Ohio school districts have found an innovative way to express their opposition to their loss of funding to pay for charters. Ohio has a large number of failing charters. The district’s are sending the bill to the state.
“Boards of education continue to pass resolutions to invoice the state for charter school deductions
“A note from Fairborn board member Andy Wilson indicates that the Fairborn Board will vote on a resolution to invoice the state on January 14. The title of the resolution, “Resolution to authorize the Treasurer to invoice the Ohio Department of Education for money paid by Fairborn City School’s Taxpayers that has been sent to charter schools without voter approval”. The words “without voter approval” put emphasis on a very germane point.
“The state has enacted laws that rip local funds away from school districts to support a failed $7 billion experiment that harms students and wastes tax money, including dollars from local tax levies.
“Districts should not hesitate to invoice the state.”
William Phillis
Ohio E & A
Join Our Mailing List!
Ohio E & A
100 S. 3rd Street
Columbus OH 43215
Sent by ohioeanda@sbcglobal.net
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Charter funding is complicated and it’s different in every state.
Their specific compliant is this- when the state pulls state funding from a public school and sends it to a charter school, they pull MORE state money than the school got in the first place.
So a public school could be funded as follows- 2k in state funding and then 5k in local funding. But the charter student pulls 7k out. That means two things- the children in the public school lose their share of state funding and the charter school is pulling a share of local funding. Charter schools are not allowed to rely on local funding for a very good reason- they don’t have locally elected boards. They are getting local funding though, it just comes thru a back-door method.
Here’s another (better) explanation:
“In it, you can see that prior to charter schools receiving their funding, children in districts receive more money per pupil than they do after charters take their money and students.
Yes, local revenue can fill the gap. But there is, in fact, a gap. And not every district has enough local revenue to fill the entire hole. And in any case, there remains a hole in the total amount spent in the district, even with local revenue. So in many cases, districts have to cut back to make up the difference.
I don’t wish this to be so, but the data don’t lie. If kids in local schools have $5,000 in state money (as an example) before charters get paid, and $4,850 in state money after charters get paid. How, exactly, does that not adversely impact children who aren’t in charters?”
http://www.10thperiod.com/2015/06/yes-charter-school-funding-in-ohio.html
LikeLike
“. . .they pull MORE state (sic) money than the school got in the first place.”
I believe you mean that the state pulls more money than they gave the district on a per pupil basis, in other words the state is taking local tax monies without the consent of the taxed and/or local taxing agency. Be that as it may, you explained what you meant well.
LikeLike
Chiara: this and your posting just below—
Many thanks for the info.
Gives new meaning to the complaints by rheephormistas on this blog alone that charters don’t get their “fair share.”
😎
LikeLike
Some Ohio lawmakers admit the funding disparity, BTW. They know public school students are getting shafted on this deal:
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/09/09/ohio-politics-now-charter-school-funding.html
Ohio lawmakers are ga- ga over charter schools. Head over heels in love. They can’t open them fast enough. The least they could do is not rob the public school students while they’re privatizing the system.
LikeLike
“Duane Swacker
January 15, 2016 at 1:43 pm
“. . .they pull MORE state (sic) money than the school got in the first place.”
I believe you mean that the state pulls more money than they gave the district on a per pupil basis”
Exactly. Thanks. That means they have to shift local funding to cover the difference. It’s made worse by the fact that Ohio voters expressly rejected local funding of charter schools in Columbus- they voted overwhelmingly against it.
I’m not even sure charter can get local funding within Ohio current laws. Local taxes have to be levied by a “taxing authority” and that authority has to have elected representatives. School districts qualify, but I don’t see how charters do.
Can a private company levy and collect taxes? God, I hope not.
LikeLike
The plot thickens. Some school districts serve as charter authorizers. That is true in Cincinnati where the school board served as the authorizer of a Christo Rey charter school.
LikeLike
Right, so I suppose the district could be the “taxing authority” rather than the charter but I think they run into real trouble if they’re collecting local taxes with no local representation, especially if they’re sending it to management companies out of state.
They can’t get around it by making non-district authorizers taxing agents, because they don’t have elected local boards either.
The Ohio scheme is very precise and elaborate. It was designed to require local elected representatives if there’s local taxation. That wasn’t an accident. It’s woven thru the whole code.
LikeLike
What they’ve essentially created in this state is two sets of schools- state schools and local schools.
Then the state didn’t fund the state schools they created at the level they actually require, leaving it to local schools to figure out.
Their beef with the state is entirely legitimate. State lawmakers created a parallel system of schools and then stuck the locals with the funding problem.
LikeLike
It’s about time the state feels the pinch of its bad decisions. In Pennsylvania some districts are on the verge of bankruptcy due to the generous reimbursement formulas. That’s why I now consider charters vampire schools.
LikeLike
So far, here are the BOEs that have passed resolutions to invoice ODE for charter schools:
1. Woodridge (Summit County) 2. Logan-Hocking (Hocking County) 3. Troy (Miami County) 4. Elyria (Lorain County) 5. Parma (Cuyahoga County) 6. West Clermont (Clermont County) 7. Cardinal (Geauga County) 8. Keystone (Lorain County) 9. Northmont (Montgomery County) 10. Jackson (Stark County) 11. Streetsboro (Portage County) 12. Firelands (Lorain County) 13. Lake Local (Wood County) 14. Bowling Green (Wood County) 15. Belpre (Washington County) 16. LaBrae (Trumbull County) 17. Southington (Trumbull County) 18. Beaver Local (Columbiana County) 19. Northridge (Montgomery County) 20. Claymont (Tuscarawas County) 21. Southern Local (Perry County) 22. Indian Creek (Jefferson County) 23. Green Local (Summit County) 24. Garaway Local (Tuscarawas County) 25. Xenia (Greene County) 26. Noble Local Schools (Noble County) 27. Adena Local Schools (Ross County) 28. Gallipolis (Gallia County) 29. Oak Hills (Jackson County) 30. Monroe Local (Butler County) 31. Liberty Union -Thurston Local Schools (Fairfield County) 32. Tuscarawas Valley Schools (Tuscarawas County) 33. Amherst Schools (Lorain County) 34. Huron City Schools (Erie County) 35. Fairborn (Greene County)
MORE will join the RESOLUTION REVOLUTION!
LikeLike
Thanks for the list.
LikeLike
I think it’s a great idea. At least they’re doing something. Creative minds….
LikeLike