Dr. Priscilla Chan,
The ground at 2086 Clarke Ave. holds deep memories for me, as it does for many of my generation. I stood in that schoolyard over 20 years ago, when it was Edison Brentwood Academy. I can still hear the groan of navy-blue chairs as a roomful of brown babies learned to say “and to the republic, from which it stands” until the phrase felt as natural in our mouths as the Spanish we spoke to our mothers.
That pledge. It’s a chorus in my mind, mingling with the memories of teachers and administrators — the whistles like necklaces around their necks — who by the afternoons, transformed the small halls where we ate breakfast into vibrant book fairs, stages for a nervous recitals, spelling bees where I learned the ‘s’ in Arkansas is silent.
That place held more than lessons; it cradled what our parents carried with them for thousands of miles, that which cost them their countries, their language, their families: the hope, as tender as a newborn, that their children can grasp a better future here in the United States.
Decades later, when you founded The Primary School, you rekindled that deep-seated hope. Your vision — weaving together health and education, embracing families from birth, confronting systemic barriers head-on — resonated powerfully because it mirrored the dreams of our city. It promised a different narrative. Against the backdrop of institutional instability that claimed Edison Brentwood years ago, you staked a wooden sign with a hand and heart, a symbol of your professed commitment to our kids.
That is why the recent announcement of The Primary School’s impending closure, delivered with the cold impersonality of a website update, lands as more than a disappointment. It is a profound betrayal.
It betrays the parents who poured their trust into your vision.
It betrays the fragile hope that this time, finally, an institution fortified by immense resources would truly anchor itself beside our community for good.
Recommended for you
For you and your team, the choice to shut the school was a “difficult decision.” For these children, this was the breaking of a dream, the uprooting of their educational home. Their anguish gives voice to hundreds of families who saw The Primary School not just as classrooms and corridors, but as an essential lifeline in a challenging world.
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative operates on a scale that transcends the typical constraints faced by nonprofits or public bodies. The shuttering of this school was not an inevitable outcome dictated by scarcity. It was a deliberate choice made by one of the world’s most powerful philanthropic forces — a choice, Dr. Chan, that seemingly values other objectives above the continuity and well-being of the very children and families The Primary School was created to champion. The rationale remains shrouded, but the consequence is starkly, painfully clear.
Furthermore, the method of this announcement constitutes a failure of leadership and genuine partnership. To convey news of such magnitude via a sterile website statement, bypassing direct, respectful dialogue, is to strip parents of their inherent dignity and agency. Your decision begs me to ask you and your husband, were these families ever equal partners? Or are they moving pieces in the cold calculus of philanthropy?
This cycle — of hopeful investment followed by abrupt withdrawal, of engagement yielding to disillusionment — is not just socially irresponsible. It is a wound our community carries, a wound that relents, we are tired of being the proving ground for experiments that ultimately lack staying power.
While the $50 million transition fund CZI offers is a necessary gesture, it cannot alone mend the deep disruption to lives interwoven with the school. Successes achieved elsewhere, however laudable, cannot compensate for the failure to honor the specific, deeply felt commitment made here, on Clarke Avenue, to the children of East Palo Alto.
Dr. Chan, decisions that redirect the paths of young lives and destabilize families carry an extraordinary weight and moral responsibility. One must hope the gravity of your choice, and the manner in which it was executed, compels profound reflection within your organization.
This echoes a need felt across America. Communities everywhere deserve more than fleeting projects and conditional philanthropy. We require steadfast partners committed to authentic collaboration, partners who demonstrate unwavering resolve through the inevitable challenges. We need institutions that invest not just in places, but in people — partners who don’t retreat, who safeguard the dreams of our children, ensuring potential is nurtured, not extinguished.
Antonio López is the former mayor of East Palo Alto, and the current poet laureate for San Mateo County.
(3) comments
Why do we rely on "Virtue Signaling" billionaires to provide educational facilities?
The Ravenswood school district is one of the best funded school districts in the Bay Area. There per-student funding is now as high or even higher than Menlo Park and Palo Alto. There classroom sizes should be 10-15 and they could do all the things this Charter School was doing as well.
So the question is why are CA democrats letting these public school districts get away with failing their students? It's never the money, it's the management.
It is time to abandon the idea of school districts and superintendents - that experiment has clearly failed. That only led to segregation and corruption.
Thanks for your letter, Mr. Lopez. I’d be interested in knowing why the school is closing. My best guess is a lack of ongoing funding. Perhaps a concerted resistance from folks supporting public education? It can’t be cheap to provide a free education and whatever else was provided for free. Meanwhile, did CZI need to offer a $50 million transition fund? And of course, I’m sure we’ll hear criticism this amount is not high enough. Perhaps another reason to vote for allowing school choice, such as charter schools.
It is interesting although, in this climate, not all that surprising that Dr. Chan is now being demonized after opening the school however many years ago. It makes me wonder whether others who think about about opening up a school or other public benefit may want to refrain from doing so. Because apparently, no good deed goes unpunished, especially for Dr. Chan, in this case. Perhaps philanthropists may want to donate to a different cause, because after their money runs out, or they choose to remove it, they’ll be demonized. And who needs that?
Stated clearly and respectfully, Antonio. Sadly, respect was not a two way street in this situation. "It's not personal, it's just business," is an old saying that fits here. To the community it's quite personal. To Zuck it's just business.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.