Issue link: http://educator.cta.org/i/42291
TAKING A STAND IN JULY, the State Board of Education (SBE) unanimously approved final regula- tions governing California's controversial "parent trigger" law, legislation that allows petitions signed by a majority of parents at one of the state's lowest-performing schools to trigger interventions such as school clo- sure, a change in school personnel, or con- version to a charter. The new regulations replace overly vague temporary ones that had led to severe prob- lems and even abuse, such as when a group of charter organizers called Parent Revolu- tion attempted to orchestrate a takeover at McKinley Elementary School in Compton in December. The new regulations are an improvement upon the preceding ones, but CTA still has serious concerns about them. The hastily written parent trigger law was authored by Sen. Gloria Romero and adopted in January 2010. Bill sponsors thought the law would earn extra credit in 'Parent trigger' law gets new regulations CTA still has serious concerns the Race to the Top competition, but they were wrong. It was never considered. The law caps the number of eligible schools at 75, and so far McKinley is the only school where the parent trigger has been pulled. Aſter the McKinley petitions were submitted, many parents leveled charges of intimidation and misrepresen- tation against Parent Revolution. Some said organizers misidentified themselves as local parents or said that signing the petition would "beautify the school." The organiz- ers and some parents responded with coun- tercharges against McKinley staff members. Largely lost in all this uproar was the fact that McKinley had already been mak- ing dramatic progress the prior two years under CTA's Quality Education Improve- ment Act (QEIA), information Parent Revolution organizers did not share with parents. In May, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge declared the McKinley par- ent trigger petitions invalid for technical reasons, shattering Parent Revolution's poorly chosen showcase and forcing them to regroup. Part of the Wild West atmosphere that permeated the first attempt at using the par- ent trigger law stemmed from the vague- ness of the legislation itself and the lack of clear guidelines for its implementation. As the SBE prepared to act on replacing tem- porary guidelines with final ones, Parent Revolution bused dozens of supportive Los Angeles area parents to Sacramento to tes- tify or simply sit in the audience wearing Parent Revolution T-shirts. Parent Revolution also unsuccessfully challenged the right of board member Patricia Rucker, a CTA legislative advocate, to vote on the new regulations, claiming a conflict of interest. The state's Fair Political Practices Commission found no merit in the complaint. 42 California Educator / September 2011