Lisa Haver is a public school activist in Philadelphia. Here she writes about the long, drawn-out and very expensive proceedings to close down a failing charter school in that city.
She writes:
When the School District of Philadelphia targeted Germantown High School for closure just one year before its 100th anniversary, there was no legal recourse for students or families. No law required the District to conduct an inquiry or call witnesses in order to hear testimony from those fighting to save the school. While the administration of Superintendent William Hite did hold an informal meeting at the school, the community’s pleas fell on deaf ears. Germantown High, along with 23 other neighborhood schools that had served generations of Philadelphians, was closed by vote of the School Reform Commission in a matter of months.
Closing a charter school is a very different story. The Pennsylvania Charter Law mandates a lengthy legal process, beginning with weeks of hearings at the District level. Thousands of pages of documents are entered into evidence. Should the hearing examiner rule in the District’s favor, the charter school can appeal to the state’s Charter Appeal Board in the hope that the 6-person board of political appointees, most of whom have ties to the charter sector, will overrule the decision of the local board. Should that fail, the school can appeal to Commonwealth Court.
Not only is the process is long and expensive, but the public must pay for both sides of the dispute while the wrangling goes on, year after year.
So how many lawyers does it take to shut down a failing charter school?
The Inquirer story explains that “because charter schools are funded largely by school districts, taxpayers are paying not just for the district to make its case but for the charter to defend itself.
The District also pays for the hearing examiner, the stenographer, and for the assembling and copying of thousands of documents. Aspira Olney’s lawyers are making between $180 and $300 an hour, but lawyers for Aspira Inc. wouldn’t disclose their hourly fees—and they are under no obligation to, even though they are paid, indirectly, with taxpayer funds. The District could be shelling out $10,000 a day in legal and administrative fees. That doesn’t include billing for preparation and other costs. That’s $140,000 for the already scheduled fourteen days; total cost will easily exceed $200,000. How many teachers or librarians could that buy? How many toxic buildings could be made safe?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Taxpayers should be outraged by having to pay ridiculous legal fees to close a failing charter school. Unfortunately, this is what happens when the charter lobby writes the rules. Charters are given preferential treatment that defy common sense, and taxpayers are left holding the bills while legitimate public schools crumble.
OMG … more than SICKENING. This is outright theft and abuse.
Diane, Thank you. What you do is just so important and I am grateful, very grateful.
Jim Crow is well and alive.
How many? Let me guess. One to hold the door of the school, and hundreds to gradually rotate all of society around its hinges so that it shuts the door. This is why charters are so much more efficient than public schools.
You forgot the one to carry the money bags and the one to drive the getaway car.
If you have the interest, The Education Commission of the States (ECS) has a database on state policies for charter schools.
Unfortunately, 2016 is the most recent database with information on the appeals process for charter school renewals or revocations. Of the 43 states that had charter school laws in 2016, 14 placed final appeals with the state board of education, five states had an arbitration or mediation process in place, and only four had a process that ended up in courts. In addition to Pennsylvania, courts had the last say in D.C., New Mexico, and South Carolina.
ECS also has a 2017-2018 database for state laws on charter schools, searchable by state with legal citations. This resource includes state-by state information on:
(a) legal specifications, including conversions of public schools to charter schools, caps on charter schools, any state preferences on types of charter schools, any rules on enrollment and preferential treatment, who must provide transportation.
(b) the authorizing process, including organizations permitted to serve as authorizers, appeal process for applicants, standards for authorizers if any, reports on performances of schools if any, penalties imposed on authorizers if any.
(c) charter school autonomy and accountability, including state rules waived if any, grounds for termination or non-renewal, grounds for closing a charter school if any;
(d) financing and funding, including who provides funding, availability of start-up funds for new charters, and facilities financing;
(e) charter school teachers, including certification, how salaries are set, equal access to retirement;
(f) virtual charter schools, including enrollment limits if any and oversight if any.
Here is the profile for charter schools in Pennsylvania. http://ecs.force.com/mbdata/mbstprofile?Rep=CSP17&st=Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania the zoned public school must provide transportation both locally and regionally, if the zoned school participates. If the school district has these obligations to charters, the charter should be accountable to the local board of education. Taxpayers are paying the bill. Otherwise, it is taxation without representation.
Hey maybe this is the source of PA’s stinky charter law— quoting from Diane’s previous post: “…fill-in-the-blank bills… have become so intertwined with the lawmaking process that the nation’s top sponsor of copycat legislation, a member of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, claimed to have signed on to 72 such bills without knowing or questioning their origin.”
No doubt.
ALEC has model charter bills.
Why write your own when you can get the bill fully developed from ALEC?
ALEC also has bills for online charter schools and for eliminating the teaching profession.
Go to ALEC Exposed to find ALEC’s education legislation.
very telling of current political action: WITHOUT QUESTION
You forgot the one to carry the money bags and the one to drive the getaway car.
PA’s charter laws were written by Democrats. The lead sponsor, Dwight Evans, is a well-known and highly successful grifter. PA’s charter laws make meaningful regulation almost impossible becuase Evans and fellow Philly Dem grifters wanted to get their hands on the money that was flowing to public schools and they wanted no potential interference in their grifting. Evans sponsored the charter bill and then opened one of the first charters in the city through the community development corporation he founded and controls.
He also had his hands all over the conversion of public schools to charter schools through the so-called Renaissance program. He had the high school in his district converted to a charter. The charter conversion was such a disaster that parents demanded the school be returned to the district. While parents were meeting with district officials Evans was working behind the scenes to get the school transferred to another charter chain run by one of his regular campaign donors. He almost succeeded until someone ratted him out to the media.
Democrats have to rid the party of privatization grifters. It won’t be easy. Evans is now a member of the US House in a what is a completely safe seat for him. Nevertheless, one by one they need to be run out of the party for good.
That doesn’t mean Evans didn’t avail himself of ALEC’s model charter law, which had already been making the rounds since 1995. ALEC plays with both teams. NJ’s charter law was also initiated & backed by Democrats in the ‘90’s, but it took Christie & his Broadie Cerf to light a fire under it and expand privatization by multiples in Newark and Camden. Privatization grifters populate both parties, the corp-happy Republicans and nelib Democrats, plus anyone whose vote can be bought. Seems like current crop of Dem hopefuls are starting to see the light on this issue [except for Booker].