reviews did word of education this is nothing decision of the of the judge and in the nature review there has to be a rational purpose for a statute to guide the there to instill competition and competition sometimes comes with costs it's going to it's going to be painful to someone because competition isn't an easy thing to  district effective on the other hand you say just because we have these resources financial resources doesn't mean a charter school should be granted either so when do you grant a charter school no one will drive which will destroy the business that's the so it's clear this area no that's true in every case in every case where there's a charter school that is approved there's going to be a lot of students at a loss of the funds that are attached p created as well as the illinois state board of education review of that decision and those factors must be considered and and they were in this get if if this panel this decision is that other that's perfectly appropriate to grant a charter school to exist with the financial disadvantages in this record there will be a thousand try to schools in the sake understand this area we're not we're not the obvious meet that generated the hardest school proposal for a change in the educational system that isn't adequately serving according to the in the according to these peers they're looking for a an alternative school district or an alternative choices school what what what what happens to them what happens to them  agree with with counsel that the overall decision obviously is for field for clear air which is a very deferential standard of review but in that but the but the key components of the course of the board's decision i reviewed separately and  are there i go there are there is some concern that the components before the state board were not components that were presented to the district well i think there are there are several components of the district already knew the the most important one i think is that they'd be district has consistently consistently had a very healthy surplus consistently it's this thirty five forty nine does whatever whatever it ended up being is not a runoff it wasn't a  windfall they have been very fiscally prudent to their credit to the district's credit and it is that it's so that it's run of the facts and it's and it's undisputed and in fact we know that that it was healthier than than the district thought it would be consideration of the record i guess it's only state board adopted i mean if you're if you're asking me if i think that the district would would be in favor of the proposal no i don't think so but obviously that's a question in the savings that they will achieve by losing students and i don't think anybody thinks that is certainly the school board didn't say that they're going to say for every every student dollar they leave the point to achieve student dollar savings i mean that's not going to happen you i you know with respect to the charter school that it can't be proportional you do still have fixed costs you have you know you have three buildings you have this but you have other variable costs you have you're going to have to district has to make hard choices just as it would have to make hard choices if it didn't get you know funding from some other source they have to look at administrative salaries for example they have to look at administrative ratios they have to look at class size they have to look at whether they're going to have a new administrative building they have to look at all of these things and say i was saying savings over time to achieve to to not force the the district into bankruptcy there were again there were two there were two opposing views at the hearing one said they're going to be able to phase it in they're going to have to make hard choices that they're going to be able to face again over the four years and the other you know the the financial people for the district said no we're not going to be we're going to go into bankruptcy in three years instead of two and now just facially if you look at that that doesn't make any sense because what they would have been saying is if you have a thousand students at one hundred twenty five percent we're going bankrupt in two years but then but then they're also saying if you lower the students by fifty percent and if you lower the to five hundred students at one hundred percent even lower by like sixty percent we're still going to go bankrupt in the third year i mean that just just you know you can look at the hear those numbers and go that doesn't make sense and that's even remember mr best from the from the state board said you know i don't know what kind of savings there but she did testify that there was going to be a financial detriments in two thousand and fourteen this which is as a fourteen but she goes you know i'm using numbers that i don't know what they're going to do i don't know what kind of savings th going to have i don't know what what they're going to do about benefits i don't know what they're going to do about salaries i don't know what they're going to do about their buildings i don't know what they're going to do so she just didn't have enough money and enough knowledge rather information from the school district and this interesting lea dollar savings you know if we all know you know there was if your kid goes out to college just still have the mortgage analogy at the hearing well if your kid goes off to college you still have your mortgage but you don't have that milk bill anymore your insurance for going down your car insurance will go down because a kid has his own car and so on so you would she either savings you're not going to choose one for one savings but you are going to achieve savings because you're going to lose in the end twelve percent of your student body and you're not going to have the same costs when you lose twelve percent of your student body i mean that just doesn't make sense you know that means that you've you've increased your class size you've increased your you're and administrators you know student ratio if increased everything i mean that doesn't make sense they are going to lose money there's no question about that because that's the case with ever greater exactly this is and the superintendents recommended decision acknowledged this it says under the statutory scheme it's unavoidable that that this for the district really like every school district is going to lose money but that's the decision that the that the general assembly made as a matter of public policy and and in the rest it's it's you know economically unsound unless unless they really  become insolvent now running back to the procedural issue remember the the script district did not respond to the to the documents that these charter school submitted in response to the school board saying we need more information remember that the charter school said you know i know that originally we're talking about a thousand students or one hundred twenty five percent but now let's talk about a thousand students at a hundred percent and seven hundred  board is saying that the district is saying is you didn't follow state worldful state rules are not equal you know our chance amounts to procedural due process in a constitutional sense and they also haven't explained to me riaa school district as a as an entity state created entity would have due process rights but but putting all those aside to say that there's a procedural right that they have that was violated just simply not true what happened here was that the staff talks to the charter school as both the statute and the rules to do chu to talk to a charter school about its proposal and then what happens was that they they got the proposal the school district got the proposal the modified initially modify proposal a thousand students at one hundred percent instead of one and twenty five percent and didn't submit anything to the board saying no no no this is completely wrong then when there was a the superintendent further the superintendent further modified the proposal thousand students at one hundred percent of five hundred students at one hundred percent this again the district did nothing it didn't and in fact what it's sad at the hearing interesting enough was we ran the numbers we looked at it we gave it more than a quick look this is a see you know kind of a record six hundred fifty two but then they didn't say and look at our chart our child says we're going to be losing that you we're going to be losing money you know we're going to be in a deficit after four years and but you know let's face it even if they had said we're going to be in a deficit after four years they've shown that there were going to be a deficit of four years which which just doesn't make any sense really given the amounts of money we're talking about here they you know that rockford sad being a deficit doesn't being at a deficit doesn't mean you have you don't have economic soundness i mean so it's a very at the end of the day you know what we're talking about here is that there were facts that were predicate to the to the and they they had the superintendent took into account that there was not going to be any transitional ed which would have made a huge difference about the general somebody did not was not able to fund that you know and that the first year remember the school district has about a seventy five million dollars budget operating in iraq yes operating budget but they were only going to lose a million under two million for the first year and multiples thereafter so in the end i think it's very clear here that then be able to say these are the facts as opposed to getting into this dispute between the parties as to what are the facts and what the school board actually decided what standard of review that we apply here  well but i again i think if you look at the superintendent's decision which was incorporated into the board's decision that explains the very facts that i'm talking about that that there was a healthy long term you know surplus that there was a  short term death and that you know i was there i bet the financial you know adverse the fact is unavoidable it wasn't going to be so severe that it would make the district be not economically sound after the proposal as if the plaintiff if the school district is if i'm sorry if the school board the state school board did not iraq how can the school district an opportunity be heard and again it gave it gave the school district opportunities to be heard in the can and again and the school district did not take advantage of those opportunities then then he would be managed for a hearing to the board but you certainly would not outrightly first said you know keeping in mind that the school is now in its second year of operation thank you suggesting contrary to the statute that is being interpreted here and contrary to the case law that this is are i gotcha that was supposed to happen is that a proposal for a brand new school is submitted to the school district and it's a step in it never changing thing that we look through this page is asked that that aside and say this is what you gave me and we are not going to ask  about we've decided that we're not going to give you an opportunity to provide an educational action to the children in your area we agree with you to twenty seven but it's  money that admittedly is going to be allocated to these children and southland because it's the belief southland and the community leaders are the mayors who spoke at the hearing and the hearings of these children that deserve better than they're getting into twenty seven but media sad to twenty says i think to you today for a gag they handed us a piece of paper we looked at the piece of paper we don't have to do anything more than met and at the end of the day we get to say back say you didn't do this he didn't do that and i would submit to your honor's that there's no school that could ever be studied under that scenario there are always stillings so it seems to me that if you're going to build up a relationship between these these these competing educational systems that you would want to be able to work with the school board and present to them meet the e p a the eventual final proposal that is ruled upon by the state board of education we absolutely do want that your honor first of all accordingly we feel that the state had the statutory authority to reverse the decision i believe the school district condition that the foundation which was starting a charter school submitted facility down the fact is we had last year two hundred and seventy two families joining me to come for one hundred twenty five spots that were advertised for new freshman class if those people were begging for this action because they want the best education for their children we wouldn't have any loss of funding so the feel that we can say we're dealing with the first piece of paper the state words can star the sack we believe that the record here is so clear that this is in the best interests of the students and that the state for sale simply got it right we're happy to talk about it and the state board of education said it's we're looking at what has happened to twenty seven for a long period of time and we're also looking at his spine in district one sixty two over the nine years since whether this was in the best interest is we look at what is there and i know there is no question that there is the post i'm sorry crow the performance came back here is undeniable they looked at what these two districts were able to accomplish and said the performance is undeniable they talked about the scores history to twenty seven h managed to get up to thirty nine percent of its children meeting or exceeding escape or so said that the way to take it back was base losing forty one percent of the juniors we should have taken that pass from the task we know that they're down to twenty eight percent meeting or exceeding this year meanwhile as the court sag districts one sixty two has a upward trajectory and we also see that district one sixty two has more children right in economically there was a suggestion in the papers of two twenty seven day that something was going to be something that they did not release which i think that's a red herring that children are already in by the time they signed that agreement along with their passed that we're going to get on most important something that this picture twenty seven discounts something said we are going to to hear and abide by that's required under no child left behind they said well everybody that well how does that make the band doing anything special at that time what that meant was that they were committing to having eighty five percent or more their students meeting or exceeding state standards and we know that at that time you whose expense can we get back with this case everyone has agreed figures at the end the four years with or fully staffed as i school we have lost forty one million seven hundred sixty thousand dollars if you deny that by the number of kids that are rotten to twenty concern the educational concerns of a great number of people and to that extent the school board acted as a public body would find a trying to reach an a