Stories featured in Ohio Charter News Weekly may require a paid subscription to read in full.
The school facilities debate continues in Ohio
Cleveland.com last week covered the question of whether Cleveland Metropolitan School District is flouting Ohio law with their efforts to sell off several recently-closed district buildings to developers without offering them to charter and private school operators first. Several charter supporters—including the Thomas B. Fordham Institute—are quoted in the affirmative, while CMSD officials believe they have a two-year window in which to offload their buildings without involving charters. While no consensus is reached on the current letter or spirt of the law in that piece, everyone does seem to agree that new legislation under debate in the General Assembly is both clearer and less susceptible to loopholes. Elected board members of Columbus City Schools also seem to recognize—and fear—that the clarity of SB 311 will put an end to the obfuscation and runarounds they and other districts have used to deny access to their un- and under-used facilities for charter and private school operators…should it become law.
The quiet part out loud
Meanwhile, the elected members of the Burke County (NC) Board of Education voted 5-2 this week to demolish a recently-closed elementary school, specifically because they didn’t want a charter school to buy it. What’s interesting in this situation is that district officials actually went on the record explaining what would be so bad about the competition moving in: “For a charter school to open it must have at least 80 students, per state law,” Finance Director Keith Lawson told his elected bosses. “If a school opened and grew by 2 percent each year, after five years it would cost the school system $3.5 million in state funding alone.” The superintendent added: “I’m not opposed to parental choice as long as those entities have the same guidelines that we are required to follow, per state standards, (such as) calendar law, school hours, teacher work days, things like that, testing requirements.”
Cleveland charter leaders weigh in
Similar vibes back in Cleveland, where two supporters of the Breakthrough Schools charter network published an op-ed recently reminding folks about the Cleveland Plan and the longstanding connection between high-performing charter schools and CMSD which that plan forged. Andrew McRae and Susan Ertle seem to sense a fraying of that connection in the wake of the district’s closure/consolidation efforts and opine in favor of reknitting that fabric: “When we stay grounded in our values, aligned to a clear strategy, and relentlessly focused on outcomes for scholars and families,” they write, “we move closer to the Cleveland we all believe in, a city where every child, regardless of ZIP code, has access to a first-class education.”
A test at the ballot box
The new board that oversees education in Indianapolis decided last week to place an operating levy on the ballot this fall. For the first time ever, proceeds will be split evenly between the district and charter schools in the city. Its success or failure will be a vital litmus test for the new education paradigm in Indy.
Moratorium in motion
As we discussed in our last edition, Rhode Island House Bill 7415 places a three-year moratorium on new charter schools and lowers the maximum number of charters allowed in the state from 35 to 28. That bill was signed into law by Gov. Dan McKee on June 18.
*****
Did you know you can have every edition of the Ohio Charter News Weekly sent directly to your Inbox? Subscribe by clicking here.
