we’d have to ask them. But if you’re referring to the many times he’s criticized Bagley, he has reasons for doing so, which he’s stated. You may not agree with him, but he’s criticized particular behaviors that he thinks are inappropriate for a superintendent.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Interesting… why were the rest of the comments on this thread were removed?

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

They were removed for review. Some have been allowed.

Fence Sitter
Guest
Fence Sitter

AF, are you saying that I am lying to you? Your comment felt very unproductive and rude. I am a “fence Sitter” meaning I see both sides, but I don’t agree with your assessment of all Stand and that they are all haters and bullies. I think what you don’t realize is that there is an entire community out there that may not be associated with Stand, or RVC that think one way or another yet you seem to lump anyone that may not agree with RVC tactics to Stand and haters and that is just simply not the case.… Read more »

Fence Sitter
Guest
Fence Sitter

Ps. AF, why do you say I am “obviously not a fence sitter”? Because I call into question some of the content on this page? Because I don’t exactly align with you? Because I don’t bash Stand? Why exactly do you say this? Really, I am curious!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I’m not AF, but respectfully–I believe you’re not a fence sitter because many of your comments indicate that you believe Stand’s rhetoric that is, in some cases, blatantly false, or at least opinions stated as fact. Your comment felt to me like someone who believes everything on Fox News, without acknowledging a huge bias. Having a difference of opinion is fine. But believing everything you’ve heard coming from Stand, a group that is devoted to destroying RVC, is questionable. They put out a lot of misinformation that many people accept as fact, and because they are “loud” and persistent, it… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Please post what blatant lies Stand have told, or what was opinion stated as fact, please post the misinformation that many accept as fact. I am serious in my asking as I would like to know if I have misunderstood something as fact that wasn’t. Thank you.
I think that both Stand and RVC need to always back things up.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Here’s one:
Go Public Not Charter

Charter schools ARE public schools. See definition on the California Department of Education website:
https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/si/ds/dos.asp

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

From Stand Blog – “Let’s break it down: ‘Go Public!’ is a broad-based statement of support for our truly public schools. ‘Not Charter’ clarifies that STAND does not recognize charter schools as truly public. They have little transparency or local accountability, and are often for profit, or indebted to some heavy-muscle lobbying groups. Proponents of charter schools will say that public vs. charter is a difference without a distinction. Respectfully, and strongly, we disagree. The vocalization of this disagreement is a right that each and every one of us can celebrate. Our disagreement is not personal; it is a Civics… Read more »

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

While very passionate, your post is mostly just a rant. Try documenting your statements. Or, better yet, post on Nextdoor or the IJ.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

There are so many things wrong with this post that it seems ridiculous to respond, but here goes anyway. “truly public” — charter schools are public schools (see Dept. of Ed website for definition). It’s a marketing gimmick to say charter schools are not “truly” public. They are, even if you don’t like that they are. little transparency or local accountability — as a public school, RVC’s budget is public, its board meetings are public, it is subject to FOIA requests (and there have been about a hundred of them)–plenty of transparency. And RVC is accountable to the state dept.… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I think there is a lot of black and white thinking here.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

These families are generally all really good people – an both sides. Do I think Conn Hickey was thinking of the good of the community when he used prop 39 – no! But that doesn’t change the fact we are ordinary families who all want the best for our kids. We all must unravel this mess. I force more legislation and control of charters coming. The situation is a mess. Whole neighborhoods have been torn apart.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

foresee….

jaCK
Guest
jaCK

Very true. And these torn apart neighborhoods and relationships, the division is NOT just in the Ross Valley but across this country of ours, not just in the Ross Valley. I think that change is coming too.

John D
Guest
John D

Fact: Most ND leads are active Stand leaders, and themselves post pro-Stand comments and do not moderate neutrally (as Next Door requires). Most leads allow angry, vitriolic, falsehoods as answers to non-Stand person posts. That is not a fact and is in fact, incorrect. Also, how do you know how any lead votes? It has been explained on Next-Door that leads vote after a comment has been flagged, and that doesn’t mean a comment stays or goes, so how do you know how any one lead votes? Please could you provide your proof of this comment, “Most leads allow angry,… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I actually read those huge thread discussions on NextDoor. I see pretty cogent arguments, from both sides. It is a bit one-sided though. But I do not see the vitriol that this post claims. I think the poster may be mistaking the sheer numbers of families that are worried for the claims made above.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

One example (link below), and as said above, there are many more. And by “sheer numbers” are you referring to the same 5-20 repeat commenters? That’s about all we’ve seen. Or are you referring to the way that little cadre of 5 or 10 gangs up on ANYBODY who is brave enough to disagree with the Stand/District propaganda?

Claudia Gibson, Cascades·1h ago
https://nextdoor.com/news_feed/?post=92106361

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Editor, who is your target audience here? Is it RVC families that the school has asked not to read or engage in social media other than there approved sites? This below comment is yet another MIS fact. “Fact: The charter does not hurt RVSD children. Nothing about their education has changed since RVC was established. The money follows the student and so do the expenses. It’s a false attack meant to scare parents out of considering the charter for their own child(ren) and it’s not based in fact.” RVC has cost RVSD way over half a million $$ that could… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

RVSD has chosen to fight RVC every step of the way–that is why the district has spent so much money and time on this issue. All of it could have been avoided if district leadership had been willing to sit and talk with MAP/RVC leaders at any point over the last several years. They’ve refused. No one wants to see that kind of money spent outside the classroom (not RVC or RVSD parents or teachers–we all lose when this happens). Wouldn’t it be great if a mediator could come in and make the two sides talk it out? There’s no… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I think with different MAP/RVC leadership things would have been different. Look at the longevity of the conflict.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

MAP/RVC has been put in a position of fighting for its continued existence for the last several years. Perhaps with different leadership there would have been a different outcome. But the same can be said for district leadership.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

RVSD leadership doesn’t like RVC leadership. Responsible leadership is about having to do what’s best for the community even if it means negotiating with people you don’t like. Otherwise it’s just asking several thousand people to be the victim of RVSD leaders’ grudges and personal feelings. We’re going through that nationally and it’s not working there either.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

If the Rvc families took interest in how their school is run, they would replace their revenge-fueled board with all new members. Doing that and dropping prop 39 would end the dispute.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

Unfortunately, if RVC dropped Prop 39, the district would take all classroom space away from them. A better solution would be for the district to sit down and mediate.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

And look, especially at the RVSD board president and leaders of Stand and you’ll see how long they have been attacking the MAP program.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

With all due respect, RVC walked out of mediated meetings with RVSD and went to charter and now they want mediated meetings again after they have sued, what 3 times, or two and now a third? Are you saying that it’s okay for RVC to hire high powered attorneys that are don’t give a hoot about the financial survival of a public school district, sue RVSD and RVSD should not lawyer up and fight for their rights and the rights of the 2,500 +/- students and teachers? I hope not, but it sure wounds like you are saying, Gee, if… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Please give evidence of RVC walking out of mediated meetings. There have been two lawsuits (the second one is still in process). Where do you get that RVC “doesn’t give a hoot about the financial survival of a public school district”? RVC has tried repeatedly to negotiate with the district over the last few years, but RVSD just won’t talk. Agree that there’s no trust from either side. But the only way to move forward is to try to build trust and to start communicating. RVC is always looking for its own campus but there just aren’t many options.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

RVC did not walk out on meetings with district. The district refused meetings.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

We maintain that district leadership is responsible for the costs. Here is a link to the relevant information you seem to be lacking:
https://rvsd-outliers.com/prop-39-facts-not-hearsay/

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

RVC is a nice addition to our valley for some families. Most people prefer their neighborhood schools. It’s very obvious that the opposition to the charter has more traction. I believe the only way forward is for the charter to disengage from their “legal” right for district space. Prop 39 was voted in by a majority of California voters because it seemed to help public schools get more funding. The part where school districts had to provide classrooms was added on in the last minute and not widely published. Paid for by Reed Hastings no less ( grantor of $125,000… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

RVC would LOVE to have its own campus. But where?

RVC would love to be located at Red Hill. It’s a campus that’s the perfect size for RVC, and RVC offered to pay for its renovation, and to agreed not to use Prop 39 if it could get a long-term lease for Red Hill.

Why won’t the district consider this?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

That ship sailed a long time ago. You are taking us back to court again in November – you you don’t understand why we don’t want a deeper relationship with you.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Have you ever thought to simply rent your own premises? So many problems solved.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Where?
RVC would love to do that and has searched (and continues to search) for locations, but hasn’t come up with any that can accommodate 200 kids and be a rent that a public school can afford.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Most charter schools take more than a year to get approved, so it’s not typical to have a space secured before approval. Although RVC did try: St. Rita’s school was closing and RVC made a pitch to rent it, but they wouldn’t consider RVC a viable tenant without an approved charter and no enrolled students.

The tire store was too small and had no outdoor space for kids. But keep suggesting! It would be great for RVC to find a viable space off district property!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

The former 3r school in San Rafael is for lease. Has outdoor playground space and was built as a school. Also very cheap. $1.05sf. Before you say the state requires you to be in SA or FX why don’t you request the state to allow you room to grow.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

RVC has specifically asked if it can be located out of district and the answer is always no.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

If there’s a will, there’s a way. Plus you guys have a good lobbying hook up with KK of ccsa. San Rafael is way better suited to be your schools home site. You already have about 40% enrollment from there. This is the only way forward. You will not get more than 100+ families in Ross valley under prop 39 but you may gain more if you stop the lawsuits and unethical practices

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

The state has been asked repeatedly, both by RVC and Stand folks. They will not allow RVC to be located out of district. (Ask them yourself!)

Untrue that 40% of enrollment is from San Rafael. About 75% of RVC’s students are currently in-district. More than 120 students are currently from San Anselmo and Fairfax.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Again, not true. A group of people representing RVC made a pitch to St. Rita, but they chose Cascade Canyon, which was ready to move in a few months later, at the beginning of the next school year. RVC hadn’t yet been approved by the state.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Again–state says no. Must be in Ross Valley school district boundaries.

Why wouldn’t RVC talk about it at a board meeting? Because there are a group of hungry tigers out there trying to destroy its school at every turn. They would certainly try to sabotage any deal to relocate.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Interesting response. I guess you don’t realize how “crazy” some of the Stand insiders are. There truly are RVC people who are afraid to speak up because they worry about their property, their children, their businesses, etc.

I agree that most Stand supporters would be happy if RVC moved out of White Hill. But the core group of intense Stand people who are responsible for most of their activity just want to destroy RVC, and won’t be happy until that’s accomplished.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Misinformation. RVC is not “taking us back to court.” RVC is asking the judge for clarification: can the district place a classroom for special education on another campus? Unfortunately it’s going to take until November to get an answer. Stand and the district always deflect when the topic of Red Hill comes up. Why can’t that idea be revisited? That campus is still sitting empty. It was one thing to try to block RVC’s opening by not allowing them to rent Red Hill. But RVC is now in its second year, and it’s looking at a third year at White… Read more »

Observer
Guest
Observer

One of the intents behind Prop 39 was to use empty schools. It’s irresponsible for the district to allow Red Hill to deteriorate when there is a viable renter. And the argument that they can’t rent the space because RVC is litigious is a red herring. First, they are not. One lawsuit was to force the district to be transparent with decision making and the bond committee and the second lawsuit was because the district refused RVC’s compromise for space which turned out to be exactly what the judge ordered by adding space to the agreement. And there is no… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Someone on ND posted about the old Jacks Pharmacy building in San Anselmo. Or what about a location and putting up some yurts or portables. What about using all of the pull of your board member who is also on the CCSA board and getting a revision to locate in San Rafael, tons of space there. WHY is this not ever discussed in RVC board meetings?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Not discussed publicly because RVC doesn’t trust Stand members–they would likely try to sabotage any potential lease.

Wherever RVC locates has to have enough space to accommodate 220 students (full capacity), plus an office and outside play space (or access to a nearby park). It also has to be a reasonable price–not market-rate rent. That’s just not affordable to a public school.

Must be in SA/FX.

Hey, I just heard about a school site with a bunch of empty classrooms in San Anselmo!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Not Josh (whoever that is). The Brown Act is violated when three or more board members discuss issues outside of a public meeting. RVC has been looking at a variety of sites for years–non-board members or a committee of people that may include one or two board members have done this. If a site became available, the full board would discuss it. But note that under the Brown Act, real estate negotiations can be discussed in closed session.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

I must tell you that by commenting to this site you are not speaking to RVC. The fact, however is that the nature of your comment tells me that yes, the district does use Stand as its voice.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

RVC’s voice can be heard on its website:
https://rossvalleycharter.org/

Also its Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/rossvalleycharter/

Or you can come to board meetings.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

So why do you continue to say that Stand speaks for the district? RVSD has it’s own website as does each school and RVSD has board meetings, you can email any of the trustees or the superintendent. Can’t have it both ways.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

They haven’t been deleted. They are being moderated. We’re trying to determine if they meet our criteria for adding to the discussion. We are hoping that commenters will add to the subject they are posting to in a positive way.

Fence Sitter
Guest
Fence Sitter

Editor, I certainly hope that you will put my comments back as they were heartfelt and in no way against your policy, rude to anyone or inflammatory. Thanks.
Also, I hope that you will not be deleting many of the comments, pro rvc or not as many here did not go against your rules of:
This site does not censor anybody’s comment.
If the comments don’t follow our simple rule to Behave Yourself – (Personal attacks will be taken down), then we take down the comment.
Simple, easy to remember, no censoring, just gone.

Fence Sitter
Guest
Fence Sitter

Editor, I see that you have replaced some comments, thank you, but not my first comment that starts with “Julie, et all, ….”
It was in no way attacking or against your rules – Why have you not replaced it?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Personally – i think it’s a shame that pro-charter sites such as this one and the one on facebook resort to this kind of control. Maybe it says a lot about decision making by RVC leadership.

-Editor
Guest
-Editor

This site, as has been said many times, is not affiliated with nor representing the RVC. The “control” you dislike is my personal decision of whether to allow a comment or not. You have plenty of other places to post, no lack.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Really? This blog site is controlled by Julie quarter and lisa canin? Sorry if I misplelled their names. My comment will be deleted even though I “”behaved”. I have never believed our county could swing so far right. Just to defend this charter… . I’ve read posts from RVC people defending Marshall Tuck for State Superintendent of Schools. … that guy is the worst! Are RVC peeps actually voting for this guy? This is a most sorry state for our community and our country.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Your chronic attacks are tiresome and petty. You seem obsessed with people you don’t know…and pretend not to know the difference between gossip with substance.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

The actions of RVC affect us all. It is dividing a community.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Also voting for Marshall Tuck is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Stand cries “hate speech” when valid descriptions of their activities are provided. Perhaps some minimal education is due. Hate speech, by definition, is “speech that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, color, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.”

Not sure how Stand members get to claim protected status – although arguably pathological myopia, tunnel vision and hypocrisy is disabling….so maybe that’s the angle.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

I’m sure it’s uncomfortable for Stand people, after a couple of years of getting away with increasingly inappropriate bullying-type behavior, to have people call them out. It’s much easier to blame the folks who are holding up the mirror than to actually look in the mirror and see how ridiculous they are.

Stand feels that it represents the community, but there are a lot of people in this community that abhor their behavior. You don’t have to be pro-charter to be sick of what’s going on.