Jonathan Pelto has covered the charter school scams and scandals in Connecticut and often pointed out that the charters with the highest scores don’t accept the lowest performing students. That was the original purpose of charters. Ironically, the same cast of characters and hedge fund managers can be found pushing privatization of public schools across the nation.
In this post, Pekto draws attention to an excellent article on this subject by Sarah Darer Littman.
Littman analyzes the Washington state court decision and connects its relevance to Connecticut.
Jonathan writes:
“In her latest piece, Littman challenges Connecticut legislators to pay “close attention to several interesting legal developments on the West Coast, which could have significant implications here in the Nutmeg State.”
Sarah Darer Littman writes,
“The first came Sept. 5, when the state Supreme Court in Washington ruled 6-3 that charter schools don’t qualify as “common” schools under the state’s constitution, and therefore can’t receive public funding intended for traditional public schools.
“Our inquiry is not concerned with the merits or demerits of charter schools,” Chief Justice Barbara Madsen wrote in the majority opinion. “Whether charter schools would enhance our state’s public school system or appropriately address perceived shortcomings of that system are issues for the legislature and the voters. The issue for this court is what are the requirements of the constitution.”
Littman writes:
“Charter schools have always tried to play the public/private issue both ways. The acts of calling themselves “public” when it comes to claiming funds from the public purse, yet immediately claiming to be private entities the minute accountability and FOIA matters are raised, have created several interesting conundrums, as we have observed right here in our own backyard. (See FUSE, ConnCAN)
In the Washington State case this play it both ways strategy finally went pear-shaped:
[The Washington court writes:]
“The words ‘common school’ must measure up to every requirement of the constitution . . . and whenever by any subterfuge it is sought to qualify or enlarge their meaning beyond the intent and spirit of the constitution, the attempt must fail . . . Bryan established the rule that a common school, within the meaning of our constitution, is one that is common to all children of proper age and capacity, free, and subject to and under the control of the qualified voters of the school district. The complete control of the schools is a most important feature, for it carries with it the right of the voters, through their chosen agents, to select qualified teachers, with powers to discharge them if they are incompetent.”
Littman writes:
“The court listed all the ways charters fail to meet these qualifications. Namely, they are:
1) “governed by a charter school board,” which is “appointed or selected . . . to manage and operate the charter school.”
2) The charter school board has the power to hire and discharge charter school employees and may contract with nonprofit organizations to manage the charter school.
3) They are “free from many regulations” that govern other schools.
4) Charter schools are “exempt from all school district policies,” as well as “all . . . state statutes and rules applicable to school districts” except those listed in I-1240 section 204(2) and those made applicable in the school’s charter contract.”
Littman writes:
“In other words the Washington state court finally issued a ruling confirming what many of us here in Connecticut have been saying for years: charters are siphoning off taxpayer money from the public school system without sufficient (if any) accountability. Calling them “public schools” is merely convenient political fiction.”
Five different Washington state attorneys general, representing both major parties, disagree with with the court’s majority.
http://smartergovernmentwa.org/unanimous-five-attorneys-general-think-court-got-charters-case-wrong/
Among other things, the current attorney general points out that the state’s Running Start has operated for many years despite the fact that it is not under the control of a local school board. Running Start allows high school students to take courses at many Washington state colleges and universities with state funds paying (depending on the students) all or part of the tuition costs.
Keep grasping at those straws.
Joe,
It doesn’t matter at this point what the AG’s think nor whatever party they are from has any bearing whatsoever. I would think that maybe then the Running Start program (and I know absolutely nothing about it but what you have written) may not be constitutionally viable and will need to be reauthorized in a way that is.
(you’re using a strawman argument with both your examples-I’ve come to expect better from you as you usually present fairly cogent responses, sometimes much to the dismay of some posters here)
Duane, we’ll see what happens. The central logic of the majority was that the state constitution does not allow public $ to be spent in education unless the education program is controlled by a local board.
But as the current & other Washington state attorney generals have pointed out, this is inconsistent with what Washington state has done with other educational programs.
As I’ve noted in response to other postings here, many states fund schools that are not controlled by local boards. These include schools for students who are blind, or hard of hearing, or statewide magnet schools for youngsters with special skills in the arts, math or science.
I am sure the Waltons must be disappointed. Alice Walton put close to a million into the Washington State referendum, which passed by less than 1%. And then there was Bill Gates, the Bezos family, and a handful of other billionaires who decided to buy the election.
Money is flowing freely & extensively in elections. I agree sometimes with teacher unions and disagree sometimes. Same is true of the people you mention, Diane (Agree sometimes, disagree sometimes – for example, I opposed vouchers which Walton and others have supported).
Here’s a Washington Post article about how teacher unions spent $60 million on recent elections (separate articles have noted they spent $ in Washington State on the charter referendum)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/teachers-unions-spent-60-million-for-the-midterms-but-still-lost-many-elections/2014/11/05/b70aa066-6528-11e4-9fdc-d43b053ecb4d_story.html
Joe, I don’t know any union that matches the combined spending of the Waltons, Bloomberg, Gates, Broad, Dell, Fisher Family, Bezos, Arnold. Do you? Have you noticed that all the billionaires are on the same side? Including the Koch brothers.
Diane, I think the first issue is whether Washington state supreme court made the right decision. I posted opinions by 5 recent Democratic and Republican attorneys general who believe that the court erred because the state legislature does support education programs that are not controlled by local boards.
As to the billionaires, while I’m not an expert on billionaires, I do know that George Soros has an agenda quite different from the Kochs and Waltons.
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/programs/us-programs
The Carlson sisters of Minnesota, listed by Forbes as billionaires, invest in mentorship and the University of Minnesota, among other places.
Teacher unions bring not only cash but also the work of their members, who are sometimes heavily involved in campaigns. Again I think that’s fine – part of democratic principles.
I have seen no support from the foundations you mention for any state or local grassroots organization trying to save their public schools from the privatization movement. If Soros or the Carlsons support higher education, that’s swell. Neither give a penny to the hundreds of local parent-led groups fighting privatization and high-stakes testing. They don’t support the opt out movement, they don’t support the Network for Public Education, they don’t support NC Public Schools First, they don’t support parent groups in Florida, Massachusetts, Colorado, Indiana, Ohio, or anywhere else.
Please name any K-12 program that has the support of billionaires. Your side–the privatizers–has Gates, Walton, the Koch brothers, John Arnold, Michael Bloomberg, Jeff Bezos, Sheldon Adelson, Art Pope, and every other billionaire I can think if. I would love your help in identifying a billionaire–just one–who might help parents trying to save their public schools.
As father of 3 graduates of urban public schools, a former urban PTA president, “honorary life member of the Minnesota PTA, and frequent ally of the St. Paul and Minneapolis Federation of Teachers, I’m on “the side” of excellent urban, suburban and rural public schools.
There are lots of people, like me, who do not agree there are just 2 sides
Both Soros and Carlson have supported k-12 public school efforts, not just those to help improve colleges and universities.
Can you name any grassroots organizations that Carlson and Soros have supported? Any parent groups? Public education is threatened by rightwing ideologues and neoliberal allies like you. How do you feel about Eli Broad taking control of 50% of LA’s pupils? How do you feel about NC stripping funds from public schools to enrich their chums in the charter biz? How do you feel about the for-profit frauds in Ohio, Michigan, and Florida? Joe, you used to be a progressive, charters have now become the favorite cause of rightwing ideologues in ALEC, the Heartland Institute, and every rightwing governor. Face it. Your movement has been co-opted by the far right.
Diane, as you point out from time to time, this is your electronic home, so you get to make the rules.
It appears you are not disagreeing that Washington state does provide funds allowing high school students to attend and earn credit toward graduation at public colleges that are not controlled.
In terms of funding for grass roots organizations, there’s a terrific grassroots group in Minnesota founded by a suburban school board member named Parents United. It has received funding from a variety of foundations, including a major group of banks that have offices in several states. I don’t know if the group has been funded by Carlson or Soros.
In terms of other grass roots groups, several of the foundations you have criticized have funded the Black Alliance for Educational Options. There are African American activists all over the country who are members of BAEO. I realize you don’t like the foundation or their positions – and I agree with some and disagree with others.
For 13 years, the Ford Foundation provided $45 to local education funds, which were organizations traditional districts had set up to support their work. They had local citizens on their boards, determining their activities. Here’s a link to the report about what they learned.
Click to access strategies_improving_public_education.pdf
One final point: the term “privatization” is used regularly here.
What’s more private: a local district public school open to all throughout a metropolitan or rural area, a local charter public school open to all throughout a metropolitan or rural area, a district public school in an exclusive suburb that hires detectives to keep out students from a nearby city, or an exclusive “magnet” school that is open only to a handful of students who can pass a standardized traditional test?
For some of us progressives, the first two are much more “public” and the second two are much more private.
Joe,
I’m not so sure as to why the funds have to supposedly be controlled by local boards. Perhaps, as indicated by the decision, that is the case in WA but I am not so sure that it is the case everywhere. Does anyone here have a better grip on that aspect?
Without knowing each state’s constitutional wording/court precedents it seems that the whole “has to be under local control” is a red herring meme (not sure originated by whom/what side of these debates) that doesn’t mean a whole lot/do much for either side (unless it truly can be considered a constitutional issue). I certainly don’t have the expertise to know, again, if someone does please chime in!
$60 million? Why, that’s shocking. Another $40 million and you’ll reach what just Mark Zuckerberg spent in just Newark.
You do realize that unions represent millions of people, right? So $60 million is roughly like every union member chipping in $3. Again, shocking.
How do students get into the Running Start program? Don’t they have to have approval from their local school? In which case, isn’t the money essentially being controlled by the local board?
No, Running Start students don’t have to have permission from the local board and no, the $ are not controlled by the local board. 11th and 12th grade Students do have to take courses at colleges that will meet state high school graduation requirements
Sorry to burst Nathan’s bubble but Running Start does have our local school board overseeing the high school students who go into the program and high school teachers vet the courses. So yes, it can be proven that program does have some local control. And it’s a program whereas charters are schools. Big difference.
And, there are many judges who DO agree with the ruling including one who says he voted for charter schools and now, on reading the ruling, says he agrees with the Court.
The ruling will be upheld and charter supporters in WA state will have to start over. We who fought this law warned them it was unconstitutional and their hubris has gotten us to this point where we are today.
Fearmongering by the charter rah-rah crowd. They’ve also accused the justices of wrongdoing based on a whopping $1900 dollar donation from the WEA. Ironically, not a single whiny pro-charter legislator has admitted to the ALEC money THEY took. They are OWNED by ALEC. The AGs quoted are primarily GOP – what do you think they’re going to say? And then we have some selective editing by the GOP Washington Policy Center trying to show our former Gov Gregoire speaking against the ruling, when actually she only spoke against the timing of the ruling. But that’s what the charter industry does – cheat, fraud, cherry pick kids and utilize selective data… The Washington State Legislature has a job to do – fund PUBLIC schools, not privatized schools. If Bill Gates and his DINO and GOP buddies want charter schools, they can pay for them. They’ve managed to do so this year – they can do it again.
Poor Washington public schools. Your entire state government will now be consumed with “choice” issues for the next decade.
The public schools will be completely ignored- every debate will center around charter schools, all energy will go toward charter schools- the public schools will be an unfashionable duty, an after-thought, and really only mentioned in comparison to charter schools.
Get ready to join reform-land. It’s all charters, all the time.
Chiara,
Unless my sarcasmometer is broken, I think you missed the point of the ruling. The ruling confirms that charter schools are not public schools and therefore ARE NOT eligible to receive any state monies.
This is a huge ruling in that it paves the way for other courts in other states to more closely examine the constitutional language that may or may not allow public monies to private schools. It will depend on each state’s constitutional wording. You might be advised to go back and reread Ohio’s constitution, there may be an opening for you.
I actually once took a course on state constitutions, which was really interesting. I’m a fan of Ohio’s earlier versions because they were probably more “progressive” on issues related to “the commons” (although not in some other areas) than any law that would pass in Ohio now.
I was speaking to this narrative, this focus, that happens in “choice” states where the public system is relegated to a lesser role- the role of back-up, where the public schools are only valued in relation to and comparison with the “charter sector”. It’s all over ed reform. It permeates this “movement”. I don’t even think they’re aware of the omission. There is simply no mention of the effects on the existing system.
That’s why I don’t believe ed reformers are “agnostics”- they would consider the public system if they valued it. They don’t value it because they don’t even consider it. Public schools are more than the safety net for charters and private schools. They have value all by themselves.
Many of the people involved in trying to improve public schools have enrolled their youngsters in district public schools, including urban district schools that do not have admissions tests. That includes the 3 children in our family.
For many of us, urban district schools, open to all, can and should be a valued option.
Better judges in Washington than in Ohio. See the recent, horrific, Whitehat decision
Just remember- lawmakers in Ohio have the opportunity right now to protect public funds and they are refusing to do so. The regulations they’re writing are weak and unenforceable.
It is up to the legislature to fix White Hat. They are refusing to do so. When the next scandal arises (and it will) it is all on them.
The next time a charter operator converts public funds to private profits, our lawmakers endorsed that, by refusing to act.
To note: this decision was all about our state constitution. Washington state has a constitution unlike most other states – it says that public education is the “paramount duty” of our state and defines “common schools.” It is the only governmental function in the constitution.
It doesn’t matter if it’s not “right” or “fair” – the Justices made this ruling with our state constitution in mind.
As for Running Start, it’s a program that allows high school students to take community college classes. It will NOT end because of this ruling – that has already been proven but charter supporters want to use that as a red herring.
I hate to tell Chiara but, at the same time as this ruling, we have the McCleary decision (also a Supreme Court decision) that found our state was not fully funding public education. THAT is job one and has everyone’s attention, save the charter school supporters. In fact, this ruling seems to ripple more outside the state
than inside it.
We will prevail and the Court will uphold this ruling and charter supporters
can start from zero.
Cheers for this outstanding and common sense ruling !
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Sarah-Darer-Littman-s-late-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Accountability_Charter-Schools_Connecticut_Fraud-150925-493.html#comment564679
I read the arguments here, but do not have the time to respond to some the stuff that Nathan posts. I do know this …there are 15,880 LOCAL SYSTEMS, and that division plays into the hands of those who seek to conquer and end public schools.
It’s a free for all across the nation, and local folks simply do not have the information, the money, and the power of access to ensure that LEARNING actually occurs in the ways that the human brain acquires skills. Koch, Soros and the $$$ied folks have the resources to exploit this ignorance.
I know one thing, the INSTITUTION of PUBLIC EDUCATION is being eradicated by the wealthy class and thus they are creating a servant class. Our founding fathers are turning over in their graves as the common good of the people of this nation is ended.