A strong defense of charter schools. Lawsuit is about money
The Georgia Charter Schools Association sent this piece by its CEO. It is on the Monday education op-ed page in the AJC and I am sharing it here with you:
In his own words
By Tony Roberts
Deja Hulbert and her parents wanted better.
In simplest terms, that’s why she chose to attend Ivy Preparatory Charter Academy last school year for sixth grade.
During an impassioned speech to the Gwinnett County school board in October, Deja talked about the dismal fate that snared many girls like her who attend her zoned middle school — teen pregnancy, low expectations from teachers and administrators and educational indifference.
Now a seventh grader, Deja is thriving at Ivy Prep, as are the vast majority of her 300-plus “sisters” at the all-girls charter middle school in Norcross.
However, as inconceivable as it sounds, there are those who would like to see this ethnically and racially diverse school closed, and see Deja and her sisters returned to their zoned schools.
School board members in Gwinnett and DeKalb counties and the city of Atlanta, as well as in Bulloch and Candler counties in southeast Georgia, have filed a lawsuit to dissolve the state Charter School Commission, the two highly successful schools it has already approved — Ivy Prep and the Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology in Statesboro — and the seven others it has approved for 2010-11.
Supporters of the lawsuit make a number of unsubstantiated claims. But their main points of contention are money and power.
Actually, what they really have a problem with is their lack of control over money and power.
On the issue of “power,” these misguided school boards falsely claim that the creation of the commission was unconstitutional and only local boards of education have the authority (read “power”) to authorize charter schools.However, Article VIII, Section I, Paragraph 1 of the Georgia Constitution reads: “The provision of an adequate public education for the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the State of Georgia.”
The language here is crystal clear. It does not say that granting charters is the exclusive right and role of local boards.
Indeed, throughout the legislative process during the approval of House Bill 881 — the law that created the Commission — numerous constitutional and legal experts deemed it fully constitutional.
On the issue of money, the authors are disingenuous at worst, flat out wrong at best.
They claim that local dollars are being used to fund commission charter schools, and they attempt to further cloud the issue by infusing the state’s complex public school funding formula into the argument.Once again, however, the true facts are clear. Charter schools approved by the commission are funded by the state in an amount that is commensurate with funding provided for traditional public schools.
No “local” funds are involved. Period.Yet as wrongheaded as this position is, it still begs a number of questions: Why were no lawsuits filed, nor outrage expressed, when state-authorized charter schools were funded at less than half the amount of funding compared to traditional public schools?
Were not the children in those schools being “shortchanged” at the time, prior to the creation of the commission? And why would you jeopardize the future of schools like Ivy Prep and Charter Conservatory ?
In a little over a year, Ivy Prep has established itself as one of the top middle schools in the state.
This ethnically and socioeconomically diverse, all-girls school had more than 90 percent of its inaugural sixth-grade class meet or exceed the state standards in reading, English/language arts and math, a performance that rivaled or bested other public schools in Gwinnett.
As for Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology, the middle/high school consistently graduates 100 percent of its students, a rate higher than both of the two traditional public high schools in Bulloch County and significantly higher than the state average.
Additionally, the number of students enrolling in college after graduation from the school is a full 20 percent higher than the state average.
The answer to all of these questions is simple. The wishes of the students and their taxpaying parents don’t matter. It’s not about the students.
Instead, the primary concern of the suing school boards, and those of like mind, is not making sure that students like Deja, her sisters at Ivy Prep, her peers at Charter Conservatory and parents throughout Georgia have quality public educational options for their children.
It is not making innovative new learning environments readily available for those students who have not fared well in traditional public schools.
And it is not improving the condition, overall, of public education in our state.
In fact, while we are in the middle of one of the most difficult economic periods in our state’s history, these school districts have chosen to use public tax dollars — dollars that could and should be devoted to teacher salaries and instructional programming — to sue a public school. This clearly, and sadly, illustrates the districts’ true intentions.
Unfortunately, their chief interest appears to be maintaining control over money and power, and continuing to monopolize our public education system, to the detriment of our students — students like Deja, and tens of thousands of others across the state, who simply want more quality educational options.
They want better, and they deserve better from so-called educational leaders.
Tony Roberts is CEO of the Georgia Charter Schools Association.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2012 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
31 comments Add your comment
catlady
March 22nd, 2010
12:28 pm
Can I use this piece for a lesson I am doing on emotionally-charged language?
Lynn43
March 22nd, 2010
1:07 pm
No “local” funds are used??? Yes, they are. It is in a “round about way”, but local funds are used. It is like being garnisheed by a company with whom you did not do business nor do you owe them anything. The court rules in the company’s favor and deducts it from your salary that is owed to you. You didn’t write the company a check, but it came from your funds just the same.
You are right in that the school district does not write the charter school a check from local funds, but the state deducts the charter school’s bill from what the state owes a school district, including the amount for local funds. Whether or not the money comes “directly” from local funds, it does come from local funds by making a detour through the state.
Charter schools proclaim to be public, but the only thing public is that they are funded with taxpayer moneys. They say they have to take everyone, but that “everyone” in Ivy School has to be female. Most charter schools do not provide transportation, therefore, limiting their school population to students with parents who have a way to provide transportation to and from the school. This leaves out most “undesirables”.
Many charter schools have parents sign volunteer and involvement contracts. This also eliminates many “undesirables” who do not have supportative parents. As a retired teacher, I truly understand the importance of parent involvement, and it is these students with parent involvement that the charter schools are recruiting not the ones who need their help the most (if they are as good as they say they are).
My problem is not with the money, but with the idea of segregating students, not by race, but by socio-economics. It is the very poor (no transportation or involved parents) students who are being left out of this equation.
So what?
March 22nd, 2010
1:20 pm
Of course it is about money. What else? Perhaps because of the economic difficulty, school districts have to do everything they can to get the money they can use to support their students equitably – even if it means there may be some legal fees.
catlady
March 22nd, 2010
1:36 pm
By the way, can we quit publishing pieces written by the Georgia Charter Schools Association? If a topic is worth discussing, bring it forward, but don’t keep providing free PR for any private group. Or quasi-private group.
CharterStarter, too
March 22nd, 2010
2:44 pm
Catlady, if you don’t want it posted here, then why do you keep reading and responding? Looks like you’re just morbidly curious, I suppose (charter school rubber necker?) It’s the ISSUES being brought forward that are hot in debate and are worthwhile topics to include on this board.
Lynn43, I ask you this…do charter school parents pay taxes? Of course! And if their children are attending a Georgia public school (authorized, by law, by the legislature, and according to rigorous standards set forth by the Commission and the state), then why, pray tell, should their tax dollars not be allocated to their child’s public school? Do you think it makes any sense for the local school districts to collect funds for children they do not serve? How is that logical? The state has every right to adjust revenue to ensure an adequate and fair education for all Georgia students. The local school districts don’t like them exercising this right, but it is theirs none-the-less.
Regarding charters “segregating” children – that is utter rubbish (pardon me, Catlady, for using emotionally charged language.) Take 5 minutes to do a search of minorities served in charter schools in both nationwide and in Georgia…you will find that DESPITE the lack of transporation in some schools, charters serve a HIGHER minority and at-risk population than other public schools and serve in urban areas more than any other. With better results in many cases….
The districts have an opportunity to take these small pockets of innovation (a.k.a. charter schools) and USE them to support the growth and improvements in their own districts….some of the wiser districts are doing this here in Georgia and nationwide Instead, they quibble over what truly amounts to peanuts in the district budgets (considering they’d have to serve the kids anyway if the charters didn’t). It’s shameful at best that the district focus is on an issue like this rather than dealing with the big dawg issues that are really impacting their student achievement and fiscal solvency.
CharterStarter
March 22nd, 2010
2:50 pm
Catlady, what’s with the claws? GCSA is private, by the way. No public funds. And they represent a majority of the charters in Georgia, so it’s very appropriate for their voice to be heard. Unless of course you’d like to silence free speech…
Lynn43, how does the state “owe” a school district for students the district is not teaching?
Tony, AWESOME column! It IS about the students and the choice their parents should have…or it should be.
zoe
March 22nd, 2010
3:09 pm
No parent pays the full amount of what it actually costs for their child to attend school. I pay taxes in Fulton County, my school tax share of the tax bill was less than $1500 and I am pretty sure Fulton has one of the highest milage rates in the area. Unless one is living in a mansion in Buckhead and most likely those kids are attending Westminster, Lovett or the like, no one pays their fair share of public schooling. Society as a whole pays this bill and these state sanctioned charter schools take money from society as a whole and give to a select few.
Lynn43
March 22nd, 2010
3:10 pm
Charterstarter, Your name tells it all, and yes, it is about the money– for the charter companies. I’ve done research for months and found that “for profit” charter management companies are “raking it in”. Are you one of these “get rich quick” charterstarters? I know one company that gets a 25% cut off the top and if they do not use all of the other 72% (also 3% off the top for the state Charter Commission) then they can keep it. They don’t even have to use it to educate GA students as this company is located in another state. This money can, also, go into their pockets.
Another “for profit” management company is using taxpayer money to go into the real estate business. They recently sold some theaters for $178 million while many of the schools they manage are in a budget crisis, but they did not use the money to help their schools. The husband and wife team who own this company are billionaires. The taxpayers would create a rebellion if public school officials were using taxpayer money in such a way. Oh, by the way, many of these companies are hidden behind “non-profit” companies and don’t even have to pay taxes.
BJ Van Gundy
March 22nd, 2010
3:13 pm
First of all… My full name is listed… I’m not going to hide my identity behind some moniker… especially one that suggests that I’m crazy…(catlady) or one that shows that 42 others beat me to getting to use just my first name.
@catlady… Really? Should the AJC censor commentary by all quasi-private groups, or just those that you don’t agree with? What about other Quasi-private groups like the American Red Cross, the AARP, the NAACP, the ADL, Special Olympics (or any other group?). Or should the AJC run any commentary by YOU first and let you decide.
May I assume that you’ve also requested permission to use everything that has been used to justify the newly passed health care plan as material for your lesson plan? I didn’t think so.
@Lynn43 I’d be very interested to hear more about your definition of “undesirables”. It scares the hell out of me personally that you were a teacher. Ever. Thank God you are retired… (BTW, “supportative” isn’t a word… hope you weren’t a Language Arts teacher to boot!).
From what I can gather from your commentary, there are children that you define as “undesirable”. For the record. I disagree with what you 100% that ANY child is “undesirable” to have in a class room. Your writing only shows what a bigoted and/or prejudiced teacher you were in defining certain children as “undesirable”… especially based on something that is so surface as ones economic means… and not upon their OWN desire to learn. The fact that you seem to have determined that some parents are “undesirable” as the parents of these children and therefore somehow the children themselves are undesirable is quite disturbing to me.
As far as transportation issues go… your assumptions that all of these schools have children that HAVE to be bussed to them shows your ignorance of the issue. Just as your typical elementary school is located within a neighborhood where children can simply walk to school, a charter school, in many cases is just as local. The fact that SOME students are driven to school by their parents is not somehow an indictment of the intentions of the school. Are you seriously suggesting that since the charter school is being shorted transportation dollars in its allocation of funds that it is somehow the charter school’s fault that the children get a ride to school? Can I take it then that you advocate the allocation of dollars to charter schools to provide transportation to students wishing to attend?… I didn’t think so.
The bottom line is that the school that is closest in proximity to where a child resides is not necessarily the best school for them and their parents. If parents have the means (a car) and desire to get their children out of the local failing school into a school that better fits their needs I would hope that those that care about the well being and best future for the children would applaud charter schools. It is most unfortunate that I have heard no, zero, nadda, zippo arguments made against charter schools that argue that the children being put in the charter schools are somehow being damaged… only that it is horrible that they are being taken out of failing schools and put in successful schools that are using public monies and providing a good education… Huh?
As Dr. Roberts pointed out, it is those that only care about power and the control of public funding for education that are fighting charter schools….
When one of you anti-charter schools zealots explains to me how they are furthering the education of even 1 child by fighting charter schools I’ll be happy to listen. Continuing the same old lies about charter schools “cherry picking” students is getting quite old.
I certainly hope that others as well will see that the commentary from a former teacher that classified some of her students as “undesirable” should be discounted if not admonished.
CharterStarter, too
March 22nd, 2010
3:38 pm
Lynn43, Not sure if you were talking to me or to CharterStarter. If you were talking to me….then no, I was not an EMO. I was a teacher on a mission to educate kids. My family LOST money in the endeavor, as there is inadequate planning funds available for folks to get a school off the ground and those trying usually foot the bills themselves for a long time until a school is authorized.
Regarding your continual slights to EMOS….they are not all bad. Stop the generalizations. The boards need to select carefully, ensure they are getting a good value for their money, and monitor appropriately. EMOs are a business….just like text books companies and others. The schools are the consumers and have the right (and more importantly, the responsibility) to choose carefully what is in the best interest of the schools.
An advocate for public education change & choice
March 22nd, 2010
4:04 pm
@ Lynne43: First not all charter schools are run by for profit management companies. In the metro Atlanta area you have a number of charter schools that are either former district run schools that converted to charter status or they are start up charters which sprang up from within the neighborhoods they primarily serve. It’s not appropriate to cloud the issue by painting with broad brushstrokes. Looks like more research is in order for you.
Secondly, (and this one is @ Zoe as well), it would seem to me that the public funds allocated for each pupil within a given school district should flow toward the student’s academic home. Unless the student elects to attend a private institution, I don’t see why all the fuss over where the dollars are directed? Can you explain this to me please? As long as we’re not talking about charters schools getting more money than the district would naturally receive if the student was in a district run institution what’s the rub.
Third, you speak of for profit ventures. Well I guess you never heard of the Beltline project or any of the other Tax Allocation Districts (TADS) driven projects around the state funded with taxes dollars collected for PUBLIC EDUCATION. This scenario was so enriching to its participants that they managed to lobby for a change in the state constitution to allow the practice to continue (a move that sadly many of us were duped given how it was worded on the ballot a couple of years ago). The APS school district has invested in these instruments of real estate profiteering masquerading as tools of economic empowerment for over a decade. While you may be able to name some successful ventures that made money for the developer who put them together, I’m still waiting for somebody to articulate exactly how much return on investment APS has received and put back into the development of a strong public education system. My point here is greed and mismanagement isn’t just the exclusive domain of these management companies who have pounced on the opportunities presented by the change in public policy across the country to privatize public intuitions’ (inclusive of schools & prisons. As you will find that these management companies often times are both segments of business). There are many public school boards who are guilty of the same.
Charter schools are far from a panacea but in my view a part of the overall solution that will bring families desperate for quality public education options some manner of real choice. There is a lot more work to be done. I have to think this lawsuit being spoken of is costing these districts millions of dollars that in these times the desperately need to perpetuate programs that really benefit the students.
Lynn43
March 22nd, 2010
4:12 pm
To whomever you are that doesn’t understand my word “undesirables”. That is not my definition. That is the definition of some charter school supporters who have e-mailed me. One mom said she supported charter schools because she didn’t want her child to go to school with free and reduced lunch children. One mom didn’t want her children in the same classes as students with IEPs.
I loved all my students, and that is why I am so upset at the thought that many of them will be left out of any opportunities that others have. I still go into the schools and work with the children who do not have home support. During my career I received many awards for my students’ accomplishments, and no one can say that any child I taught was given less than 100% of my concern and care.
BJ Van Gundy
March 22nd, 2010
4:26 pm
Whomever you are? Really? I use my ENTIRE NAME… You use your first name and you come up with “whomever you are”. Really?
So let me get this straight. Charter School Supporters randomly email you and make sure that they use epithets in describing children so as to provide you, an Anti-Charter School activist, fodder to abuse charter schools. Wow.
So. Who are YOU that gets emails from charter supporters? Why are you hiding behind the name “Lynn43″?
In judging blog posts and their ability to sway my opinion one way or the other I adopted, a long time ago, a position of heavily discounting any opinion that someone wasn’t willing to stand behind with their name. ESPECIALLY negative posters. Positive posters don’t necessarily have something to hide….
You obviously do.
middle school teacher
March 22nd, 2010
8:02 pm
It is not making innovative new learning environments readily available for those students who have not fared well in traditional public schools.
Can you offer any proof that the students who now attend these charter schools did not “fare” well in traditional schools? Did you mean academically or in some other way?
Just my guess, but I believe many who leave public schools do so for other reasons than just academics.
Tony
March 22nd, 2010
8:50 pm
Catlady, in addition to using this piece as an example of emotionally charged arguments, you may also use the responses as examples of ways to twist language to the extreme. The bottom line in the legal challenge against the state for the charter school commission is the state is taking local money from a district. The state is clearly doing so by reducing a district’s allotment in an amount equal to the per pupil share that would go to the charter school. The analogy above about garnished wages is perfect to describe what the state is doing. The arguments about how good charters are, how innovative they are, how much better students achieve because of the charter school – all those arguments are irrelevant. The law is unconstitutional.
Fulton co teacher
March 22nd, 2010
10:39 pm
@zoe – ontrary to your assumption, Fulton Co. has one of the LOWEST millage rates in the state.
Fulton co teacher
March 22nd, 2010
10:39 pm
“Contrary”
CharterStarter
March 23rd, 2010
12:18 am
For the record, I am not an EMO either. I help start charter schools, at considerable risk to my own finances and the financial well-being of my family, because I believe our public education system is broken and needs best practices from the innovative partnerships, leaders and teachers who form and run most charter schools. To date I have had a hand in starting 15 charters in Georgia.
EMOs (for profit management companies) help run a modest but significant percentage of charter schools in Georgia. They fill a very important role, legally and appropriately, or else they lose their contracts. All the EMOs with which I am familiar are successful, committed, honorable, and clearly understand that their success is tied directly to the success of the students who attend the schools they manage. I wish all Superintendents and Boards of Education had the same attitude.
A strong defense of charter schools. Lawsuit is about money | Get … | Educational Georgia
March 23rd, 2010
12:39 am
[...] Follow this link: A strong defense of charter schools. Lawsuit is about money | Get … [...]
Enlightened
March 23rd, 2010
12:39 am
While I am not a proponent of charter schools, I am forever a fan of Ivy Prep! The young ladies/sisters who attend are SO impressive. I had the pleasure of meeting a few of them and I would put them up to ANY private school attendee (Westminster, Lovett, etc) ANY day of the week. And this lawsuit is only about power and control. Shame on those systems for not considering the children.
alice
March 23rd, 2010
7:24 am
It is my understanding that many of the Cobb start ups are not happy with their EMOs and are considering not renewing their contracts.
Unlike a traditional public school, where parents and teachers may be stuck with a bad principal, at least these schools have options.
Larry
March 23rd, 2010
10:25 am
YES, these legal actions are about money, but let’s be clear about who started it.
Ivy Prep’s petition was rejected by Gwinnett’s BOE over legal concerns that a public school cannot legally refuse students based on gender. Ivy Prep then petitioned for and was approved as a state “special” school. As a state special school, it received FULL, not partial, FULL state and federal funding for its students.
Ivy Prep *could* have also received local funding in its first year, based on the outcome of a local referendum but, the question was never put to local taxpayers.
Instead, Ivy Prep re-filed its existing petition with the Charter Schools Commission, to receive more money. This additional funding was deducted directly from state funds allocated to kids who attend Gwinnett public schools, including other charter schools. Also, the amount deducted from GCPS was significantly more than what would have been spent educating these kids had they attended any other public school in Gwinnett. There was no outrage or lawsuit the first year because, as Ivy Prep founder Nina Gilbert states in her public position, this not an anti-charter school lawsuit. If Ivy Prep’s founder understands this, it’s odd some of her “supporters” do not.
Mr. Roberts is correct that the Georgia Constitution is crystal clear, but he quoted the wrong section. Article VIII. Section V. Paragraph I. “Authority is granted to county and area boards of education to establish and maintain public schools within their limits” and “No independent school system shall hereafter be established.”
As to whether deducting money from GCPS’ QBE earning constitutes “effective” use of local funds, Ivy Prep’s attorney claims it doesn’t matter. He claims there is no constitutional prohibition against “effectively” funding Commission Charter Schools with locally levied taxes, because the Constitution only prohibits “actually” funding state special schools in this way.
Larry Major – Dacula, GA
BJ Van Gundy
March 23rd, 2010
10:30 am
Thanks for the very good point Alice….
That is something that is also a beautiful thing with Charter Schools! To take it even further: If a Charter School fails to do what it said it was going to do, the parents can yank their kids out and/or the charter can be yanked….
Where is this Check and Balance with regular public schools (keep in mind, Charters are public schools too)? You answered it… everyone is simply STUCK with the failing regular public school… and those that are geographically closest to it are REQUIRED to send their kids to it.
The opponents of school choice need to be considered opponents of children… They certainly can’t be considered to be helping children that they want to force to attend a failing school. And for the record: “The Enemy of my Friend is my Enemy.”
The problem here, using the Gwinnett law suit as a basis for discussion, is that Gwinnett is is ONLY looking at the $ and not individual children…. Somewhat understandable since the task of educating 150,000 children vs Ivey Prep’s task of educating ~300 (a task that allows the administrators to know EACH and EVERY child) is somewhat overwhelming.
Understandable yes…. acceptable…. NO.
AJC Op-Ed: Power and Money Trump Students | Georgia Charter Schools Association
March 23rd, 2010
12:26 pm
[...] Here is the link to the piece on “Get Schooled”: http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/03/22/a-strong-defense-of-charter-schools-lawsuit-is-abo... [...]
BJ Van Gundy
March 23rd, 2010
1:13 pm
Quick answer regarding the Gwinnett School’s concern over a single gender school.
The author of Title IX has stated that Ivey Prep does NOT violate Title IX.
Additionally… if Gwinnett County’s “legal concern” over refusing students based on gender were a REAL “legal concern”…. Where is that law suit?
Larry
March 23rd, 2010
2:39 pm
The single gender case wasn’t based on Title IX, but on the U.S. Constitution.
The case is United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996):
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=518&page=515
It’s a long read, but the way it ended was the United States Supreme Court held that Virginia’s exclusion of women from the Virginia Military Institute violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Whether Ivy Prep’s admission policy would withstand constitutional scrutiny is a subject for legal professionals and I’m sure you could find opinions on both sides. What isn’t opinion is that such a case against Ivy Prep would be bound to go through the appeals process, back to the U. S. Supreme Court for final resolution – an expensive process that could be avoided by simply changing the admission policy.
BJ Van Gundy
March 23rd, 2010
4:40 pm
Or… an expensive process that IS being avoided because NO ONE IS FILING SUIT!
CharterStarter, too
March 24th, 2010
10:57 pm
Larry, do you think Gwinnette would have approved Ivy Prep if it was mixed gender? Seriously? The gender issue is an “easy out.” Interestig that other school districts don’t see this as an issue. Even more interesting is that the state BOE and the feds don’t. Smokescreen.
Drew
April 4th, 2010
10:34 am
Larry, you are an apologist and a hack. Your arguments against education reform are old and tiring. The Earth is not the center of the universe, the world is not flat, and public education in our country is NOT doing even close to what we need to do to reach our children. Until people like you open your eyes to realize we must forge new and innovative ways to reach our children in our public schools, like we see at Ivy Prep, we, as a country, will be limited in our progress. And this is not the time to limit our future progress. Are you a problem solver or just as I think you are, a problem maker?
Tweets that mention A strong defense of charter schools. Lawsuit is about money | Get Schooled -- Topsy.com
April 4th, 2010
10:52 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Doug Hering. Doug Hering said: http://ow.ly/1urRr A strong defense of charter schools by the CEO of the Georgia Charter Schools Association. [...]
female companionship
June 24th, 2010
1:35 pm
Really cool article to track it at least as for me. By the way, why don’t you send that post to social bookmarks? That should bring rather big traffic to this blog.