A lawyer representing the Metro Nashville school board contends that Tennessee’s charter school law is unconstitutional.
John Borkowski, of the Washington. D.C., law firm of Hogan Lovells maintains that the 2002 law
“seems to impose increased costs on local governments with no offsetting subsidy from the state,” which he said violates the Tennessee Constitution.
Borkowski concluded that the state was requiring the districts to pay the full costs of charters without sharing the financial burden, thus draining the district schools of resources, which is unconstitutional:
The school board sought his advice in April to consider possible legal challenges to a state bill that would have given the state new power to approve charter schools that local boards of the state’s four largest counties, as well as Hardeman County, had denied.
The bill, supported by Mayor Karl Dean, Republican House Speaker Beth Harwell and other charter advocates, died on the final day of the legislative session. In his memo, Borkowski cites three “colorable legal arguments” against the bill, which is expected to be introduced again next year.
Yet he goes much further by questioning the constitutionality of the landmark law that established the funding mechanism for publicly financed, privately led charters in Tennessee.
A section of the Tennessee Constitution says that no law shall impose “increased expenditure requirements on cities or counties” unless the Tennessee General Assembly ensures the state shares those costs.
Under the state’s charter school funding formula, the combined state and local per-pupil dollar amount follows students to their new schools. This equates to about $9,200 per student in Nashville.
“The charter school receives all of the state and local per-pupil expenses, while the [local districts] still must cover existing fixed costs,” Borkowski wrote, adding: “There does not appear to be any state subsidy to share in these increased costs.”
The legal opinion provides fuel for an argument Metro school officials are making routinely of late: that the increase of charters in Nashville comes with a sizable financial toll. Twenty-one are set to operate in Metro by 2014-15, which officials say will cost $61.3 million.
Metro officials have argued the exit of students from traditional schools to charters hasn’t reduced the costs of maintaining schools they leave.
Keep an eye on this one. If the judges agree with Borkowski, Tennessee will have to find another source of funding for charters and stop bankrupting local school districts.
This could be a national issue.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
An SPLC takes on Alabama: “The Southern Poverty Law Center has filed a lawsuit challenging the state’s new controversial school choice law. The lawsuit contends the private school transfers allowed by the act are inaccessible to Alabama’s poor families and will siphon millions of dollars away from the public schools they do attend.”
What about the Common Core implementation and testing? Our school districts in TN can not afford the curriculum or technology required by the state. It is really putting a hardship on local school budgets.
Parents & schools must have legal recourse to address inequity or we’ll have a much longer, harder fight to regain our footing. I hope more of these damaging education laws are challenged and ruled on by honest judges lest public school children will be at the mercy of a bought & paid for legal system.
TN law mandates we appoint judges. This has kept its judiciary relatively trustworthy. However, TN Lt. Gov Ron Ramsey wants elected judges in TN. Since he actually runs the state (Haslam is his puppet) and has an ironclad grasp over both legislative bodies, he may be able to get his wish.
Federal law protects children with disabilities right to an appropriate education in public school.s (FAPE). Providing FAPE is a far murkier obligation relative to charter schools. As a special educator, our students’, parents’ & teachers’ strongest legal protections have come from the federal law IDEA. Ever since IDEA (PL94-142) was passed in 1975, it has been reauthorized every 4 years with little controversy. It has not been brought up for reauthorization since 2004. It’s worrisome that this has stalled about the time privatization was fast tracked by NCLB. I fear lobbyists are working on profitable loopholes in IDEA.
So jcgrim, you may be interested to know that some parents, frustrated by their experiences with district public schools have set up a charter that focuses on “bilingual and interdisciplinary curriculum using American Sign Language (ASL) and English for students who are primarily deaf, deafblind, and hard-of-hearing.”
http://mdsmn.org/
and other parents and educators have set up a school that focuses on students with Asperger Syndrome & those on the autism spectrum:
http://www.lionsgateacademy.org/
Some parents are happy with what local districts (or groups of districts) offer, because some districts have decide to work together to offer programs for youngsters with special needs, rather than try to create a program within their own district.
Yes, parents must have legal recourse. And some parents want options like these too.
You are correct. TN does not have the infrastructure in place for the level of technology & support needed for Common Core & PARCC assessments.
Sometimes I think these edu-CEO’s assume that when they snap their fingers that , like royalty, their servants will make it happen.
Indeed, this money follows the child approach to funding charter schools at the expense of traditional school districts and local property taxes is a national issue. We need to awaken legislators, parents, and all voters to the treachery and the fiscal and educational consequences of this simplistic notion of district resources following students to charters. There seems to be far too little understanding of “fixed costs” that any district incurs and which is instrumental in supporting quality education. In other words, we’ve got to wean educators and the public from thinking solely in terms of “per pupil costs.”
And by the way, whether those charters are for-profit or nonprofit is totally irrelevant to most any argument involving charters, including the money-follows-the-child issue. The fiscal goals and misguided educational practices are almost always equivalent and not at all centered on the best interest of kids or ensuring that public schooling meaningfully contributes to a multicultural society in which a critical examination and commitment to the principles of equal opportunity, social justice, and democratic values are cherished above test scores or robotic adherence to rigid disciplinary practices.
Let me emphasize the “almost always” in that last sentence! There are, of course, notable exceptions to the lesser-than-noble aims of charter schools that I’ve mentioned here. But I haven’t found any of these more-noble charters to be those that seek to propagate themselves and become multi-site. Could it be that founding principles get lost in the push to increase revenues by expanding?
Legislators in many states have decided that dollars are allocated for the education of young people – not for the protection of a particular district.
In for example, parents decide to move from one traditional district to another, dollars follow students.
There are really 2 issues with disability specific charter schools. One, separate, segregated schools for children with disabilities is an option in the continuum of service models as outlined in IDEA. If children need a segregated program, so be it. However, charters might guarantee rights for the founders’ children but there are no legal protections for families whose child may have co-morbid disabilities or who might have behavior issues and are rejected by the charter.
Two, segregated schools restrict options for children to participate in their community and grow up with same aged peers. The lack of appropriate social models for children with disabilities is a significant challenge in such settings. I know this from research and from my real experiences. I taught in both a segregated school (cross categorical, not disability specific) and started an integrated class for kids with severe disabilities in a public middle school. Integrated special ed classrooms show far better outcomes for children during school years and post-school years.
I have ex-students who are working in paying jobs that they NEVER would have gotten had they remained in a segregated school because the adults who hired them had been in school with them and were not afraid of them. Segregation breeds fear. Integration breeds acceptance. I have ex-students who are living an happy and productive lives with their families because they are far more independent and involved in their communities. I have ex-students who worked in my classroom as peer tutors who are now special education teachers.
Were there problems and glitches? Yes. Are we still facing many obstacles for accepting individuals with disabilities as FULL members of schools? yes. Was it expensive ? yes. We needed more staff to keep class teacher -student class ratios low. The biggest barrier is funding- the federal govt promised 40% funding after IDEA passed in 1975 & that has never happened. These barriers do not mean that segregation should be codified.
We’ve segregated persons with disabilities from their community schools for hundreds of years to their detriment. It took 10 years after integrating our students to see the benefits. The changes are gradual. There are many parents in public schools who support other parents to advocate for MORE appropriate services & use the full power of an appropriate IEP. Charters do not guarantee those protections to children or parents. As such, I cannot recommend segregated charters as an answer to providing equal opportunities for children with disabilities.The segregation model is antediluvian and counter productive.
Fortunately families have choices – including the models you prefer, as well as the models some of them have helped create.
Yesterday I met with a inner city African American man who is a certified special ed teacher. He also has dyslexia. He talked about the many challenges he faced in school, including taunting and some educators who told him what he could not do.
Fortunately his mother and a few educators helped him and he is now “giving back.” He’s helping inner city African American youngsters create you-tube videos about the value of taking college level courses while still in high school.
As to your assertions about schools you call “segregated…” you might want to check out the large number of African American leaders who graduated from historically Black colleges. Many African American families continue to chose these schools, Howard, Morehouse, Spellman, etc. It’s their choice.
JC, I’m a big fan of empowering families and not telling that we professionals always know what’s best for them.
As charters spread, designed by TFA graduates and charter chains, the one choice denied you is your neighborhood school, which was destroyed
In some places, yes, district neighborhood schools have been closed as You’ve and others have documented this for example, Chicago and New York.
In other places, neighborhood schools have responded to the situation that they are no longer the only choice. They have improved their own programs.
Joe, the money for charter schools comes out of the public school’s budget. The public schools’ fixed budget does not decrease, only their funding decreases. Thanks to the efforts of the charter sector you helped to create, we are establishing a dual school system–one for the deregulation charters, which make their own rules–and the other for underfunded public schools, who are legally bound to accept the kids kicked out of charter schools.
Actually, Diane there were dual systems created many years ago. They include the magnet schools that were and allowed to pick and choose among students – and continue to do so, as I have documented many times over the last several months. I understand that this is an accepted part of NYC’s public school system for decades – it was NOT an acceptable part of public education for much of the country before the tragic decision to allow many schools to serve whoever they wanted.
The situation was made worse in many districts were elite magnet schools to receive extra dollars…this was deeply frustrating to many inner city teachers and parents.
There there are the elite suburban districts that restrict who can attend to those who are able to afford to purchase and pay real estate taxes to subsidize these “public” schools. In a number of cases these districts have hired detectives to insure that no one who lives outside the district can attend their “public” schools.
A number of us have worked hard for decades to expand funding for students for low income families and to insist that there be opportunities for educators and parents to create new public schools.
As Shanker wrote many years ago, educators who tried to create new public schools could look forward to “insecurity, obscurity and outright hostility.” If they somehow succeeded, they would be treated like “traitors or outlaws for daring to move outside the lockstep.”
There are a vast array of charters, as there are a vast array of district schools. Some of both work with students that no one else wants to work with. Some work with a cross section, and some work only with more affluent students.
This makes me wonder if Louisiana’s constitution has a similar provision that could be used to challenge state-authorized (Type 2 by Louisiana’s designation) charters. For that matter, it might even be useful to challenge the state-run (and mislabeled) Recovery School District on the same grounds.
I am tired of urban parents allowing themselves and their children to be used for profit. I am also tired of people using poverty as an excuse for urban students. Urban parents need to send their children to school disciplined, feed, loved, prepared and wanting to learn. I don’t believe urban students are failing standardized test the way the state government wants us to believe. The cities are going broke, they lack a sound tax base to fund urban public schools and Pres. Obama is listening to Arne Duncan instead of standing up for students, teachers and parents. So they are selling urban public schools to wealthy corporations and individuals because they know urban parents will allow this, especially if the charter schools offer them something. In a city in NJ, parents have told people that they are offered laptops, or nooks, and a parent claimed that the Charter School her child goes to told the parents that if they send their child, they will put fifty dollars a week into an account that will go towards their child’s college tuition. I wonder where the money is coming from? Christie knows that urban parents will put their children in these charter schools because he is aware that we as urban parents don’ t read behind the lines. Eventually these charter schools will go broke and close. And when charter schools closes, there are no public schools, what school will your child go to. Urban parents need to say this to themselves, charter schools are not in suburban areas like they are in urban areas. I wonder why? Answer– perhaps suburban parents stand up for their public schools and teachers, they attend report card night and they don’t allow politicians tell them what school to send their children ,especially a politician who you know cares nothing about urban America. This isn’t about educating urban students this is about getting rich off of urban kids. And we a urban people let people get rich off of us all the time as we get poorer and they are laughing themselves right to the bank. It is pitiful that people want to convince urban parents that their children can’t learn in an urban public school, they need alternative or charter schools to learn. This is an insult to urban parents. Foreigners will come to this country attend the same urban public school urban students attend, can barely speak english, learn, graduate in honors and attend college. Why can’t urban kids do the same thing, because urban parents need to do their part, people need to stop using poverty, the city, state and federal governments needs to stop telling urban students they can’t do and support them, public schools and cities and urban students need to take education seriously.