Last fall, there was a hard-fought election in Washington State over charter schools. Voters had turned them down three times but this time was different: Bill Gates, the Walton family, and a passel of super-rich people gathered $10 million or so to support the charter idea and their initiative passed by a small margin.
However, today a judge ruled the law unconstitutional because the state constitution says public funds are solely for “common schools” and charters–under private management, are not common schools.
“In a ruling issued today (pdf), King County Superior Court Judge Jean Rietschel has tossed out the heart of Washington State’s charter schools law on the grounds that it violates the constitutional provision that state education revenues be “exclusively applied to the support of the common schools.”
“But, Judge Rietschel concludes: “A charter school cannot be defined as a common school because it is not under the control of the voters of the school district. The statute places control under a private non-profit organization, a local charter board and/or the Charter Commission.”
“In other words, charter schools may not be funded with state dollars dedicated to funding our state’s common schools.”
The term “common schools” was used in the nineteenth century to refer to public schools supported by all and open to all, under democratic control.
The court might usefully have looked at rulings in federal courts and the NLRB where charters have fended off lawsuits by disgruntled employees or by employees hoping to form a union by asserting that they are not public schools and are not subject to the same state laws. Or the courts might have looked at the amicus brief filed by the California Charter School Association in support of charter school founders convicted of misappropriation of public funds, earlier this fall. The charter founders were not guilty, said CCSA, because they were operating a private corporation with a government contract, not subject to the same laws as public schools.
You can be sure the decision today in Washington State will be appealed.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Yeah! Score 1 for common sense!
LikeLike
The “contractor” analysis on charter schools could get interesting. Ohio charters have claimed “contractor” status, too.
“Buried in the budget deal brokered by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) is a provision that dramatically reduces the maximum amount the federal government can pay most civilian and defense contractor employees on an annual basis.
The Ryan-Murray legislation, called the Bipartisan Budget Act, lowers that cap by almost half, to $487,000 — with “narrowly targeted exceptions” for scientists, engineers and other specialists who are validated by agency heads. It is to be adjusted annually based on the change in the cost of labor.”
So it’s a bit of a stretch, but is a corp like K12 a federal contractor if they receive federal funds? If they’re not public schools (and they claim in courts and before the NLRB that they aren’t) are they then subject to state laws governing contractors?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/budget-deal-slashes-salaries-for-federal-contractors
LikeLike
A big kerfuffle out here right now between both sides of the charter school law, with both claiming victory in the court decision today. Headlines vary widely, some saying the law was ruled constitutional, some saying it was ruled unconstitutional. Twitter getting nasty at times. It will be appealed to a higher court, soon.
LikeLike
This case isn’t over and will be taken to the Washington State Supreme Court.
The League of Education Voters (LEV) is heavily backed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. LEV heavily pushed this initiative and the YES campaign was funded at $11M. Despite $11M, the YES campaign narrowly won.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has recently provided the League of Education Voters with $4.2M for charter expansion in Washington State. I’m sure LEV is getting lawyered-up to fight this ruling.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2013/10/OPP1095105
LikeLike
Awesome
Jeff
LikeLike
It isn’t a victory for privatizers if the money spigot is cut off. The whole point of “charters” is to siphon public money for private gain.
I will say it over and over: these “schools” need to be abolished.
LikeLike
About time! Let us hope it makes the appeal process.
LikeLike
John King live on WBFO in Buffalo now: http://www.wbfo.org/content/pages/listen
LikeLike
I’ve given an update on the forum in Buffalo under Why does John King stubbornly cling to his views.
LikeLike
Any thoughts on how this might impact state funded colleges and universities in Washington? The University of Washington is certainly not “open to all”.
LikeLike
TE, I am sure that universities have never been defined as “common schools,” which are K-12.
LikeLike
I agree that they are not “public schools”, which the judge has ruled are the only schools entitled to public funding. That seems to me to be the problem. Perhaps they are not funded from funds dedicated to “public schools”. Of course that would mean that the legislature could fund charter schools (and the a University of Washington) from funds not dedicated to “public schools”.
LikeLike
I could be wrong, but I think TE is recommending that the legislature use their discretion of “freedom” to rob the money from some other state funded system that is bleeding money to pay for questionable charter services that have a history of fiscal malfeasance.
LikeLike
It is not a recommendation, rather an observation.
If a particular category of revenue must be devoted to X, reducing the revenue in that category is the simplest way to reduce spending on X and increase it on Y.
LikeLike
TE – the big problem the legislature has right now is that they are not fully funding the existing public schools. This was the subject of a lawsuit by school districts and others, and the state lost. The McCleary decision directs the legislature to fully fund K-12 education, and the judicial branch will check in with the legislature to see how they are doing. So far, they are not doing well, as the current traitor in charge won’t even discuss new revenue to fund education, and the current budget was built on a lot of gimmicks and robbing Peter (teachers) to pay Paul (the K-12 budget). Therefore, if they try to divert existing streams of revenue to fund charter schools – which are not common schools – then they’re probably going to have their proverbial asses handed to them on a platter since they can’t even manage to fund the schools they have and are required to fund. Therefore I suspect they will head towards some type of constitutional amendment to make an end run around both the McCleary decision and the common school definition.
Those DFER and LEV people in WA also want their profits from charters that their compadres are getting in other states, after all. And we’ve got our own fair share of unscrupulous legislators who will be only too happy to get some kickbacks in return for their “assured vote” on whatever will benefit the charter industry. The same thing happened when the legislature allowed in the virtual schools quite a few years ago – after the vote, several legislators resigned to take high-paying jobs with those online school companies. Imagine that.
LikeLike
It seems that many state legislatures and state courts are fighting over who decides what “ample” means.
LikeLike
TE – here is the wording in the WA State Constitution. I’m also including the preamble because it discusses discrimination and providing for ALL children. Normal schools are the higher Ed institutions.
SECTION 1 PREAMBLE. It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.
SECTION 2 PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. The legislature shall provide for a general and uniform system of public schools. The public school system shall include common schools, and such high schools, normal schools, and technical schools as may hereafter be established. But the entire revenue derived from the common school fund and the state tax for common schools shall be exclusively applied to the support of the common schools.
LikeLike
Thanks for the quote. How much freedom does the legislature have in determining what taxes are “state taxes for common schools”?
LikeLike
You can be sure Rodney “traitor” Tom and his merry band of neoliberals, turncoats, and conservatives will be doing whatever they can to amend the constitution to change the funding structure. So we’ll just have to see how successful they are. They still have to fully fund schools under the McCleary decision, which they have yet to do without gimmicks, like taking money from teachers.
LikeLike
I don’t think a constitutional amendment would be called for. How does a dollar of state funds become categorized as “state tax for common schools “?
LikeLike
This is terrific news!
LikeLike
I was at the hearing. There were a lot of notes being taken in relation to RCWs. Suspect there may be attempts to redefine, add language etc. to RCWs.
LikeLike
RCW?
LikeLike
RCW or Revised Code of Washington refers to Washington State statutes.
LikeLike
Hopefully this will be a landmark legal precedent for other states!
LikeLike
A very important decision. A great blow against the cronyism that has enriched the idiot cousins and brothers of politicians and plutocrats who have been cashing in on the education biz at the expense of kids. It’s time that people like this judge started calling the deformers out on their Newspeak. A for-profit charter chain is not a common school.
We have, here in Florida, a chain of charters in which the kids show up each day and do nothing but worksheets on a screen provided by a national virtual school company. Teachers are reduced to the status of facilitators of keeping these computers running. This travesty is run by a fellow who tells investors that he is not in the school biz but in the real estate biz. You see, he buys old buildings, collects taxpayer dollars for the kids he is educating, uses those dollars to lease the buildings from himself, and then pays this mortgages on the buildings or his investors in those buildings off. It’s a great scheme for making money by providing the minimum that the state will agree to call education while taking out of the system the maximum in returns.
“And be these juggling fiends no more believed, That palter with us in a double sense.” –Shakespeare, Macbeth
LikeLike
Thats good news…and a step in the right direction…keep on fighting the charter movement.
LikeLike
No voter control, no public money. Makes perfect sense to me.
LikeLike
It’s about time.
LikeLike
You don’t think public schools are “for profit”, take time to did into the cost accounting of your local school district where there are most likely a lot of misuse going on with funds. Look how top heavy the district is. Do they do “retire/rehire”? Are funds being used properly for Special Ed? When they rent out space, where does the money really go? How much are your top 10 people in the district making and are they all needed? Some schools have Deputy Superintendents who play golf most of the day. An overkill on assistant principals, district “TOSA’s”. Things like this are why teachers have to use so much of their own money to supply their classes and why there are way too many students per class.
Charter schools in some places are mismanaged and of no value to the students, I agree, but I have also see public school pass students who should not be, grades changed to keep the pass/fail ratio in check and worse. I have also seen Charter Schools that were a huge success, parents, students and staff loving them. Those don’t get mentioned often.
Nothing out there is black and white, people need to dig deep. Why are our colleges having to drop below a math 101 because professors say they are teaching many kids what amounts to 6th grade math? This should not be happening.
LikeLike
KC,
A study of “span of control” done in the 90’s found that in the business sector there is one supervisor for every five employees. In the public education realm there is one supervisor for every 22 or so employees. Now either teachers (they do make up the bulk of employees in a district by far) are such excellent employees that they don’t need much supervision or the administration in education is that much better and more efficient than in the business world. But tell me about how efficient business is in comparison to public education, please!!!
LikeLike
And there are all sorts of spin off companies making profits form the sale of trade books, text books, teachers manuals, periodicals, furniture, school supplies, office supplies, copy machines, computers, smart boards, LCD projectors, now iPads, also architects, plumbers, electricians, construction workers for buildings being updated, etc. Then, of course, there are the universities and colleges that train the teachers. The state which collects the certification fees. The speakers who come in to do training. And the companies that publish the testing. Did I hear someone say Pearson?
LikeLike
Here is the judge’s response: http://ourvoicewashingtonea.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Order-on-Motion-for-Summary-Judgment.pdf
There are several components of this argument. The plaintiffs won some and charter supporters won some, too. At this time, charters will continue to move forward.
Unfortunately, I am in complete agreement with K. Quinn and I suspect there will b be an attempt to do an end-run around this decision. According to the decision, I 1240 does not meet the “common school” definition and can’t receive construction, and possibly, funds from state tax.
House Appropriations Chairman Ross Hunter is a questionable Democrat and Hunter supported charter schools. Here is what Hunter said via Seattle Times:
“Charters could exist without state property-tax dollars, he said, but the Legislature would have to fund them through other means.”
Even if charter schools can’t be financed with state property taxes, he said, “We use all kinds of money to pay for public schools.”
Hunter states he hadn’t read the court ruling.
Here is the Seattle Times article;
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2022452464_charterrulingxml.html
So, we have a legislature that is charged with failing to fund educations and they are under a court order to do so. Then, I’m sure we will have a bunch of legislators and Senators that will be willing to fund charters over public education.
It should be noted that the legislators left Olympia last year without funding transportation. Last year, funding for education was obtained by withholding voter approved COLA for teachers and transferring dollars from the capital budget to operating budget.
LikeLike
Thanks, Sarah, for these links to Washington State ruling.
It seems to say that it is okay to create privately managed charter schools but that these schools are not “common schools” and are therefore not eligible for funding that is reserved in the state constitution for genuine public schools, schools that are democratically controlled.
Where does Washington state go now?
This is not dissimilar from Louisiana voucher decision, where courts said that they were not holding vouchers unconstitutional but that public funding was reserved for public schools.
Legislature had to create a separate, new funding source.
LikeLike
Thanks for this information, Diane.
Reuven Carlyle is the Chair of the House Finance Committee. Carlyle calls himself a Democrat, but voted for charter schools:
.http://reuvencarlyle36.com/2012/05/21/yellow-canaries-in-the-coal-mines-of-public-education/
I’d asked Carlyle about his support for charter schools. Carlyle told me that he supports “private charters”. I’d never heard of such a thing.
Given the fact that Reuven Carlyle and Ross Hunter hold key financing positions in the legislature, it is certainly worth watching these two guys.
LikeLike
Charters are indeed “private.” He is right about that. They are not subject to the same state laws as public schools; they make up their own disciplinary policies. They argue in court and before the NLRB that they are not public schools. They continue to find supporters by having the backing of some of our nation’s wealthiest people, who give the charters extra funding and who make generous campaign contributions. Check the campaign finance records of your legislators.
LikeLike
State legislatures in many states have state that charters are public schools. Unlike many magnet schools throughout the country (including New York), charters in most states are not allowed to have admissions tests.
The charter movement also has encouraged some school districts in places like Boston, LA and New York to ask district public school educators to create new within district options, sometimes called Pilots.
There are a variety of school choice programs. Some (like exclusive admission magnets, have produced situations where neighborhood schools have have a far higher % of low income, limited English speaking and students of color). Some charter programs have worked well, some have not.
LikeLike
We will await the Supreme Court Decision.
LikeLike
Waiting for Supremen.
LikeLike
Great News!
LikeLike
Another view of the Washington state situation from the Seattle Times:
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/today/2013/12/judge-upholds-most-of-state-charter-school-law/ utm_content=buffer1d3fd&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer
The judge apparently ruled that charters are not eligible for construction funds because they are not controlled by a local board.
But for many years, Washington State has had a “Running Start” program allowing 11th and 12th graders to take courses on college campus, with state funds paying their tuition. That’s part of public education in Washington, but the participating colleges are not controlled by a local board.
Many states have examples of statewide public schools that are not controlled by a locally elected school board.
Reply
LikeLike
This is only the beginning. The other value of this ruling is to put the focus back on the odious provisions of I-1240, which voters never got to hear about given how the billionaires who created this vile law outspent the opposition 17 to 1.
That’s not a misprint: The Privatizers Outspent Their Opponents By Seventeen To One.
But even with that egregious, billionaire-purchased edge, they could do no better than a statistical tie. Three weeks after the election, when every vote was finally counted, the pro-charter billionaire purchased “law” won by a hair of a hair.
However, now that we’re going to be focused on I-1240 again, maybe this time our citizens can hear about the “Trigger” which allows a private company to come in and circulate a petition for school takeover in secret among parents or teachers, using paid signature gatherers who would go door-to-door in the neighborhood: and there is no requirement, of course, to actually tell people the truth about what they’re signing.
The next day, we parents could come to school to learn that it is now “seized” by a private group that has immediately fired everyone, from the principal on down,”
And that’s just scratching the surface of this truly vile, anti-education initiative.
Stay tuned. This is actually our NATION’S fight for Public Education!
LikeLike
I am a special education teacher teaching in a large city on the east coast, but I am a native of the state of Washington. The title of this post is incorrect and hyperbolic. King County Superior Court Judge Jean Rietschel did not rule charter schools unconstitutional. Rather, she ruled that charter schools “don’t meet the definition of “common schools” because they are not under the control of the voters of the school” (quotation from the article linked below). As a result, charter schools are not eligible for state construction funds.
Judge gives go-ahead for charter schools, but raises funding question: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2022452464_charterrulingxml.html
LikeLike
Michelle, I followed up the first post about the Washington state court decision with another saying tat it is difficult to decipher the decision. If charter schools are. Not common schools–and the are not–then they receive no funding dedicated to public schools, not just construction funds. Without public funding, Bill Gates and friends will have to pay the costs.
LikeLike