The above item would have flown right under the radar had some one not pointed it out to me. It would not have even occurred to me that this would be an Aspire Public Schools issue. Of course, I gave Aspire the benefit of the doubt and looked at http://www.aspirepublicschools.org/?q=financials. and http://www.aspirepublicschools.org/?q=pressroom as I believe all parties should have an opportunity to weigh in on the subject.
From what I can gather, Fitch sees Aspire as being not transparent enough. From what I read about (written by others), Aspire refuses to be honest http://acsa.org/MainMenuCategories/Advocacy/Issues-and-Actions/Success-for-ELSF.aspx, which has nothing to do with tenure or all the other rigamarow Ms. Rhee constantly complains about. Aspire seems to be anti-competitive, which is anti-Michelle Rhee and anti-Jeffrey Canada. This all makes for some interesting conversation. I can find no mention of the bond issue nor the lawsuit issue. No where can I find Michelle Rhee’s commentary………so I will leave the interpretation of all of this to the reader.
This demonstrates to me once again that charter schools have been so busy marketing and touting themselves that reality never had a chance. Aspire is a not for profit CORPORATION. By reasonable standards, people should be flinching about the lack of competitiveness Aspire Public Schools operates under. The message may well be that test scores really do not tell the whole story, even though Aspire and Michelle Rhee would have us believe otherwise with propaganda.
This is Aspire 15 years out. I have to wonder if this is what Don Shalvey, James Wilcox, Wayne Hilty and Elise Darwish prepared for in advance and escaping to Tennessee is not the entire answer. It would seem that abandoning part or all they sought to change in CA is definitely not a good answer for students, investors and public education. With Wall St. having brought down the economy, limited and insufficient disclosure to Fitch does not seem to be in line with what the public would like to know.
LIMITED AND INSUFFICIENT DISCLOSURE
Under the bonds’ continuing disclosure agreement, the lawsuit does not appear to qualify as a ‘significant event.’ However, given Aspire’s significant concerns regarding the lawsuit, Fitch views the lack of communication until after the proposed statement of decision negatively. In addition, the March 21, 2012 disclosure statement made no reference to the serious risks, including possible default, cited by management in its declarations to the court.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for June 8. Fitch will continue to monitor developments in the lawsuit and their potential ramifications for bondholders.
Of course the real concern is how did these people NOT have an appropriate long term business plan in place knowing CA politics? What are the board of directors http://www.aspirepublicschools.org/?q=board thinking? I have to wonder if even Superman can make this better considering charter schools have touted that their composition is based on their ability to do it better for less. Jeffrey Canada, are you paying attention?