Win the (court) battle; lose the war?

The fight ain't over



This AP report on Thomas Jefferson Classical Academy's legal victory over Rutherford County Schools is good news, of course, but it also touches upon a troubling reality--under current law school districts are now free to 'hide' more money from charter schools. 

"The General Assembly clarified the school funding law last year to expand the types of money that can be placed in segregated funds. It's a decision that gives districts more ways to prevent them from giving more money to charter schools, said Richard Vinroot, a Charlotte lawyer representing Thomas Jefferson Classical Academy."

When North Carolina's original charter school law was passed in 1997, the funding formula seemed clear enough: all public funds allocated for education were to be equally divided on a per-pupil basis between district and charter schools.  School districts were given the responsibility to calculate the per-pupil amount specific to their districts and pay their local charter schools accordingly. 

But from the very beginning some districts played games with the numbers, and the most popular of these games was to hide certain funds so they wouldn't have to be divided with charters.  When some charter schools caught on to what their districts were doing (the districts were not required to 'show their work' when calculating the per-pupil amount, and many still go to great lengths to hide their calculations from the public), lawsuits were initiated.  Charter schools won every single one of those suits, because the law was clearly on their side.

Fast forward to the closing hours of the 2010 General Assembly, when the then-Democratic controlled legislature was putting the finishing touches on that year's budget bill.  When the final version of that bill was presented for a vote it had somehow acquired overnight a new section 'legalizing' what the school districts had been doing all along, and giving those districts which had already been caught hiding money from charter schools up to three years to pay any court-ordered settlement.  This new section had been inserted into the bill (literally overnight!) at a point in the process where it could not be amended except by the bill sponsors themselves.  It was a coup of lobbying legerdemain by the North Carolina School Boards Association, completely bypassing the normal legislative process to get a special favor for its client, the state's school boards, and it worked.

As a result, school districts are now free to create 'special' accounts into which they may deposit whatever funds they so choose to pay for their 'special' programs.  School districts don't have to share funds in these special accounts with charters, and there is no language in the law defining what constitutes a special program these accounts are supposed to pay for.  Thus, an enterprising district chief financial officer could conceivably move significant sums of money from the 'local current expense account,' the account that all monies are normally put into, and which is divided evenly with charters on a per-pupil basis, and into one or more 'special' accounts, which are not shared. 

And thanks to last year's midnight skulduggery by lobbyists for the NC School Boards Association, it's all perfectly legal. 

Now, one might think that the more charter-friendly Republican controlled legislature would be inclined to fix that problem, and one would be right--to a point.  An effort was made to include language in Senate Bill 8, the bill that lifted the charter cap, to curb the use of special accounts and make districts more accountable for how they calculated and shared per-pupil expenses with charters, but that language was stripped out as part of the compromise that made the bill veto-proof. 

Of course, there's nothing that says the charter community cannot demand a fix to the problem in next year's budget bill.  Perhaps a section inserted into the bill the night before the final vote, returning the law to its original condition, and setting out financial penalties for districts that try to evade its provisions, hide their calculations, or drag their feet when it comes time to write the check...
   

.

Finally, some love (well, some 'like' anyway) from the press

Kudos to the Winston-Salem Journal for its editorial on Wednesday recognizing that allowing well-prepared charter applicants to open new schools as early as next August is a good thing.  The editors praise the State Board of Education for its decision earlier this month to allow a 'Fast Track' approval process for charter applicants who were turned down in the last round only because of the now-defunct cap.

"The state board has shown common sense here, cautiously deciding that charters must not be rushed into operation but also recognizing that, in some cases, an opening date of next August is reasonable."

The W-S Journal has been one of the few mainstream media outlets in the state to show even a qualified understanding of, or support for, charter schools.  Back in June the paper editorialized in support of the stripped down version of Senate Bill 8 that removed the cap in this year's session, but demonstrated a poor grasp of the details, calling many of the bill's original provisions "misguided." 

"Some legislators even proposed reducing standards for charters so low that they would, in effect, become subsidized home schools." 

...sigh....

Well, newspaper editors can't always know what they're talking about.  But still it's good to see that there is at least one paper that doesn't always spout the anti-charter talking points of the public education cartel's praetorian guard.

NC charters dodge a bullet

No news is good news

The September 'mini-session' of the General Assembly has come and gone, and the Honorables have taken no action on the two issues of interest to the charter community.  For that remarkable show of restraint, they are to be congratulated.  It's not often that an elected body at any level comes face to face with a golden opportunity to do something stupid, and doesn't do it.

The first opportunity involved approval of governor Perdue's long-overdue appointees to the State Board of Education.  Recall that at present there are three seats on the SBE that are being filled by 'holdovers,' members whose terms of office expired back in March but are allowed to stay on until their successors are approved. 

After months of delay, the governor finally submitted the names of three individuals (two incumbents, chairman Dr. Bill Harrison and NCAE shill Jean Wooland, and one newbie, a Mr. William Woltz) to fill the seats.  Had the legislature approved the appointments, those three persons would have had seats on the board until March of 2019.  But some clever person figured out that if the General Assembly simply declined to approve the appointments, a new (and potentially pro-charter) governor taking office in January of 2013 would then be able to nominate his own appointees, giving him a running start towards overhauling the current anti-charter board. 

The second opportunity had to do with the proposed constitutional amendment on governance of public education.  While there are a lot of good ideas in the proposal (like shortening the terms of office for SBE members from the current eight years to a more reasonable six), it would also strip from the legislature the power to approve or disapprove of the governor's appointees to the SBE.  The trade off there is that the leaders of the two legislative chambers would get to make a few appointments on their own, but the governor's eight appointees would still constitute a majority of the fifteen member board.  That provision needs some work.  We've seen what kind of damage an anti-charter governor can do, working through a compliant SBE, and we don't like it.

Wilmington Star-News Stuck on Stupid

All children can learn, but can all newspaper editors?

Remember that old saying about how it's better to keep your mouth shut and have people suspect that you're stupid, than to open it and remove all doubt?

The editors of the Wilmington Star-News apparently never heard that one.  How else to explain this embarrassing fiasco masquerading as an editorial in Tuesday's on-line edition?  Here's a specimen:

"It is encouraging that the council includes educators from both the public and charter school worlds. The emphasis must be to ensure that charter schools are accountable to the public and that they be judged as harshly when they fail as the public schools their advocates deride."

and...

"It is equally important that the state not be an excuse to dismantle the public schools, which have made steady progress over the past three decades, by depriving them of funding that is shifted to charter schools."

aaaaaand...

"Unlike the state board, which oversees all public schools, the advisory council will be charged only with scrutinizing charter-school performance."

and if you can stand one more...

"Markley [that's superintendent of New Hanover County Public Schools Tim Markley] is open to new ideas and is interested in finding out whether the charter school concept can work within the public schools."

There are only two possible reasons why anyone in North Carolina who's able to read and write (Charter Guy assumes that description includes the editors of the Wilmington Star-News) would continue to refer to "public schools" and "charter schools" as if they were two separate entities.  The first, and most charitable explanation, is that the persons in question are just plain stupid.  It can't be simple ignorance mind you; the editors make their living in the information business, so we have to conclude that they have the facts regarding the public status of charter schools at hand.  So either the editors are too stupid to understand that charter schools are public schools, or...

...they are deliberately trying to mislead their readers. 

Naw, couldn't be that.  But just in case, Charter Guy is going to place the Wilmington Star-News on the watch list for the prestigious Muhammed Saeed al-Sahhaf Award for Excellence in Counter-Factual Reporting.

Fast Track a Narrow Lane



Small is the gate and narrow the road...and only a few shall find it



As expected the State Board of Education approved the new "fast track" charter approval policy at its September 1st meeting.  The Raleigh News & Observer reported on that development here.   While the new policy is fine as far as it goes, don't expect to see new charter schools popping up like Starbucks in the nineties.  The new policy may create a straight and narrow path, but few will be able to follow it. 

According to the N&O report the office of charter schools is saying that there are six charter applications from last year that are eligible for fast track consideration.  That's not a lot of schools, but it's apparently too many for board member Jean Woolard, who was quoted by the N&O as saying "I'm a little bit wary about proceeding so rapidly."

Ms. Woolard is one of the board members governor Perdue would like to re-appoint to the board, and the General Assembly is scheduled to consider her nomination in its 'appointments bill' next week.  Perhaps our legislative leadership should be "a little bit wary about proceeding so rapidly" with Ms. Woolard's nomination.  After all, why should they rush to appoint to an eight-year term on the state board of education an NCAE activist who sees a problem with allowing the board to merely consider adding six charter schools a year?

Also on Charter Guy's radar are the comments towards the end of the article about buses and bus safety.  The article points out that buses used by charter schools are not subject to the same safety regulations as buses at district schools,clearly implying that charter school buses are less safe.  It quotes Derek Graham, section chief of transportation services for DPI, as saying the 183 buses and 24 vans now being used by charter schools makes him "cringe."  The article goes on to say that the new North Carolina public charter school advisory council will be asked (by the board, presumably) to "review the issue." 

Of course any bus or van used by a charter school to transport students must be in good condition and operated in a safe manner.  But readers will recall that transportation, or lack of it, was one of the phony issues crafted by the guardians of the failing status quo to derail the charter school bill in the last session of the General Assembly.  Don't be surprised if certain members of the council push for a recommendation to the board that all charter-owned vehicles used to transport students be required to meet costly new requirements.  And if they are successful in that effort, to follow up with a recommendation that all charter schools purchase vehicles to provide comprehensive student transportation. 

State Board to discuss charters

The State Board of Education will hold its annual planning session Sunday August 28 through Tuesday August 30th, at the Sheraton Downtown in Raleigh. This meeting was not announced on the SBE website, but is open to the public.

On Monday the 29th at 3pm Philip Price is scheduled to brief the board on charter schools. He's only been alloted thirty minutes, but his comments could give us an overview of where the board wants to go with charter schools over the next year.

New Charters in 2012?

 

Could it really be...?



The Raleigh News & Observer reports today that the State Board of Education might actually consider allowing a few new charter schools to open their doors in the fall of 2012 after all. Heres' the link:

http://projects.newsobserver.com/node/22710

Believe it or not, they may actually be serious about this. A plan for reviewing 'fast track' charter school applications has been written and is on the board's agenda for the August 31-September 1 meeting. You can see the plan here:

http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/stateboard/meetings/2011/09/lfi/09lfi01.pdf

In brief, the idea is to have the newly formed Public Charter School Advisory Council review existing applications that would have been approved last go-around, had there been no cap, and make recommendations to the board as to which of these should be approved for 2012. Existing schools that want to convert to charters would also be allowed to submit fast track applications, as would currently successful charter schools that wanted to replicate or spin off another campus.

There are a lot of things that could still derail this move, of course, starting with the board's discussion and vote next week. As anyone who has spent any time observing the operations of the board knows, very little of substance ever happens in an open board meeting; the real decisions having already been made in private beforehand. And of course, the advisory council that would have to review all the applications doesn't actually exist yet, so...yeah.

Still, this is the best charter news to come from the state board since...well, it's the only good charter news that Charter Guy can ever remember coming from the board.

Constitutional Math: 8 > 4

 

More changes afoot?

During the recently concluded session of the General Assembly there was a lot of talk about amending the North Carolina Constitution to overhaul the way public education is governed. Representative Bryan Holloway (R-Rockingham & Stokes) introduced a bill that would do just that, but after a few hearings and amendments the project was slipped onto the back burner. The idea was that Holloway's bill (HB823) would be taken up during the special session that the legislative leadership planned in Spetember for consideration of constitutional amendments.

Now comes a report from Carolina Journal about the September session, and the amendment on public education governance doesn't get a mention:

Politicos Brace for Down-and-Dirty Amendment Fight in September
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=8146

If the leadership has given up on the idea, it's probably just as well. Holloway's original plan was just to make the Superintendent of Public Instruction a full member of the board and give her control over all state-level appointments of administrative and supervisory education personnel. The bill as amended does that, but (and here's the rub) it also removes the General Assembly's power to confirm the governor's appointments to the State Board of Education.

True, the amended bill gives the GA four appointments of its own, reducing the governor's appointees to eight (from the current eleven). But eight is still a voting majority of the board's membership of 15 (the State Treasurer and Lieutenant Governor are also members), thus leaving an anti-charter governor in a position to lay a lot of land mines for charter schools during her term. Too many for Charter Guy's comfort, anyway. The bill would also reduce the current eight-year term of state school board members to a more reasonable six--a good thing, in Charter Guy's opinion.

It's hard to imagine why any legislative body would willingly surrender its power to determine who will constitute the majority of an important policy-making board. And to trade that power for a measly four seats seems like the kind of deal made by one who doesn't understand the equation 8>4.

If this bill resurfaces during the September session, let us hope that the leadership brushes up on some basic math first.

Meet the new board, same as the old board



The old guy



The new guy

 



Governor Beverly Perdue has finally submitted the names of her nominees to fill the vacant expired spots on the State Board of Education. Loyal readers will recall that the terms of two of the board's district representatives expired back in March, but those members have continued to serve due to a quirk in the law that the Perdue administration believes somehow trumps the Constitution's defined eight-year terms (see, "What's that smell? SBE appointees WAY past their expiration dates," charternation, August 7th). Board Chairman Bill Harrison's term also expired in March, yet he gavels on.

So to replace State Education District One's Jean Wooland the governor has chosen--Jean Wooland. And to replace Chairman Bill Harrison, the guv's pick is--Bill Harrison. Only district seven's Tom Speed is actually rotating off. If Perdue gets her way, William Woltz would take his place (more about him in the coming days).

After all, why change personnel when things are going so swimmingly (cough, cough, EOGs, cough, cough)?

The legislature is scheduled to consider these appointments during its September mini-session, and if they are approved the three anti-charter amigos would serve until 2019 (eight year terms, remember?). That's six and one-half years into the administration of any pro-charter governor who might possibly be elected to replace Perdue in November of 2012.

On the other hand, suppose the legislature doesn't vote to approve them? Maybe they just leave those names and positions out of the appointment bill, just lets them continue to serve, waiting to see what happens on election day? Then a new governor could nominate replacements upon taking office in January of 2013, get some people of his own choosing on the board right away...just say'n.

Pat McCrory, are you out there? Might want to give Speaker Tillis and Senate President Berger a call.