Welcome to Ohio's open sewer called charter school legislation....
Speaker Batchelder and his colleagues do charter schools no favor by relieving for-profit operators of so much public accountability
May 3, 2011
Even many charter school advocates are furious with provisions slipped into the budget plan put together by Speaker Bill Batchelder and fellow Republicans in the Ohio House. Consider the widely reported words of Terry Ryan of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which sponsors seven charter schools in the state. He warns that the provisions would set back the charter movement in Ohio, returning to an era of weak oversight when the state was a national ''laughingstock.''
Whatever the arguments for and against charter schools, the concept is here to stay. What Ryan and others have sought, and achieved, in recent years is improved accountability, working to the advantage of effective charter schools and rightly placing in jeopardy failing efforts. The House budget plan thumbs its nose at such thinking. It would erode oversight, and dramatically so.
Here is a moment for John Kasich to use that voice he enjoys deploying, the governor standing up for charter schools by calling for the House to abandon this exercise in excess.
How excessive?
Currently, charter schools are formed through sponsoring organizations, a process designed to achieve accountability, the principle of a check and balance. The House budget plan would allow for-profit entities to establish charter schools — without a sponsor. More, a school's governing authority would be permitted to delegate any or all of its rights and responsibilities to the school operator. And the public money that flows to the for-profit operator of a school? It no longer would be viewed as public funds, anything purchased with the public money would become the property of the operator.
Put another way, a for-profit operator could start a charter school on its own, and then via the mere transfer of funds, public money would become private money, effective monitoring cast aside.
The House plan further proposes that the renewal of a contract between a charter school and its sponsor must have the approval of the operator. These and similar provisions amount to a substantial shift in power, for-profit operators gaining at the expense of sponsors. No other state in the country allows charter schools such leeway. Why in Ohio? Speaker Batchelder and his allies invite the impression they are eager to help David Brennan, an Akron businessman and the state's largest operator of charter schools. Oh, and the past decade, Brennan has donated more than $4 million to Ohio Republicans.
Couple these gifts to Brennan with proposals to expand the presence of charter schools, and the Terry Ryans have good reason to worry about lax oversight, leading to poorly performing schools, even scandal, all harming the reputation of the charter concept. At best, the House would yank these provisions from its budget plan as it prepares for a floor vote this week. If not, then the governor and Republicans in charge of the Senate must make the repairs. Listen to the many advocates of charter schools. They don't want this burden.
Even many charter school advocates are furious with provisions slipped into the budget plan put together by Speaker Bill Batchelder and fellow Republicans in the Ohio House. Consider the widely reported words of Terry Ryan of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which sponsors seven charter schools in the state. He warns that the provisions would set back the charter movement in Ohio, returning to an era of weak oversight when the state was a national ''laughingstock.''
Whatever the arguments for and against charter schools, the concept is here to stay. What Ryan and others have sought, and achieved, in recent years is improved accountability, working to the advantage of effective charter schools and rightly placing in jeopardy failing efforts. The House budget plan thumbs its nose at such thinking. It would erode oversight, and dramatically so.
Here is a moment for John Kasich to use that voice he enjoys deploying, the governor standing up for charter schools by calling for the House to abandon this exercise in excess.
How excessive?
Currently, charter schools are formed through sponsoring organizations, a process designed to achieve accountability, the principle of a check and balance. The House budget plan would allow for-profit entities to establish charter schools — without a sponsor. More, a school's governing authority would be permitted to delegate any or all of its rights and responsibilities to the school operator. And the public money that flows to the for-profit operator of a school? It no longer would be viewed as public funds, anything purchased with the public money would become the property of the operator.
Put another way, a for-profit operator could start a charter school on its own, and then via the mere transfer of funds, public money would become private money, effective monitoring cast aside.
The House plan further proposes that the renewal of a contract between a charter school and its sponsor must have the approval of the operator. These and similar provisions amount to a substantial shift in power, for-profit operators gaining at the expense of sponsors. No other state in the country allows charter schools such leeway. Why in Ohio? Speaker Batchelder and his allies invite the impression they are eager to help David Brennan, an Akron businessman and the state's largest operator of charter schools. Oh, and the past decade, Brennan has donated more than $4 million to Ohio Republicans.
Couple these gifts to Brennan with proposals to expand the presence of charter schools, and the Terry Ryans have good reason to worry about lax oversight, leading to poorly performing schools, even scandal, all harming the reputation of the charter concept. At best, the House would yank these provisions from its budget plan as it prepares for a floor vote this week. If not, then the governor and Republicans in charge of the Senate must make the repairs. Listen to the many advocates of charter schools. They don't want this burden.
posted by Kathie Bracy at 9:38 PM
<< Home