Bill Phillis, a veteran warrior for public schools and equitable financing of them, wrote the following in response to a court case that will be heard on September 23. Does a for-profit private corporation own all the assets of the schools it manages?
Who owns school facilities, equipment, technology, furniture and other assets purchased with taxpayer’s money? White Hat Management? The privately-operated White Hat charter school board? The public?
Over the past couple of decades, citizens of Ohio have, through taxes, purchased more than 1,000 new school buildings, complete with furniture, equipment, technology, etc. Who owns this vast investment? Duh–the public.
September 23, 2014 will be a pivotal day in Ohio history. The Ohio Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on whether a private company owns real estate, facilities, furniture, equipment, technology, and other assets that were purchased by taxpayer money extracted from school districts. The Supreme Court’s decision on this issue will have far-reaching consequences. Historically, taxes devoted to public school infrastructure has been owned and controlled by the public.
For the past couple of decades, while taxpayer money was being used to rebuild Ohio’s public school infrastructure, state officials have extracted $7 billion from school districts to fund privately-operated, so-called “public” charter schools. A portion of that $7 billion financial drain on public school districts has been used to purchase charter school furniture, equipment, technology, etc. Who owns these assets? The public? Individuals? Private corporations?
It would be absurd for public policy to allow private ownership of the new 1,000 public school buildings or any other school district assets. But, White Hat Management and some if its charter school allies, including the Alliance for Public Charter Schools, argue for private ownership.
The lower courts supported the claims of White Hat Management. It is quite interesting that the State Attorney General supported the claims against White Hat Management in the lower courts but has since dropped out of the case.
Also of interest is that the Attorney General’s Chief Operations Officer is the former Executive Director of the Ohio Department of Education’s Center for School Options and Finance and thus had administrative oversight of the Office of Community Schools.
Oh what a tangled web state officials weave—the taxpayers do they intend to deceive.
William Phillis
Ohio E & A
Ohio E & A | 100 S. 3rd Street | Columbus | OH | 43215
Diane Ravitch's blog 
This is exactly why states should not permit private charter schools at public expense. I don’t see the need to waste a court battle over this. The assessts were paid with taxpayer money, they are owned by the taxpaying citizens. If White Hat wants to purchase them from the taxpayers, and the citizens agree, then they can place bids to purchase the assests.
sorry–assets!
Possession is nine tenths of the law is the old maxim, I believe. The charters have taken possession of the people’s property and, thanks to our Supreme Court, the monied class also has possession of our politicians. In the current world we inhabit it would not surprise me at all to hear that the Ohio Supreme Court rules in favor of White Hat. But I am keeping my fingers crossed that common sense will, for once, prevail.
This will be interesting. No doubt the court ruling will also have an impact on the facilities of Head Start programs in Ohio.
Oh, it will also be interesting if the court rules that accepting Pell grants and research grants from federal and state governments gives those governments an ownership interest in the private colleges and universities in the state.
Private entities applying for federal tax money in the form of grants for research is not, in any way, the same as community tax money being taken to provide public educational services to the community. As usual your response aims to redirect and obfuscate.
Betsy,
It is not clear to me that the court would be able to disentangle the two, but I agree it is far more likely that organizations like Head Start of Franklin County, Inc. would be in the most danger of losing ownership of its facilities and equipment then Oberlin College if the court ruled that purchases of assets with by private entities using public funds means that the public owns those assets.
Why do you think that Head Start of Franklin County, Inc. should not be concerned?
State constitutions have specific provisions regarding “common public schools” that don’t include pre-k or college.
That’s why it’s a poor legal comparison.
We never had a universal public school system for college and pre-k. We DO have a universal public system for k-12.
So relying on your argument, what’s your proposal? Make k-12 into a system that is NOT universal and public? If that’s the argument, ed reformers should run on that.
Chiara,
It could well be that Ohio state law distinguishes between K-12 spending and other types of spending, but the common bumper sticker position about public spending going to private schools does not draw that fine a distinction.
Do you find Head Start part of a system that is not universal? It is certainly not public in the sense usually talked about here. I have no idea why folks here support Head Start as it exists today.
Perhaps Vergara/Campbell Brown reasoning can be turned around on this. If the management company owns the school’s assets, then they have for all practical purposes ” a contract for life” because boards and districts will not have the money to buy back – or sue for – the assets when any management fails. No one will be able to turn around or close failing charter schools (which is supposed to be part of their raison d’etre) because the process will be, as a matter of practicality, impossibly onerous
Please look at what is happening with the Gulen charter schools in Texas.
http://www.tbfurman.us/2014/08/public-risk-private-profit-gulenist.html
Schooling should be a “free” public service that does not treat one individual or group differently because of their (family) financial resources. Privatization inherently leads to discrimination on that basis for reasons that should be obvious to any high school student. Any use of taxpayer funds should not be sidetracked in any way that can even potentially benefit private parties or business at the expense of the general public. Public-private cooperation may be possible, of course. However, anytime public money is spent, it must not be diverted to even remotely enrich individuals whose interests and objectives are not strictly committed to public purposes and programs.
Now, let’s ask who it was who heavily promoted and established free public schooling during the nineteenth century. It was the top echelons from business and industry and the most powerful and influential political and religious leaders, was it not? As a historian, Diane Ravitch should know. Those who fought for more and more schooling for more and more kids were the industry leaders and fanatical religious types who believed that indolent and ignorant children should be “properly” instructed in how to and think and what was important and true. The Bible, Christian teaching and a certain “morality” were at the forefront for almost all of those Machiavellian types.
The common folk were adamantly opposed, especially to the compulsory feature, which was part of the deal that was jammed through despite angry protests. Ordinary farmers and working people felt that their rights as parents were being taken away and they believed that the elites had ulterior motives and sinister purposes in ram-rodding legislation through. In a manner similar to the undemocratic way corporations are currently using their money and power via lobbying, the moneyed interests of that unfortunate day pushed the legislation through in the various states, alleging that they only cared about the children and education. Sound familiar?
This is déjà vu all over again. It doesn’t matter what the little people say and it doesn’t matter how many daily posts there are on this blog. They got away with their paternalistic manipulation then, and they will get away with it now if you all continue to refuse to deal with the single most significant and fundamental error. The issue isn’t public versus private. They can steamroll right over you and the courts will ultimately side with the elites. The Supreme Court five are squarely on the side of the wealthy few.
Nearly total power was delivered to the people who in each generation are able to satisfy the demands of the politicians and wheeler-dealer types who run things in communities, states, the federal system, and in schooling and elsewhere through the establishment of laws requiring school attendance. It was a fatal mistake. You will never call the shots as concerned parents or educators because it was never about education or the welfare of children to begin with. Someday you will figure that out, if it isn’t already too late.
The wealthy elites believe they are superior and that they should decide for the rest of us how we should learn and grow from children into adults. Their perfect mechanism for keeping control is the behind-the-scenes control of schooling and what we know as curriculum by their “experts” and wizards as a consequence of authoritarian bureaucracies that indoctrinate children for twelve formative years. They aren’t going to let go of that power unless it is taken from them. The only possible way of taking it from them is to get the legal threats and intimidation removed from the picture entirely by eliminating the attendance laws. Nothing else will EVER make a dent as proven by generations of failed reforms.
Your real problem, once again, is the conflation of school and education. You cling to the notion that schooling assures at least a minimal level of education. But, the reality is that the more schooling that a person is exposed to, if it is traditional and involuntary, the less chance they will achieve any authentic level of education, formal or informal. But, don’t listen to me. Just go to the library and do a little real research with eyes open and blinders off. Sermon # 9,783.
I posted your rant on hemlockontherocks.com. Left me breathless…
Has there finally been one person on this blog that agrees with me? I hope you were breathless because you felt I said something meaningful and true. I’ve left people here breathless before, but only because they thought I was so far out on the fringe that they couldn’t believe I’m not in an institution. I checked out your site briefly. You have a lot more energy and talent than I could ever muster. I’ll take a closer look when I have more time. I didn’t see my remarks there, but I could have missed them, since I was rushed. Nevertheless, I couldn’t resist leaving a comment in response to the Brown v. Board article that you have posted there from earlier this year. Nothing has changed substantially in the last century in schooling due to the barriers to real innovation inherent in legalized “education”, which is anything but education. Equality isn’t going to become a priority as long as the law necessitates a hierarchical authority-based bureaucracy with power far removed from parents and teachers. Reinventing the educational wheel has become a cottage industry with the same concepts being recycled in one form or another a million times. But, the wheel is buried in concrete and new ideas go nowhere really fast.