I said: “A finalized Charter IS a Legal Contract; much like the Constitution of the U.S.”

In retort you say: “So the district’s listing dozens of conditions for discussion and debate and requesting a review of each updated draft seem to be a legitimate part of the process”

So now I say: With this “specific” Charter attempt, the organizers are trying to be cooperative with an emphasis on “Statesmanship, and the art of compromise” as that is the desired way to avoid an all out revolution.

With this “specific” Charter request, we will have to wait and see if the District has any proclivity toward Statesmanship or the art of compromise.

I think G strictly compared it to a (political) contract with the U.S. Constitution being an example thereof.

Also not a coincidence that both documents have to do with setting up a new government of freedom and independance from tyranny!

The Federal Convention convened in the State House (Independence Hall) in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787, to revise the Articles of Confederation. Because the delegations from only two states were at first present, the members adjourned from day to day until a quorum of seven states was obtained on May 25. Through discussion and debate it became clear by mid-June that, rather than amend the existing Articles, the Convention would draft an entirely new frame of government. All through the summer, in closed sessions, the delegates debated, and redrafted the articles of the new Constitution. Among the chief points at issue were how much power to allow the central government, how many representatives in Congress to allow each state, and how these representatives should be elected–directly by the people or by the state legislators. The work of many minds, the Constitution stands as a model of cooperative statesmanship and the art of compromise.

———

char·ter   [chahr-ter]
noun
1.
a document, issued by a sovereign or state, outlining the conditions under which a corporation, colony, city, or other corporate body is organized, and defining its rights and privileges.
2.
(often initial capital letter) a document defining the formal organization of a corporate body; constitution: the Charter of the United Nations.
3.
authorization from a central or parent organization to establish a new branch, chapter, etc.
4.
a grant by a sovereign power creating a corporation, as the royal charters granted to British colonies in America.

——–

con·sti·tu·tionFunction: nounEtymology: Latin constitutio system, fundamental principles (of an institution), from constituere to set up, establish 1 : the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it 2 : a written instrument containing the fundamental rules of a political or social organization; especially cap : the U.S. Constitution

Which of those Amendments would you have voted against? The First? The Fourteenth? The Nineteenth?

With a working-living, long term contract, the Fat Lady never sings…it is always a work in progress.

If that’s the way it works, then why bother to present anything at all? The District is sigining off on the fact that the charter petition meets the required elements. If the steering committee says that what they’re turning in is just a draft – all BS just to get the board to sign off – and they’re not bound by it, how can the district say the charter petitioners have met the requirements? What would be the point of having the charter petitioners present anything at all except for the teacher signatures and the required affirmations? Surely the legislature wanted the authorizing body to verify that the required elements are in place, or they would haven’t written that requirement into law.

Which, I guess, has been the argument of the charter proponents all along: We don’t have to present a plan. All we have to do is present the required number of signatures and the required affirmations and we can do anything we want and you don’t have any say in it. As a taxpayer, community member, and parent, I find that attitude appalling.

But it was my understanding that the charter document is the legal contract that governs how the school will be run. That it’s not just a meaningless draft to be submitted just to get the school board off their back.