You probably don’t remember the claims made by charter advocates when they were starting this dual system of schools; they said they could get better results for less money, which would be a huge cost savings for taxpayers.
As we have seen in state after state, charters usually get worse results than public schools, except when they cherry pick the students they want and kick out the ones with low scores.
Better results for less money? Forget about it.
Charter operators in New York are suing for more money, saying that it is not fair that public schools get more money. The parent plaintiffs are from Buffalo and Rochester. You would think that with their capacity to tap hedge fund managers for millions, they would be satisfied to let public schools–which have larger proportions of students with disabilities and English language learners–get the money they need for the students they enroll.
Ed Justice Newsblast – Charter Operators Want More Money in New York
CHARTER OPERATORS WANT MORE MONEY IN NEW YORK
September 22, 2014
Similar Lawsuits Expected in Other States
On September 15, 2014, the Northeast Charter Schools Network (NECSN) and charter parents filed a lawsuit against the State of New York, seeking more taxpayer support for charter schools, specifically for facilities.
The lawsuit, Brown v. New York, which was filed in Buffalo, claims the funding system used by the State to allocate money to charter schools violates the state constitution. The plaintiffs argue that the state funding formula denies children enrolled in charter schools access to a “sound basic education,” as required by the New York State Constitution. Additionally, they allege that the funding scheme has a disproportionate and discriminatory impact on minority students.
The parent plaintiffs are from Buffalo and Rochester and are represented by Herrick, Feinstein LLP, Park Avenue, New York, NY.
As reported in the Rochester City Newspaper, the Alliance for Quality Education, a statewide group that advocates for high quality public education for all New York students, issued a statement calling the suit a “deceptive PR stunt.” “Despite the fact that public schools are severely underfunded, Wall Street-backed charter school groups continue to use aggressive propaganda to win more public school dollars,” the statement asserts.
The plaintiffs ask the court to issue an injunction and a declaratory judgment that the State’s funding scheme violates the Equal Protection and Education Clauses of the New York Constitution and discriminates on the basis of race.
As reported in the Hartford Courant, one of the co-founders of NECSN, Michael Sharpe, falsified his academic credentials, resigned from leadership of a charter school organization, and was convicted of embezzling public funds years earlier.
In North Carolina and Washington, DC, charter school organizations filed cases seeking additional public funding. And, Connecticut, because NECSN is active there, could anticipate a similar suit. It bears watching to see if charter organizations take similar actions in other states.
Related Stories:
Charters and “Choice” Increase Segregation and Reduce Achievement for Students in North Carolina
Education Justice Press Contact:
Molly A. Hunter, Esq.
Director, Education Justice
email: mhunter@edlawcenter.org
voice: 973 624-1815 x19
http://www.edlawcenter.org
http://www.educationjustice.org
Copyright © 2014 Education Law Center. All Rights Reserved.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
These people are worse than leeches. First they wanted a chance to do more with less…now they claim they can only do more with more? How does deprofessionalizing and paying teachers less and profitizing the rest for charter school founders make things better for everyone?
How about they take less profits and use that to fill the gap instead of asking for more money.
“. . . now they claim they can only do more with more?”
The “more” that they will be doing is putting more money into their own bank accounts.
I imagine these hypocrites, I mean plaintiffs, have been emboldened by the Vergara-style lawsuits filed in NYC.
Although NYS is phasing out for-profit charter schools, pray, pray that the current cap on new charters is never, ever lifted!
Sharon – Is NYS really phasing out for-profit charter schools? I hope you are right! Can you provide me a link so I can read more about this? I’m doubtful that the cap on new charters won’t be lifted in NYS. It is so sad.
NY mom,
It is my understanding that NYS does not allow for profit charter schools.
Several years ago, I think perhaps in 2010, the NY legislature amended the charter law to ban for-profit charter schools. Existing for-profit schools were grandfathered in. The law functioned as a phase-out.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Surprising that the suit cites cost needs for buildings when lenders can use the New Markets Tax Credit to nearly double their money over 7 years.
CROSS- POSTED AT
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Charter-Schools-in-New-Yor-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Charter-Schools_Diane-Ravitch_Money_Schools-140922-924.html
WITH THIS COMMENT (WHICH HAS LINKS TAKEN FROM THIS SITE TO THE POSTS WHICH I COPIED BELOW:
In the 15,880 districts around the nation who are facing the conspiracy to replace public education with Charters, the same stories play out. Here are a few:
Ohio: The letter grades for Ohio schools were posted recently, and most charter schools in Summit County were rated F.Across Ohio, 47% of 251 charters saw a drop in scores. In Summit County, with 9 charters, only two improved. The only charter to receive an A grade is run by the county, not entrepreneurs. The other 7 charters in Summit County were rated F.”Charter schools managed by for-profit companies reported the lowest test results.
New Orleans :
Paul Tractenberg, a distinguished law professor at Rutgers University, challenges the ideathat all-charter districts based on the New Orleans model are a magic bullet for Newark, Camden, and other low-performing districts in New Jersey. He notes that for the past four years, we have been bombarded with propaganda films like “Waiting for Superman” and “Won’t Back Down,” intended to convince us of the superiority of privatized charter schools over traditional public schools. But, Tractenberg notes, the evidence is missing. Contrary to media hype, the Recovery School District in New Orleans is one of the lowest-performing districts in the state. No miracle there.
When Kristen Buras read that the leaders of York City, Pennsylvania, were considering turning their schools into an all-charter district, she didn’t think it was a good idea. When she read that all the students in Muskegon Heights, Michigan, had been turned over to for-profit charter operator, Mosaica, she thought it was necessary to issue a warning.
“Mosaica? I’ve been studying the corporate takeover of New Orleans public schools for the past decade. Let me share a story that community members in York City will find relevant to their battle. It comes from the Times-Picayune newspaper and reveals how the board of Lafayette Academy charter school in New Orleans terminated its contract with Mosaica, which was paid $773,000 for the first year of its five-year agreement. Nonetheless, Mosaica failed to arrange appropriate transportation for students; did not organize a repeatedly requested after-school program for students below grade level; and kept the school filthy. The school also lacked copy machines and insurance when the school year began. Through a legal arbitration process, a judgment of $350,000 was issued against Mosaica. Find the story here:
Nashville: Jesse Register, the Director of Metro Nashville public schools, proposes to close a number of low-performing schools and replace them with charter schools, despite the fact that the state’s all-charter Achievement School District has not outperformed public schools.
Palm Beach : The Palm Beach County Commission allocated $20 million to enable a new charter school to borrow money for school construction. Some members of the commission opposed it, but the majority thought it was just another business that needed public funding.
Chicago: Rahm Emanuel wants to privatize public education as much and as fast as he can. Aside from closing down 50 schools in one fell swoop, the mayor privatized custodial services to two companies for $340 million over three years, promising cleaner schools and cost savings.But, as reported by Catalyst, a respected journal that covers education in Chicago, principals complain that their schools are filthy and rodent-infested. The corporations have promised to improve.
For more.
put Charters in the search field on the site of Diane Ravitch
https://dianeravitch.net/
and see the many posts she makes each week that tell the tale and the travesty that the billionaire’s boys club has orchestrated to end the INSTITUTION OF PUBLIC Education… and thus -THE ROAD TO OPPORTUNITY. (How odd, that the Ken Burns documentary airs this week and shows us what a country’s leader LOOKS LIKE when he cares about the common good!)
I thought I had reached a limit on my perception of “incredible moments in edu-reform”.
After reading this post, I see I was wrong.
Did I miss something… “Did hell freeze over”… the operative “segway” into that phrase being “when”!!!!!!!!!!!
This reminds me of the old saying, Give them an inch and they will take a foot. In this case, now that they have the inch, they want ten-thousand miles and then more.
This all leads us to the conclusion: Charters are pity, disingenuous, hypocritical edu-coal mine tax dollar fracking business.
Ken,
Perhaps some charters are like that. Others are not.
“FLERP!
September 22, 2014 at 8:36 pm
Several years ago, I think perhaps in 2010, the NY legislature amended the charter law to ban for-profit charter schools. Existing for-profit schools were grandfathered in. The law functioned as a phase-out.”
“non-profit” isn’t really a guarantee. You’d have to look at the state law and the contract and the individual school.
Texas (supposedly) bars for-profits, but it doesn’t really mean anything:
“On a recently approved Texas charter school application, blacked-out paragraphs appear on almost 100 of its 393 pages.
Redactions on the publicly available online version of the application often extend for pages at a time. They include sections on the school’s plan to support students’ academic success, its extracurricular activities and the “extent to which any private entity, including any management company” will be involved in the school’s operation. The “shaded material,” according to footnotes, is confidential proprietary or financial information.”
There’s actually a brand new workaround in Texas to get past the “non-profit” in state law, and it’s connected to facilities financing. They’re going to make a lot of money building facilities. Agassi is the bold innovator who came up with it.
It’s easy to get around state law. They just have to set up “the school” as a non-profit entity and then they fill that shell with for-profit services or facility financing.
This is a little more on how the “non profit” and “for profit” line gets very blurry:
“KIPP Destiny Elementary is Canyon-Agassi’s first investment in Dallas-Fort Worth and its first with KIPP DFW, a charter school network that provides college-preparatory education for students from underserved backgrounds, Canyon-Agassi CEO Bobby Turner told me in an interview.
“This is the first of what we hope to be many schools in D-FW and in Texas,” Turner said.
The school secured its new home through a partnership with Canyon-Agassi, a Los Angeles based investment fund that provides capital to charter school operators, enabling them to acquire school facilities.
The fund is a for-profit fund that recognizes that making money and changing society need not be exclusive,” Turner told me. “We have a purpose, but if we don’t return a fair profit to our investor, we won’t be able to raise more money and therefor we won’t be able to build more schools in the future.”
The charter management entity or “school” can then buy the building from the fund.
There won’t be any way to tell who is making what money on charter schools in a decade.
The for-profit/non-profit line will disappear.
http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2013/10/23/canyon-agassi-fund-kipp-partner-to.html?page=all
Non profit doesn’t stop them from paying themselves huge salaries. Nonprofit doesn’t stop them from contracting with a for profit that bleeds the money into a dark pool of a management company. Non profit doesn’t stop publicly financed renovations on private land.
I agree. I do think it’s important for marketing, though, particularly in northeastern states like NY or NJ.
I notice every piece promoting charter schools in those places makes this careful distinction between their charter schools which are non-profits and those OTHER charter schools which are for-profits in states like OH, PA, FL and MI 🙂
I don’t think it’ll matter a hill of beans in a decade, the line btwn for-profit and non-profit will be gone. other than as an IRS designation.
“As we have seen in state after state, charters usually get worse results than public schools, except when they cherry pick the students they want and kick out the ones with low scores.”
That may be the case in “state after state,” but in New York City, where the vast majority of the state’s charter schools are located, charters are doing solid work, particularly with “at risk” students who have been effectively barred from high-performing schools by segregation and the district system: http://credo.stanford.edu/documents/NYC_report_2013_FINAL_20130219_000.pdf
Charter schools in New York City receive $13,700 per student. New York City DOE schools get about $19,000 (this breaks down to about $15,000 per gen ed student and $45,000 per special ed student). The number rises to almost $24,000 per DOE student when considering non-operational costs, mainly pensions, which are poised to skyrocket in the years ahead. At a net cost of nearly $10,000 less per student, I think the claim that New York charters are doing less with more is largely accurate.
Charter schools educate about 4% of the public school population in New York State and there is a firm cap on the number of additional charters that may be granted, so it’s hard to take seriously the Rochester City Paper’s breathless worry about a parallel public school system. Besides, they must be aware that New York State has had parallel public school systems for decades now, long predating the charter school law. There’s a system for poor minorities and a system for everyone else–often within the same district (PS 321, PS 29, PS 6, etc.) and even occasionally within a single school building.
No, this does happen in New York City as well. Success Academy does counsel out children who do not test well. I heard that from a former Upper West Success Academy parent, who is close to a family who still attends the school. I don’t understand why you are in such denial about this, except that possibly the existence of Success Academy allows you to live a certain lifestyle (cheaper apartment in Harlem, passable school to send your children to versus ghetto school) and that you will defend that regardless.
While there are some charter schools which are ethically managed, a charter school, such as Success Academy, further exacerbates the parallel public school system, as evidenced by Upper West Success Academy and its 29% free lunch rate. There is a system for poor minorities and there is a system for everyone else with many charter schools being included in that system for “everyone else.”
My children attend traditional NYC DOE district schools, not a Success Academy.
I’m aware of all the second- and third-hand stories about counseling out. I strongly encourage you to advise your acquaintance to contact Beth Fertig or Juan Gonzalez, or, far more importantly, Success’s charter authorizer, the SUNY Charter Schools Institute. If the child in question had an IEP, by law their complaint must be investigated.