The board of Santa Fe Public Schools and a representative of Turquoise Trail Charter Schools seemed to reach an impasse Tuesday night over whether the school will eventually have to leave its current location.
The fundamental point of disagreement between the charter school's governing board president Floyd Trujillo and SFPS board members was an interpretation of the lease between the school and the district, which is set to expire in 2021. At one point, board president Lorraine Price invoked the district's legal counsel to rebut Trujillo's belief that Turquoise Trail could stay at the spot off Highway 14 indefinitely.
The impasse makes it more likely that the issue may land in court court, although SFPS counsel Geno Zamora said that the courts have already weighed in on the the matter in a similar case involving Espanola Public Schools. Hours before the meeting, Trujillo told SFR the state-administered charter school was "absolutely" willing to sue SFPS to attempt to keep its hold on the building.
"If it were to go to that, then yes, we would," Trujillo said. "It's not what we want, but if that's what has to happen, then that's what would have to happen."
The district says that overcrowding at the Amy Biehl Community School is partially due to the inclusion of students who were formerly zoned to attend Turquoise Trail before the state took over that school's charter. It has pointed to swelling enrollment on the city's south side as the primary reason it wants to bring the 74,819 square foot facility back under its jurisdiction.
In the meeting and on its website, the district acknowledges it does not have the authority to close the charter school that serves about 500 pre-K through sixth graders. Instead, said board member Steven Carrillo, the district wants to relocate the charter school's student population somewhere else in the district, while reclaiming the current facility for the roughly 150 SFPS students who would be zoned to attend it.
Where would the new Turquoise Trail school be located? Neither Carrillo or any other board member suggested an alternative, but were adamant that the first step to finding one was for the charter school to accept that its lease with the district will expire in 2021.
"All leases end," Carrillo said, joking that his own lease at his condominium will expire in April.
But according to Trujillo, the charter school's governing board is determined to stay put. He argues that the lease is not a standard landlord-tenant agreement and that the state's charter school laws prevent the district from relocating the school.
"There was never any intention for the lease to have any say in whether we could stay there or not," he told SFR.
At times, the night's discussion devolved into Trujillo blaming the board for ignoring his overtures over the years to discuss contentious issues such as the school's lottery enrollment system. Board members disagreed with him in a variety of ways.
Price characterized the night's discussion as circular, a sentiment with which nobody seemed to disagree.
No follow-up meeting between the charter governing board and the district has been publicly announced. But Trujillo told SFR that that the charter school's parents were willing to "take action and show up" if the district enforces the terms of the property's lease.
