Source: http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/Decisions/volume59/d17812
Timestamp: 2020-04-04 19:32:27
Document Index: 181818858

Matched Legal Cases: ['§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853', '§2853']

Decision No. 17,812 | Office of Counsel
Decision No. 17,812
Appeal of ASCEND CHARTER SCHOOLS, on behalf of CENTRAL BROOKLYN ASCEND CHARTER SCHOOL, from action of the New York City Department of Education regarding school utilization.
TAHOE., Interim Commissioner.--Petitioner, Ascend Charter Schools, an existing education corporation with authority to operate Central Brooklyn Ascend Charter School (“CBACS” or “the school”), challenges the New York City Department of Education’s (“DOE” or “respondent”) failure to offer petitioner a co-location site for the school in a public school building or space in a privately-owned or other publicly-owned facility at DOE’s expense and at no cost to the school, as required by Education Law §2853(3)(e). The appeal must be sustained.
Petitioner is authorized by the Board of Trustees of the State University of New York (“SUNY”) to operate multiple charter schools, including CBACS, which was initially chartered in January 2013 to serve students in kindergarten through grade 5. In February 2019, the school’s charter was revised to allow the school to expand to serve students in grades 6 through 8. According to petitioner, during the 2019-2020 school year, the school expanded to serve students in grades 6. The school will expand to serve students in grade 7 in the 2020-2021 school year and students in grade 8 in the 2021-2022 school year.[1]
On December 4, 2019, a written request for co-location was submitted for the school’s grades 6 through 8, pursuant to Education Law §2853(3)(e). By letter dated December 10, 2019, DOE acknowledged the request for space, but stated that it would “not be extending an offer of space at this time.” This appeal ensued.
Petitioner asserts that DOE failed to offer facilities to the school and that respondent violated Education Law §2853(3)(e) because DOE was required to offer CBACS a co-location site in a public school building or space in a privately-owned or other publicly-owned facility, at DOE’s expense. As relief, it seeks an order directing DOE to pay rental assistance to the school in accordance with Education Law §2853(3)(e)(5).
Respondent admits that it failed to offer petitioner a co-location site for the school in a public school building or space in a privately-owned or other publicly-owned facility, at no cost to the school, and that petitioner is eligible for a finding in its favor.
Petitioner asserts that DOE failed to offer a co-location site for the school in a public school building or space in a privately-owned or other publicly-owned facility for the school’s grades 6 through 8, at no cost to the school, in violation of Education Law §2853(3)(e). Education Law §2853(3)(e) provides that, in the City School District of the City of New York, charter schools that require additional space due to an expansion of grade level approved by their charter entity for the 2014-2015 school year or thereafter, and request co-location in a public school building, shall be provided access to facilities. The statute also requires that, within the later of five months after a charter school’s written request for co-location and 30 days after the charter school’s charter is approved by the charter entity, the city school district shall offer the charter school either a co-location site in a public school building approved by the board of education as provided by law at no cost to the charter school, or space in a privately-owned or other publicly-owned facility at the expense of the city school district and at no cost to the charter school (Education Law §2853[3][e][1]).
Here, DOE responded to the December 4, 2019 co-location request but did not offer petitioner a co-location site for CBACS in a public school building or space in a privately-owned or other publicly-owned facility, at no cost to the school. However, in response to the request, DOE was required by Education Law §2853(3)(e)(1) to offer petitioner space for the school in a privately-owned or publicly-owned facility at the expense of the city school district and at no cost to the school. As DOE has not offered any facilities at the expense of the city school district and at no cost to the school, it failed to comply with the requirements of Education Law §2853(3)(e)(1).
The record in this case indicates that CBACS was approved by its charter entity in February 2019 to expand to serve students in grades 6 through 8. The school expanded to serve students in grade 6 in the 2019-2020 school year, and will expand to serve students in grade 7 in the 2020-2021 school year and grade 8 in the 2021-2022 school year, expansions for which it requires additional space. Therefore, on the record before me, I find that petitioner has established that CBACS requires additional space due to an expansion of grade level that was approved by its charter entity for the 2014-2015 school year or thereafter. Petitioner has, thus, met all the statutory criteria and is entitled either to a co-location or to an offer of private or other publicly-owned space for the school (see Education Law §2853[3][e]).
Accordingly, having failed to make such an offer, DOE must, pursuant to Education Law §2853(3)(e)(5), pay petitioner for the school, commencing with the 2019-2020 school year, and in each remaining year of the school’s current charter term and any subsequent renewal term, provided that, in any such renewal term, the charter school serves the grades encompassed by the charter referenced herein, rental assistance based on student enrollment in the newly-added grades for which the school has been approved to provide instruction.[2] Specifically, with respect to an existing charter school whose expansion of grade level is approved by its charter entity, “if the appeal results in a determination in favor of the charter school, the city school district shall pay the charter school an amount attributable to the grade level expansion” that is calculated in accordance with the formula set forth in Education Law §2853(3)(e)(5).