After months of deliberation, the Board of Regents voted 7-1 Thursday to deny the application for a mayoral academy in Cranston.

For now, at least, Cranston educators are considering it a victory.

“The Board of Regents recognized that the most relevant people were the people of Cranston and it was their opinion that ultimately brought home the prize,” said School Committee member Frank Lombardi.

The vote was frustrating for Mayor Allan Fung.

“I think that parents and students were looking for that choice, for a longer school day and a longer school year, and they won’t be able to have that opportunity now in Cranston,” he said. “It’s disappointing; I’m disappointed for them.”

He hoped that a mayoral academy would provide for more oversight, over finances in particular.

“I’m relegated back to the role I had before. I’m just an ATM machine for the district,” he said.

The Regents’ vote may have been influenced by a letter from Governor Lincoln Chafee, submitted to the Board just hours before their final meeting on the subject.

“I am concerned by the opposition voiced by the Cranston City Council, School Committee, superintendent and many members of the community,” Chafee wrote. “Recognizing that a school’s success depends at least partly on the support and participation of the community it serves, I hope that the Board of Regents considers the views of Cranston residents, parents and educators when weighing whether to approve the application.”

Chafee further instructed the Regents and Commissioner Deborah Gist to examine the possibility of moving the mayoral academy to Providence, and to begin discussions with Providence’s elected officials immediately.

Regent Betsy Shimberg, the dissenting voter, urged her colleagues to support an amendment that would immediately direct the Achievement First application to Providence.

Regent Carolina Bernal questioned the legality of such an amendment and said she would rather flat out deny the application in front of them and then revisit the Achievement First proposal from the beginning – the same process Cranston went through.

“I'm not against charter schools. I'm not against AF,” she said, but “we have to be fair to all communities and give the opportunity to Providence to come back again.”

Chairman George Caruolo agreed, noting that Providence deserved the same due process.

“Small, complete victories are always better than large, incomplete ones,” he said.

Shimberg withdrew the amendment, but let her support of a Providence application be known.

“I would like us to follow the governor's direction,” she said.

Regent Colleen Callahan said she takes the recommendation seriously, but saw a broader opportunity. Callahan believes that traditional public schools should be challenged to examine some of the reforms existing in charter schools.

Cranston School Committee member Stephanie Culhane hopes that will be possible in Cranston.

“I think Colleen is an innovator. She gets that the best parts of what charter schools do, we can do by collaborating with our teachers and administrators,” she said, adding that the district has already looked at many educational reforms. “It’s sad that our mayor never realized that, but again, he never bothered to ask.”

Lizbeth Larkin, president of the Cranston Teachers Alliance, was glad that the drawn-out process was over, after a vote had been delayed several times through the summer.

“I am very happy that they voted it down,” Larkin said. “I am looking forward to returning to the business of educating and continuing all the innovative work and education reform that Cranston has been working on for many, many years.”

Although Larkin and other district teachers spoke out in force against the proposed mayoral charter school, she maintains that it was not a union issue.

“They tried to say it was a union thing and that is a very old mantra, as far as I'm concerned,” she said. “For months now, the commissioner, the mayor, the Department of Education and all the people from Achievement First have completely denigrated every teacher, every student and every person and citizen in Cranston.”

The hard feelings between mayoral academy opponents and the administration began early in the application stages.

Fung had discussed the proposal with Gist, but was not including the Cranston School Committee or Superintendent Peter Nero in the discussion – an exclusion that has repeatedly come up in debate.

“This was not a collaboration between our public school district and the mayoral academy,” said School Committee member Janice Ruggieri.

In a spring op-ed to the Herald, Fung laid out his reasons for submitting an application for Cranston, including public school choice for parents and raising the bar for education.

Nero came back swinging. He said Fung’s letter was insulting to district educators, who are already working on education reforms and have demonstrated their commitment to providing a top-notch education.

“My feelings have been hurt through this whole process,” Nero said.

The tension between the two sides continued to mount at a series of Board of Regents meetings through the summer.

Last Wednesday, at a rally of “I Am Cranston Schools,” though supporting public schools was the intended focus, the mayoral academy proposal was clearly on the minds of those in attendance who carried signs opposing the school or spoke against the application.

Those feelings will not likely go away overnight, according to Superintendent Nero.

“I’d like to say there’s been a sense of relief but it’s sandwiched in between my sense that this whole process happened behind my back,” he said. “It was a hollow victory for me.”

Still, Nero says he is ready to move on.

“I want to move on now and do what’s best for Cranston Public Schools,” he said.