Simply put, charter school advocates contend that by doing away with many of the legal and regulatory mandates on conventional public schools, they can provide more effective instruction. But school boards, administrators and teachers’ unions see charters as parasitic competitors for students and attendance-based school money.
While charters have a legal right to exist and claim shares of school financing and sometimes occupy classrooms in public school sites, their rivals — particularly politically powerful unions — do what they can to limit charter expansion or even put existing charters out of business.
Last year, for instance, the California School Boards Association mounted a campaign to make it easier for local boards to reject applications for new charters. The legislation, Senate Bill 1380, made it to the Senate floor but garnered just 13 votes, way short of the 21 required.
Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation’s second largest public school system with more than a half-million students, has been one of the most volatile arenas for the charter school battle. Control of its board — whose members are full-time officeholders — periodically shifts back and forth between those allied with United Teachers Los Angeles and other unions, and those who aren’t.
LAUSD, like California’s other urban districts, has been experiencing declining enrollment, which translates into declining amounts of state school aid that’s based primarily on attendance, thereby increasing the intensity of hostilities over money that the charters claim.
Last year, after union-backed candidates achieved a majority on the LAUSD board, it issued a new policy declaring that the district should “avoid” housing charters in 346 of the district’s school sites, thereby potentially evicting them.
The Charter School Association sued, contending that the policy violated state law that allows such co-housing arrangements, including a 2000 ballot measure, Proposition 39. That measure, which was mostly aimed at lowering the vote requirement for local school bond issues, also, as one analysis puts it, “requires each local K-12 school district to provide charter school facilities sufficient to accommodate the charter school’s students.”
The suit is now before Superior Court Judge Stephen Goorvitch, and the outcome seems to hinge on the disputed policy’s use of the word “avoid.” In his tentative ruling, Goorvitch wrote that “avoid” could be considered the same as “prohibit,” which then could render the policy illegal. The district’s attorney argued that “avoid” was not prohibitive but merely guidance.
The judge suggested the two sides discuss a compromise. But in the absence of a deal, Goorvitch told the lawyers that if he sides with the charters, the school board could counter by changing the disputed word to something less prescriptive. “I think this can be fixed,” Goorvitch said. “This may end up being a narrow and temporary victory for the petitioner.”
In other words, regardless of the suit’s outcome, it will be just another skirmish in a perpetual war.
Op-Ed’s are written by community members, not representatives of edhat. The views and opinions expressed in Op-Ed articles are those of the author’s.
[Do you have an opinion on something local? Share it with us at info@edhat.com.]
Public education hates competition for tax dollars. If the Union & School districts would produce a quality education, folks would not be seeking out an alternative.
It’s pretty hard to compete with private schools when you don’t have the funds to pay teachers properly, equip classrooms with up to date materials and supplies, etc. Maybe stop cutting funds to public education before blaming the teachers?
The tax funds are there but are spent more on bloated executives and managers rather than on classroom teachers. The school system employee force is very top heavy and that is where reform is needed.
Agreed on the Admin reform, but someone has to run the district, etc, but we definitely do not allocate enough tax money to public education. Just look at the cuts being made lately.