Breaking news: Georgia Supreme Court strikes down Charter Schools Commission in 4-3 vote.
Pro charter school forces plan a rally tomorrow but the Supreme Court ruling will cast a pallor over the event. (AJC photo)
In a long-awaited ruling released this morning, the state Supreme Court struck down a state commission that could approve charter schools over the objection of local boards of education and direct local funding to the schools. The vote was 4-3.
“No other constitutional provision authorizes any other governmental entity to compete with or duplicate the efforts of local boards of education in establishing and maintaining general K-12 schools,” the opinion states. “By providing for local boards of education to have exclusive control over general K-12 schools, our constitutions, past and present, have limited governmental authority over the public education of Georgia’s children to that level of government closest and most responsive to the taxpayers and parents of the children being educated.”
The decision is a major victory for school systems and local control but a setback to the burgeoning charter school movement in Georgia. Unclear is the fate of the charter schools approved by the commission, some of which are operating and some of which planned to open this fall.
The ruling has no impact on the 160 charter schools that were approved by local systems, only those 16 approved by the state Georgia Charter Schools Commission:
They include the Georgia Cyber Academy, Georgia Connections Academy, Cherokee Charter Academy (the county’s first charter school), Provost Academy Georgia, Heritage Preparatory Academy, Chattahoochee Hills Charter School, Atlanta Heights Charter School, Fulton Leadership Academy, the Museum School of Avondale Estate , Peachtree Hope Charter School, Coweta Charter Academy at Senoia, Heron Bay Academy, Pataula Charter Academy, Ivy Preparatory Academy in Norcross and the Statesboro’s Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts & Technology
Charter schools receive public funds to operate under a board-approved charter, or contract, that spells out a plan for improving student achievement and provides benchmarks for measuring this improvement on a five-year time line. If those benchmarks aren’t met, the school is supposed to close.
Up until two years ago, school boards in Georgia had primary power to veto or promote charter schools, but lawmakers felt that the school boards were hostile to charter schools and turned down strong applicants. So, the General Assembly created a commission that not only could approve charters, but redirect monies so that the schools receive their share of local dollars.
And that was the issue that is before the Supreme Court after seven systems — Atlanta, DeKalb, Candler, Coweta, Bulloch, Gwinnett and Griffin-Spalding — sued to have the state law that created the Charter Schools Commission declared unconstitutional. The systems lost their case in Fulton County Superior Court a year ago, but appealed to the Supreme Court in October. (Not all the systems were part of the appeal to the high court,)
The Supreme Court focused on two issues in its ruling: Does the state constitution give the state the right to create charter schools over the objection of local boards of education? The state argued for a broad definition of state-sponsored “special schools,” which have historically been limited to the state-run schools for the blind and deaf. The second point of contention was whether the seven-member Charter Schools Commission was a device for the state to divert local money to charter schools.
In its decision, the court sided with the systems, but now the question is what becomes of the charter schools already approved by the commission. Please note, the majority of charter schools in Georgia were approved by local boards of education and are not affected by this court ruling. This ruling is limited to the 16 approved by the now defunct commission.
However, in the larger picture, the decision ruling undermines the charter movement as it returns control to local boards and reduces the flow of dollars to charter schools approved at the state level.
The state Board of Education can still approve charter schools that were rejected by local boards, but those schools get only state money, no local funding. Consider that local systems provide on average about 45 percent of what it now costs to educate a child. So, it’s a dramatic drop if a charter school loses its local dollars. Without that local funding, it is unlikely that the commission charter schools can pay their bills.
So, will local boards of education step in and “adopt” those schools to maintain the stream of local funding?
The problem is that some of the charter schools approved by the now illegal commission are regional, and thus would require several school boards to “adopt” them. They are the most imperiled by this ruling.
According to the court’s statement this morning:
The Supreme Court of Georgia has struck down as unconstitutional a 2008 Act that authorized creation of a new kind of state charter school called “commission charter schools.”
With today’s 4-to-3 decision, the high court has reversed a Fulton County court decision and ruled in favor of local school boards, finding that the state-established schools authorized by the 2008 Georgia Charter Schools Commission Act do not fit the definition of “special schools” as envisioned in the state Constitution.Under the current Constitution, which voters approved in 1983, local school boards have exclusive authority to create and maintain K-12 public education, Chief Justice Carol Hunstein writes for the majority. The Constitution only allows the state government to create “special schools.” Yet in the 2008 Act, the State authorized the “Georgia Charter Schools Commission,” whose members are appointed by state officials, to approve petitions for a new type of general K-12 public school known as a “commission charter school.”“Because our constitution embodies the fundamental principle of exclusive local control of general primary and secondary (“K-12”) public education, and the Act clearly and palpably violates Art. VIII, Sec. V, Par. VII (a) by authorizing a State commission to establish competing State-created general K-12 schools under the guise of being ‘special schools,’ we reverse,” the 24-page majority opinion states.
Charter schools are a relatively recent phenomenon, according to briefs filed in the case. The first opened in 1992 in St. Paul, MN. Georgia’s first, Addison Elementary School, opened three years later in Cobb County. In general, charter schools receive public funds but are not subject to all the rules and regulations that apply to other public schools. Rather, they are held accountable for producing academic results, which are laid out in a performance-based contract, or “charter.” Georgia law in 1993 authorized existing locally-controlled public schools to convert to charter schools and permitted the creation of “start-up charter schools.” Both are now referred to as “local charter schools.” In 1998, the Georgia legislature amended the statute to authorize the creation of state charter schools that are approved by the Georgia Board of Education. In 2008, the legislature passed the Georgia Charter Schools Commission Act, creating the “Georgia Charter Schools Commission” and “commission charter schools.” (A footnote in today’s opinion states that “state chartered special schools” established by earlier legislation are not at issue in this appeal, and “we intimate no opinion as to their status under the 1983 Constitution.”)
In this high-profile case, seven local school districts – Gwinnett, Bulloch, Candler, DeKalb, Atlanta, Griffin-Spalding and Henry – sued former state Superintendent Kathy Cox, the Department of Education, the Charter Schools Commission and three charter schools approved by the Commission. The school districts challenged the 2008 Act claiming, among other things, that the Georgia Legislature lacks constitutional authority to create the “commission charter schools” because they are not “special schools.”
In May 2010, the trial court ruled in favor of the charter schools on the constitutional claims and dismissed other claims. The judge found that the Act is constitutional and that commission charter schools are “special schools.”
Today’s opinion reverses that decision. The Georgia Constitution states that, “[a]uthority is granted to county and area boards of education to establish and maintain public schools within their limits.” This language, the majority opinion states, “continues the line of constitutional authority, unbroken since it was originally memorialized in the 1877 Constitution of Georgia, granting local boards of education the exclusive right to establish and maintain, i.e., the exclusive control over, general K-12 public education.”
“No other constitutional provision authorizes any other governmental entity to compete with or duplicate the efforts of local boards of education in establishing and maintaining general K-12 schools,” the opinion states. “By providing for local boards of education to have exclusive control over general K-12 schools, our constitutions, past and present, have limited governmental authority over the public education of Georgia’s children to that level of government closest and most responsive to the taxpayers and parents of the children being educated.”
The current Constitution also states, however, that “[t]he General Assembly may provide by law for the creation of special schools in such areas as may require them…” At issue in this case is whether “commission charter schools” qualify as “special schools.” Today’s majority opinion says they do not.
“As the language in the Act and the record in this case reflect, the commission charter schools established by the Commission pursuant to the Act are created to deliver K-12 public education to any student within Georgia’s general K-12 public education system,” the majority opinion says. “Commission charter schools thus necessarily operate in competition with or duplicate the efforts of locally controlled general K-12 schools by enrolling the same types of K-12 students who attend locally controlled schools and by teaching them the same subjects that may be taught at locally controlled schools.”
Conditions existing at the time of the adoption of the 1983 Constitution “reflected that ‘special schools’ were those that enrolled only students with certain special needs, e.g., adults, deaf or blind children and those that taught only certain special subjects, e.g., vocational trade schools with jobs-oriented curricula.” The consensus among the drafters of that Constitution was that special schools “were indeed those schools that enrolled only students with certain special needs or taught only certain special subjects,” the majority opinion says. The late House Speaker Thomas B. Murphy, who was a member of the Select Committee on Constitutional Revision, said in reference to the special schools provision: “The reason for this paragraph in the Constitution is it allows the General Assembly to establish schools for the blind, deaf, or people of that nature.”
To interpret “special schools” under the Constitution “as including those schools that are indistinguishable in every constitutionally significant manner from general K-12 schools established and maintained by local boards of education would render the ‘special’ in ‘special schools’ meaningless,” the majority states.
Today’s opinion concludes that, “[t]he record establishes uncontrovertedly that the Georgia Charter Schools Commission Act and the schools established thereunder represent the efforts of well-intentioned people, motivated by their genuine concern over the current condition of this State’s general K-12 public education, to provide the children of this State with an alternative and, in some cases, a superior educational opportunity. In holding the Act unconstitutional under the unique provisions of this State’s Constitution, we do not in any manner denigrate the goals and aspirations that these efforts reflect. The goals are laudable. The method used to attain those goals, however, is clearly and palpably unconstitutional.” Joining the majority are Justices Robert Benham, Hugh Thompson and P. Harris Hines.
In a dissent, Justice David Nahmias writes that “[c]ontrary to the majority’s untenable opinion, the 1983 Georgia Constitution does not prohibit the creation of the Charter Schools Commission or commission charter schools.”
Calling the majority’s reasoning “illogical” and its conclusion “overbroad,” the dissent says that today’s ruling effectively abolishes not only commission charter schools as unconstitutional but also the “state chartered special schools” created by the Charter Schools Act of 1998 and “any other ‘special school’ the General Assembly might dare to create.”
“Today four judges have wiped away a small but important effort to improve public education in Georgia – an effort that reflects not only the education policy of this State’s elected representatives but also the national education policy of the Obama Administration,” says the 75-page dissent. “That result is unnecessary, and it is unfortunate for Georgia’s children, particularly those already enrolled and thriving in state charter schools. It is equally unfortunate for this Court’s reputation as an institution that fairly and accurately interprets the law and exercises the judiciary’s most awesome power – the power to nullify laws enacted through the democratic process – only when that result is clearly and palpably dictated by our Constitution.”
References to “special schools” first appeared in Georgia law nearly a century ago. “What is notable about all of these references – by the General Assembly, the Justices of this Court, and the Judges of the Court of Appeals – is that they all equate ‘special schools’ to schools or school systems established separate from the statewide, county-based common school systems,” the dissent says. “Not once is there a suggestion that a ‘special school’ is defined by its students or curriculum.”
“The ordinary meaning of the constitutional text, its context and history, prior usage, and basic language and logic all support the conclusion that ‘special schools,’ as that phrase is used in the 1983 Constitution, are simply individual public schools that are created by the General Assembly separate from the general county and area school systems,” the dissent says. “Special schools certainly may include schools for students with special needs, like the existing area schools for blind and deaf children, and schools that teach special subjects, like vocational trade schools. But the Legislature’s authority is not limited to creating those two types of special schools.”
The majority’s “assertion that ‘local boards of education’ were given exclusive authority over public schools under our constitutions beginning in 1877 is simply inaccurate,” the dissent says. The 1877 Constitution contains no mention of local school boards, which are not mentioned until the 1945 Constitution. Furthermore: “The General Assembly has created schools and school systems independent of the common county systems since the early years of this State, and the 1983 Constitution restored its power to create such special schools (but not school systems) without any local system approval or participation.” Local school boards have never had exclusive control over general K-12 public education, “because that control has always been shared with and regulated by the General Assembly and, since 1870, by the State Board of Education and State School Superintendent as well,” the dissent says. “The majority may be able to change our law, but it cannot change our history.”
The majority’s concern that commission charter schools duplicate the efforts of local school boards in creating general K-12 schools is also misplaced, the dissent says, given that less than 1 percent of the state’s nearly 2,300 public schools are commission charter schools, state charter schools established by the 1998 act, or area schools for the deaf and blind.
The dissent says “[t]he majority is cagey about exactly what it is holding.” The majority argues that commission charter schools cannot be considered “special schools” because they do not differ in their student bodies or curricula from general public schools. Yet, “there are very few public schools that enroll a student body consisting only of girls, like Ivy Prep,” one of the three charter commission schools being sued. “If such an obvious factor as gender does not differentiate a student body, then what factors do?” the dissent says. “The majority does not say.”
According to the majority, the baseline to which a “special school” must be compared “is not the average or ordinary local school in Georgia but any local school that exists or might ever be created in our State – that is, any school that ‘local boards of education are also authorized to create,’” the dissent says. “Indeed, in rejecting the suggestion that a state chartered school’s unique operating charter is relevant, the majority says that, like the children in Lake Wobegon, in Georgia no public school is average.” The majority’s conclusion that a special school “must enroll students categorically different from those at a locally controlled school or teach subjects wholly unlike those that may be taught in locally controlled schools,” renders the Constitution’s special school provision “a dead letter,” the dissent says.
In conclusion, the dissent says that “the policy position that the majority of this Court reads into our Constitution today contravenes the education policy established by both our State’s Republican Governor and Republican-majority General Assembly that passed the 2008 Act and our nation’s Democratic President and the Democratic-majority Congress that funded the ‘Race to the Top’ Program from which Georgia has received $400 million in funding, in part due to the State’s multiple charter school authorizers.”
Judges have no special competence in education policy, and “litigation is ill-suited to gather the sort of information and make the sort of nuanced and balanced assessments required for good social policy,” the dissent says. “Courts should strike down education-related legislation only where the Constitution ‘clearly and palpably’ prohibits the policy determination at issue. That is not the case here.”
“But the policy debate and the political process no longer matter,” says the dissent. “The majority of this Court has announced the new policy and removed the issue from the political process, unless the General Assembly and the people of our State bear the delay and enormous burden required to correct the Court’s error through a constitutional amendment.” Joining the dissent are Presiding Justice George Carley and Justice Harold Melton.
Justice Harold Melton writes a separate dissent “to emphasize the fundamental principles at play in this case.” He writes that “even under the majority’s faulty constructs and its incorrect definition of ‘special schools,’ these principles, which the majority fails to apply, require a finding that the Charter Schools Commission Act of 2008 is constitutional.”
“Two bedrock rules of statutory construction govern in this matter,” his dissent says. The first is that “we must presume that the statute is, and was intended to be, constitutional.” The second is that short of a claim that the statute improperly impinges upon a First Amendment right, such as free speech, “the statute cannot be struck down unless it is unconstitutional in all of its applications….”
As to the first principle, even a cursory review of the Act supports the presumption it is constitutional, this dissent says. For example, in provisions related to cosponsors, the Act suggests that cosponsors should be sought out to maximize “access to a wide variety of high-quality educational options for all students regardless of disability, race or socioeconomic status, including students who have struggled in a traditional public school setting.”
“Even if one applies the majority’s definition of ‘special schools’ as those that ‘enrolled only students with certain special needs or taught only certain special subjects,’ these provisions unequivocally support a conclusion that the Act was not “unconstitutional,” the dissent says.
As to the second principle, “it is untenable to argue that the Act is unconstitutional in all of its applications or lacks a plainly legitimate sweep.” The existence of Ivy Preparatory Academy, an all-girls charter school and one of three sued by the local boards, “proves that the Act meets the majority’s constitutional test, as it has been properly applied to create a special school.”
The Georgia Legislature “created a law to provide for special charter schools to enhance our educational system, and it included evidence on the face of the statute supporting such a constitutional intent,” the dissent says. “Nevertheless, the majority looks beyond this basic principle to reach a result that simply cannot be explained in the context of the applicable law and the undisputed facts.”
Attorneys for Appellants (school districts): Michael J. Bowers, T. Joshua Archer, Joshua Moore, Thomas Cox, Gerald Edenfield, Susan Cox, Charles Aaron, Timothy Shepherd, A.J. Welch, Jr.
Attorneys for Appellees (charter schools): Bruce Brown, Jeremy Berry, E. Claire Carothers, Thurbert Baker, former Attorney General, Dennis Dunn, Dep. A.G., Stefan Ritter
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
259 comments Add your comment
Education headlines: Georgia court strikes state charter commission « School Board News
May 16th, 2011
4:07 pm
[...] Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Get Schooled blog reported on the verdict as well. Joetta Sack-Min|May 16th, 2011|Categories: Advocacy & [...]
georgia cyber academy student
May 16th, 2011
4:08 pm
It isn’t just the parents that are mad, as a student of a charter school i am pissed, my right to a better education is being taken away. At first I started K12 when i was in 7th grade because i was sick and doctors didn’t know what was wrong and my school, Berkmar middle didn’t help at all, they actually wanted me to go to school with a plastic bag to throw up in. So my mom put me in k12, i am better now, but i staid in k12 not only because it was flexible but also because my grades went up for C’s to B’s and A’s. to take away charter school is taking away my education and my rights as a citizen of the united states of America. By doing this they are sending a message to kids saying “since this takes away power from the government we decided we are taking you education away.”
Sarah
May 16th, 2011
4:16 pm
I guess I will buy the K12 education package myself and homeschool my kids… they are NOT going to a BM school.
georgia cyber academy student
May 16th, 2011
4:24 pm
Good!!! Public schools suck. they make unnecessary rules because they feel big and powerful. And for the teachers there, they are good teachers, there is nothing wrong with them, its not their fault its the governments.
Kathy II
May 16th, 2011
5:02 pm
OK, let me ask all of you this: How many of you have visited or been actively involved in your public school’s School Council as per OCGA 20-2-85 through 86?
What did your school district do when lawmakers gave us HB 1187 that gave parents choice if a school was closer to there home than what the LBOE zoned their child for?
What did you school district do when HB 251 gave intra district choice if a school had room for your child?
Georgia lawmakers give us laws, but LBOEs interpret, implement, and enforce these laws without consequences. In Houston County, there is one body/person to review any out of zone request…and the rule of thumb….don’t give choice to anyone or if you do, keep it secret. When HB 251 came out,,,our district came up with a bogus 80% capacity standard….of course I had to get the “capacity” for the building from the state because EVEN that was a secret. If I didn’t know what the capacity of the facility was, I could not hold anyone accountable for a bogus 80% capacity standard pulled out of thin air.
Kathy II
May 16th, 2011
5:23 pm
the only reason I asked these questions is because we can make a difference…HOWEVER, if parents are NOT informed about laws that are in place, (and school districts are NOT going to spoon feed parents we have to go digging) then when one or two parents in any given district want to exercise the laws…we are made to look as if we are the deviant ones or the ones who got it wrong…there is NO reason why a parent has to fight the school system to be involved.
Who has knowlege of HB 400 or OCGA 20-2-237? The BRIDGE Law? That is another area that actively involves parents and the letter of the law must be followed….Senator Fram Millar authored the bill and he has been very generous with any information as to the letter and spirit of the law. The BRIDGE law puts parents in the process, ….and at my son’s school they involved us too…However, out of 8 middle schools I think our school was the only one to have this parent meeting….
Educator at heart
May 16th, 2011
5:38 pm
It amazes me that the general public seems to have so little respect for the teaching profession as well as traditional public schools in our state. I am now going to speak as an educator as well as a parent of a child in our public school system.
Teachers at the school where I am employed as an elementary educator, most of the teachers work long hours and are committed to educating each and every child that crosses the classroom thresholds. I know my test scores speak for themselves. For some of my subjects, I have 100% of the students pass the CRCT. For the remaining subjects, it is also a high percentage. We spend hours and hours creating innovative lessons and activities, have rapport with our parents and offer our students to use their multi-talents to be successful in school as well as home and community. Yes….we are 99% Free and Reduced Lunch, high minority population and have a high mobility rate. We are continually in need of funding. We have to spend hundreds of dollars and sometimes thousands to supplant what we do not receive from the school system. Our facility is in need of repair and may be even considered unhealthy in many areas of the building. Yet, we come in each day with a determination to offer a positive future for the children we educate. No one can honestly say that we do not give our heart, soul, commitment and physical energy to make our educational setting one conducive for learning and growing.
All I hear is the complaints about traditional public education. Why do people not celebrate the success stories? Why do people not spend the same kind of time and resources in our traditional public schools that they spend for charter schools? Parents need to be proactive in their community schools. They need to speak out and become active in establishing parent councils. They need to take ownership of the public schools and DEMAND that their voices be heard. I like what I read in one post,” If the boards do not listen to the parents, vote them out!” We are the taxpayers and the local schools are our schools. They are not “owned” by the administrators or the boards. We need to stand up, be counted and advocate some serious change in our school systems. Or, is it that most of the parents seek to have an environment for educating their children that is “separate” from the masses of students. Or….is it that privatization has become so powerful that parents are blinded by their promises of “saving” children from the horrors of traditional public school? Some of the Commission Charter schools were a “legal” way of taking public dollars to give to private management companies. The millions of dollars that were going towards facilities, corporate curriculums, consultants, etc was amazing.
Our public schools need dollars.Teachers are being laid off due to lack of money from the state. Facilities are being closed because of lack of money from the state and local governments. Programs are being eliminated from the schools due to lack of funding. And we talk about funding small schools that have recently opened under that magic name of “charter school/” What exactly is happening in our state? Our public schools need adequate funding, safe and healthy facilities, parental support and strong advocacy. Our talented public school teachers need the same kind of support and praise that people seem so ready to give to charter schools. We as a community can create green learning centers, arts academies, science academies, schools that specialize in the innovations that are working around our nation….and we can do this in our traditional public schools. Let there be a move towards magnet schools and a choice of schools within districts. Let us work together as communities to create change within our local systems.
Let us rally for improving our local schools at the local level. I wonder how many people will show up??????????
justjanny
May 16th, 2011
5:42 pm
@Dunwoody Mom…you are so right! Now what abot Eddie Long’s charter school (s)?
Kathy II
May 16th, 2011
5:58 pm
Educator at heart: there is already intra school choice: HB 251, but LBOEs found that loop hole too. I agree that we should NOT target teachers, but maybe not for the same reasons. Over the past decade I have seen who is making the rules, who gets promoted, who gets laid off, and who is going to teach what and when, why and how. Central office staff have their hands in the “structure” of the process and then assign teachers their duties. Believe me…I TRUST my son’s teachers before I trust some pencil pusher up at the central office who may not even know my son. This issue should NEVER be about teachers, but about a system that is BROKEN and has been for many years. Georgia backloaded on AYP absolute bars and when it comes down to crunch time…we pull the tests (graduation tests) and implement another test for AYP purposes…TWO years BEFORE NCLB mandates expire…no coincidence.
School Board members are elected every four years…and the public is very quick to forget…and there is one more point: Most of the citizens in Houston County do NOT have kids in the school system…BUT they vote for BOE members and guess who addresses the chamber of commerce and business leaders? Yep, the superintendent and Board Chair touting their successes…
One last point…you teach at a Title I school…did you know that there are Federal (NCLB), state, and local laws that give your parents more opportunities and rights than a parent who pays full price for their child’s lunch? How backwards is that? Those who do not have the resources to be involved have all those opportunities and some are even paid to be involved in their child’s school (parent involvement coordinators) …., but those of us who pay for our child’s lunch(and rightfully so) we EVEN PAY to be involved! We pay all the time….
Rick
May 16th, 2011
6:02 pm
Dunwoody Mom,
You are correct, Neighborwhood Charter School and Atlanta Charter Middle Schools were approved by APS…..However, the group of parents in my neighborhood – including a state representative – that worked through the process and tendered the document are extremely savvy and were able to put ample pressure on APS to demand approval, which they were granted. Do you think that school boards will not be empowered by this decision, resulting in the refusal of charters designed to improve the education of our children, and as a result in many cases, to stablize our neighborhoods?
I am a product of Atlanta Public Schools myself. Some of the APS schools on the northside are great, and several seem to be getting better. But many of us need TRUE local control, as in hiring the Principal and teachers, and NOT just voting for the school board. Those of you who say that moving out of a school sytem is the answer are lost. Enjoy your traffic and strip malls. And those of you who tell me to send my kid to a crap school so it will get better – would you do that yourself if you value education and TRUE diversity? Finally, to those (like Dunwoody Mom) who seem more concerned with how others may be benefitting from her tax dollars, I don’t have much sympathy. My kids’ education doesn’t cost you any more than you’re already paying.
——–
@Rick – if you are referring to the “Neighborhood School”, this was a charter school that was approved by APS. The decision to allow this was done at the “local level” – which is the argument at the heart of this controversy.
georgia cyber academy student
May 16th, 2011
6:42 pm
Educator at heart your opinion is a good one. I don’t have any thing agents teachers. when i did go to public school i liked my teachers, what is wrong is that government is taking away the education of kids who are doing better in a charter school. this isn’t an argument of government or the teachers and parents it’s an argument on how kids can get the best possible education and if charter school works for a lot of kids, government should fund it as well as any public school.
Here’s What You Can Do Right Now To Help! « Virtual School Meanderings
May 16th, 2011
7:39 pm
[...] AJC: http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2011/05/16/breaking-news-supreme-court-strikes-down-charter-s... [...]
AJBrown
May 16th, 2011
8:06 pm
Maureen, Provost Academy Georgia should also be included on the list–a statewide cyber high school for grades 9-12 that was approved by the Commission and was slated to open in August.
Maureen Downey
May 16th, 2011
8:20 pm
@AJBrown, It is on the list, toward the middle. And I included a comment from the principal in the blog entry I did today on reaction to the Supreme Court decision,
Maureen
relieved!
May 16th, 2011
8:52 pm
I am so thankful that this ruling came about. The charter school that is in my area was put together by a group of friends that didn’t want their children to be apart of the local school systems (which there is nothing academically wrong with!) They did not seek local system support from any of the 5 counties they are taking funds from. Rather decided to have a chosen board because they could pick who would make the decisions. However, because taxes were raised (in some counties tremendously), the tax payers should have a say in who makes the financial decisions for the school. Our country once felt strongly about the slogan “no taxation without representation”. And now…some people are trying to do just that. Personally I am comforted by the separation of powers and the statement “we the people” that were put into place so many years ago!
No Commission Needed
May 16th, 2011
10:20 pm
This ruling is great! A win for the tax payer; notice in the ruling a mention of local taxes going to these commission school. Here in SWGA they ran a full page ad telling us no local taxes were being used.
SW Dekalb Parent
May 16th, 2011
10:36 pm
I ain’t payin no taxes……can i still get my chilren in charter?
Sad in Coweta County
May 16th, 2011
11:35 pm
Where does GA rank in graduation rates, test scores, etc.? Where does MN rank in graduation rates, test scores, etc.? MN has open enrollment plus lots of charter schools and magnet schools… Don’t take away school choice, GA! GA schools could use a little competition.
Can't believe this ruling
May 16th, 2011
11:39 pm
This is unfortunate…yet again, another case of the haves and have nots. There is a large group of children in metro-Atlanta who are underrepresented ( and this is not a race issue, it’s an economic issue, but that’s for another day.) Charter schools fill a need for children who otherwise may not have the same opportunity to succeed in the traditional public school setting. Oh..and for those charter schools commissioned by APS…APS is HAPPILY taking HUGE sums of money for charter schools to lease the buildings they occupy. I can only hope our government gets a clue…and swiftly. When we complain about jobs being sent overseas due to limited skills in The US, we should think about this ruling. We have only ourselves to blame.
Tracy
May 16th, 2011
11:42 pm
You people who believe public charter schools that let parents work one on one with their children in a safe environment is a bad thing are complete idiots. White flight? Yes – even rats flee a sinking ship and I know many blacks who are fleeing the bathroom rapes, gang beatings, bully till death, drugged up student seducing teacher led public schools. There are some hell holes that you cannot stay and fix – you build anew. If you can’t see that then you haven’t had your child raped in a high school bathroom yet. We the parents who want to flee pay taxes too and we are sick of throwing our tax money at absolute failures led by teacher unions. Teachers who – by the way – dont care to teach so much as they care to play favorites and grope little girls and boys. This isnt a nightmare, its the truth, and until it happens to your child keep looking through those ‘clear’ rose colored glasses. Parents have the RIGHT to dictate the education of their children and so we have the RIGHT to take our children out of the prisons you call public schools whether you like it or not. You want to stay and fix it? Feel free. Those of us at least as smart as bilge rats are leaving in droves – as you can obviously see by the enrollments of thousands in the chartered schools.
B. Killebrew
May 16th, 2011
11:49 pm
Tracy…what movie did you watch?
Tracy
May 16th, 2011
11:52 pm
Real life. My autistic nephew was raped in a high school bathroom. He was also mistreated by teachers and no IEP or 501 saved him. He was constantly bullied, beaten and harassed and no teacher stood up for him. What world are you living in that you don’t see the truth on your own news?
Educator at Heart - Please Quit Whining !!!
May 17th, 2011
12:02 am
@EAH…for the last time…it is NOT about systems, it is about what is best for each child and the children and the parents (who fund education and pay your salary) being the customers !!!
It has been proven over and over again, there are always some % of children that are not best served in the traditional public school setting – for the horrible schools, studies show it can be a very high %, but even for the good schools, it is always still SOME % !!!
Do your homework !!! View the documentaries titled, “The Cartel” and “Waiting for Superman!”
And please do me a favor -stop the whining about being a public school teacher. Parents are the ones ultimately responsible for their children’s education and to best optimize that education, it has and always will be about PARTNERSHIP. Parents and Children should always be the ones to make the final decision as to what works best for them – not some power hungry Super, corrupt School Board members, or a teacher who thinks he/she is God’s gift to the profession when in reality, they’re not. Stop taking everything so personal and realize, it is not about you, the teacher, or public vs. charter vs. private, it’s about the children. Even the great public schools by most traditional standards, have children who are not best served by that school’s offerings.
I am a former military officer who has layed my life on the line countless times for the many freedoms this country offers. It is well known that sane people do not enter the military for fame and fortune. I have always said that as a former military officer now working in the private sector, I work half as hard as I did in the military but get paid twice as much. In the military I worked twice, sometimes three times as hard as I now do in the corporate world but received 50% of what I now make. However, the leadership training, camraderie, commitment, and most importantly, job satisfaction was unparalelled and I would do it again in a heartbeat. My reward was knowing I was doing the right thing, and was truly one of the many unsung heroes that made the world a better and more democratic place to live.
As a teacher, school board member, superintendent, no one has the right to enslave children to an educational offering that isn’t working for them. School Choice freedoms are long overdue, the money should follow the child public or private, and return to serving the child as the customer. The competitive and customer oriented school environment that wil result will be the change we need so that all of our children will thrive educationally.
Tracy
May 17th, 2011
12:22 am
The money used does not belong to the school board. Or the schools. It belongs to the people who PAY TAXES. And they have the right to choose how their child is educated. The local school districts want to keep control over money allocated for children even when those children do not attend their school. The per pupil funds should follow the child to whatever school their parent chooses for them to attend.
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
8:34 am
Georgia Constitution Article VIII Sectin V:
Paragraph II. Boards of education. Each school system shall be under the management and control of a board of education, the members of which shall be elected as provided by law.
The New York Times published: ” a 24-page ruling, Chief Justice Carol W. Hunstein said that only local boards of education were empowered by Georgia’s Constitution to open and finance public schools.”
Question: So, why don’t the legislators introduce legislation to create and establish additional “Boards of Education”? For example: Atlanta is a city school system, but located in what counties? Perhaps it’s time to establish corporate/city school systems with Boards of Education and NON incorporated school systems for the county? (BTW: the education committees in the Senate and House could get working on this right now…special sessions)
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
8:46 am
ALSO: It may be time for the pro Charter school power houses to look to federal legislators. What if the federal government made Title I monies conditional for State DOEs and Local BOEs? For instance, what if the federal government said, IF a state does not provide for adequate “choice” in the education process…then that state and local education system will NOT receive Title I funds.
The State and Local dollars might be the “bulk of financing” education, but the FEDERAL Title I dollars is enough to have some leverage…..
Jeff G
May 17th, 2011
8:48 am
@Rod Johnson..your repeated anti-teacher union screeds are off base here. Regardless of the merits or problems of teacher unions, they are irrelevant in Georgia. Do some research before flying off the handle, and think for yourself instead of letting Fox pundits do it for you. Teacher unions in Georgia have no collective bargaining power. The only thing they do is provide support for teachers who have legitimate grievances when school systems fail to honor the terms of the contract which the systems themselves created. As far as the effects of unions on educational outcomes, you’d have a hard time finding the correlation you’re claiming. Some states with unions may have poor outcomes, but that’s mostly due to the large number of urban schools that always struggle due to poverty and other socioeconomic factors. Wisconsin has consistently performed at the highest levels despite their supposedly detrimental teacher unions.
Patricia Bryan
May 17th, 2011
9:33 am
Any suggestions for someone who has applied to teach in some of these charter schools? What should their next step be?
Thisisridiculous!
May 17th, 2011
9:34 am
Is this a joke! In Georgia, our school systems are still operating on standards set forth in the 1870’s, 1940’s, and even the 1980’s!!!! This is a new age in education, and clearly we have no standards in place that are meeting the needs of our children! To all of you school systems out there that meet AYP and 123 and Your Excellency every year, guess what… you have still failed to meet the needs of some the children that attend your schools! The tax dollars never left the community! The money was merely shifted to allow deserving children of tax-paying citizens the right to be in environment that better fits their learning styles. IF the COMMISSION is unconstitutional, then let us come up with a more appropriate way to grant charters. These children should not have suffer because there are still a few adults around that still cannot fathom the idea of opportunity for all people and not just the one’s that look like them! These charter schools offer the basis for an alternative to our traditional school structure that just may help to transform Georgia into a premier place to have our children educated. The challenge here is to let go of that ol’ way of thinkin’… and move forward with creating environments in which all children can learn. This is about the children, right?
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
11:14 am
If the “Charter schools” that are affected by this ruling has “zoned” students enrolled….I am curious if anyone can tell me if their “public” school is a public Title I school that is in Needs Improvement status as Per NCLB and are ENTITLED to school Choice?
If a school has to offer choice as per NCLB, then the charter school SHOULD be an alternative for the FAILING Public School.
Maureen, do you know if these Charter schools are in areas where the public school is in NI status? If so, then what are the schools being offered up as choice? Also, if there are public schools that are NOT safe as per NCLB, the Unsafe School Choice Option should also be looked at…as argument FOR the Charter School.
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
11:32 am
here’s the link….for AYP from the GDOE…….. click on AYP report…if a school did not make AYP it will state what action that school must take…for instance, NI first year status…may have to offer school choice, or may offer Supplemental Education Services…..NI year two..may be either of these consequences too…
NI for three years, schools must offer both, choice and SES…..
Now, if these “Charter school students” are zoned for a school in NI status first, second, or third year then choice is an option for parents…that is how we tie Charter school choice to Title I federal funding…
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
11:34 am
THe Link for AYP from the GDOE: Sorry for any confusion
http://public.doe.k12.ga.us/ayp2010/search.asp
Commission is NOT accountable to Parents or Taxpayers
May 17th, 2011
12:48 pm
Page 17… On the one hand, local school boards are comprised of members who live in their schools’ districts and must be ELECTED to their positions by the parents and taxpayers residing in the areas from which the students are drawn and the local schools taxes are raised. See Art. VIII, Sec. V, Par. II; Art. VIII, Sec. VI, Par. I. The Commission, on the other hand, is comprised of seven political APPOINTEES who are selected by the governor, the president of the Senate (i.e., the lieutenant governor) and the speaker of the House, see OCGA § 20-2-2082 (b); hence, its members are NOT accountable in any manner either to the parents or to the taxpayers.
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
3:20 pm
…@commission is not accountable to tax payers an parents: that is why Federal Title I funds for Title I schools should be looked at closely. The federal govt. can attach “conditions” to Title I funds just as it did years ago with the drinking age going to 21 and Highway funding…..
Laura Leckband
May 17th, 2011
3:48 pm
This is a sad day for Georgia. The truth is parents can, have and continue to work with schools in Georgia THAT ALLOW THEM TO DO SO. In Avondale parents did their utmost to improve the local school for more than 5 years, while being obstructed by the administration of that school at every turn. The real result of this ruling will be parents deciding once and for all to leave their neighborhoods, and likely Georgia as well. Charter schools are not perfect by a long shot, but they represent the only way parents have to truly impact the quality of the education their children receive. School Boards, particularly the DeKalb School Board. obstruct participation, limit comment, and work to maintain their members inviobility at the polls. They provide no responsiveness to parental concerns – that is just laughable.
I challenge you – How many jobs are created in a state with substandard schools? How many students stay in that state to work? How many corporations choose to relocate a company headquarters to or build a plant in a place where key employees will not move because they will not doom their children to a poor education?
Congratulations, Supreme Court – you are now leading Georgia’s “Race to the Bottom”.
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
4:15 pm
@Laura: I agree with you on many of your points….the real challenge I hope for the majority of parents is TO KNOW the current law…and GO TO THE BOE meetings and school councils and start demanding ACCOUNTABILITY.
OCGA 20-2-85-86 School councils
OCGA 20-3-237 Parent involvement in creation and updating Codes Of Condutct
CGA 20-2-237 regarding the BRIDGE Law. are just a few ….
Then there is Section 1118 of NCLB that pertains ONLY to Title I schools…
If the majority of parents do NOT exercise these laws to HOLD LBOEs or administrators accountable…THEN THEY GET Away with whatever they do.
Examine WHY charter schools were created….then TAKE those qualities and take them to the BOE…DO NOT allow a resource officer or principal to determine if your child was assaulted at school, CONTACT the local police department or call the 1-800-say-stop (GDOE Safety Hotline) to start a paper trail that the school system now avoids. If you have an issue, that is NOT resolved at the lowest level DO NOT be afraid to take it to the OPEN Meeting your BOE has…Make all complaints public knowledge and don’t be afraid to utilize the system’s grievance policy…ALSO, there Is SACS that you can contact too for issues that the LBOE might be deviating from their “written ” …We can’t give up for the SAKE of the parents who do not speak up for a plethora of reasons.
Shirley F.Rogers
May 17th, 2011
4:30 pm
The interpretation of this preposterous, bigoted, class oriented, ruling handed down by the Georgia Supreme Court is as follows:
It is “constitutional” for taxpayer monies to fund failing public schools controlled by the local school system. It is “unconstitutional” to use taxpayer monies to properly educate our children.
However, I do agree with the Supreme Court in its definition of “special”. I interpret that as this:
If someone or something does what it is supposed to do (provide a quality education) then it is not special, but it is operating as it should. It is no more extraordinary for one to refrain from committing adultery than it is to go to school and learn substantive, relative subject matter, taught by educators who actually teach as opposed to have schizophrenic, manic episodes when a student ask to use the restroom.
Finally, this should have been a matter for the ballot where the people of the State of Georgia have the opportunity to decide; not four Supreme Court Judges that had the privilege of educating their children where and how they choose.
Commission is NOT accountable to Parents or Taxpayers
May 17th, 2011
6:44 pm
I don’t consider a “commission” who is not elected and not accountable to parents or the taxpayers a good choice. I am also not okay with schools exempt from the rules and regs and are only bound by contracts between the petitioner and the governmen agency, without input from the parents and people a good choice. Personally, I want accountability for my tax dollars.
Southwest Georgia Mom
May 17th, 2011
7:48 pm
It’s all about money, no one seems concerned over the kids or the education they are recieving. Parents already have an advantage living in northern Georgia where their children can recieve a better education and have more oppurtunities to learn, etc. Whereas in south Georgia and more rural areas this is not possible, so a “charter” school is almost a neccessity for parents that want their children to strive for an education.
yes i am worried
May 17th, 2011
7:51 pm
For what seems like the 100th time, the parents in Avondale did try hard to work within the system. There are serious problems at the local elementary school and they are related to the administration, who are tied to Dr. Lewis. (think friends and family)
I watched, from afar, as dozens of parents worked their rears off trying to improve Avondale Elementary. They contributed a substantial amount of money and innumerable hours volunteering to a school where the principal routinely ran off half the staff a year.
Dr. Lewis was aware of this and kept the administration in place.
The community was left with no options.
Jennifer
May 17th, 2011
7:58 pm
These folks who think this ruling was such a good idea – go send your kid to Meadowcreek or Summerour. Then you can talk. Let’s see Louise Radloff send her great grandchildren there and then let’s have a discussion.
Hope
May 17th, 2011
8:07 pm
SHAME! SHAME! On those responsible for this selfish and thoughtless action taken against the best interest of Georgia’s children with highly questionable motives. We will be watching and hold you responsible for the harm this disruption in their education will surely bring! I just SHAME! SHAME! On those responsible for this selfish and thoughtless action taken against the best interest of Georgia’s children with highly questionable motives. We will be watching and hold you responsible for the harm this disruption in their education will surely bring! I just enrolled my children in k12 and am sick with concern about what the future holds.
Hope
May 17th, 2011
8:13 pm
oops! sorry for the messed up post. But I’m sure my concern is clear.
Hope
May 17th, 2011
8:17 pm
To not accountable. They are accountable if we as parents determine they aren’t preforming we will leave. One size does not fit all! Money should follow child. The only people that dont like that idea dont like the competition. I as a parent know what my childrens individual needs are and should have options. Are you a parent ?
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
11:30 pm
@yes I am worried: I looked up Avondale Elem. and in 2010 it shows a poverty rate of 91%. It is a title I school. NOW…let me ask you this…
Did you obeserve those parents writing the “student/teacher/parent Compacts”? Did you see the parents helping to decide where the $125,450 would be spent? Did you see that with this money went to pay for ONE teacher? Did you notice if there is a parent involvement coordinator and is that coordinator a parent of a child at that Title I school? Did those parents approach the parent business partners on the School Council? How ofter does the school council meet each year? Did the school council or Title I parent group ever ask to see the budget for the school?
You see, if a school has an overwhelming of free or reduced lunchrate….that normally means, VERY little expendable income to support a principal’s special interest projects……..HOWEVER, there is so much more the parents can lawfully be involved with….INCLUDING deciding where Title I monies from the federal govt. can and should be spent…..
Kathy II
May 17th, 2011
11:36 pm
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/ReportingFW.aspx?PageReq=104&SchoolId=23061&T=1&FY=2010
link above should take you to the Avondale Title I report from GDOE.
Maureen, I’d like to “re-submit” a question: Maureen, do you know if these Charter schools are in areas where the public school is in NI status? If so, then what are the schools being offered up as choice? Also, if there are public schools that are NOT safe as per NCLB, the Unsafe School Choice Option should also be looked at…as argument FOR the Charter School
Kathy II
May 18th, 2011
1:32 am
BTW: the only reason Avondale, like MANY of our Georgia Schools, is NOT in Needs Improvement status… and it made AYP?
Georgia DOE backloaded. It was the fundamental belief that No Child Left Behind would not last, so Georgia and other states set the Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) or Absolute Bar very LOW at the beginning of the Law’s implementation, then as we get closer to 2014 (100% proficiency in L/A and Math) the absolute bar is raised incrementally, but more dramatic the closer we get to 2014 . The way it looks, one might predict that Avondale will likely make AYP up until 2012. In 2012, the AMO for math CRCT is set for 91%…even if the kids don’t pass, it takes two consecutive years to be NI status…so that puts us at the spring of 2014 before the school will be put on NI status, which would beget school choice or supplemental education services….However, 2014 is when NCLB is up and the AMO=100%. SO what happens after 2014?
Meanwhile it looks like Avondale should be establishing a foundation in Social Studies and Science for these kids…the percentage of students meeting or exceeding the standards on these tests are alarming…(2010 report as 2011 AYP report has not been published. Remember, the schools get to “re test” the kids and calculated in AYP) ..
A.M. Announcements | Circle Games: the Education Roundabout
May 18th, 2011
9:42 am
[...] straddles ed reform lines with his pick for schools leader. Protests in Georgia over this week’s state supreme court ruling invalidating the state’s charter-authorizing commission. Local We spend so much time and [...]
Ben
May 18th, 2011
10:15 am
This is no big deal. All it does is bring these schools under the authority of the local school boards, where it should have been to begin with. The boards and unions don’t really care about “educating” the children; they care about preserving their authority. Which is fine because education today is relative and if the children get an education, it’s incidental and not by design.
So now the choice is for a child to either get a public or private education(home schooling included); no in-between anymore. You parents are going to have to make a hard choice because the “system” has just won a big victory. No free rides anymore.
Commission is NOT accountable to Parents or Taxpayers
May 18th, 2011
11:06 am
@ Hope – I agree with you. I want “money” follows the child legislation. We dont need all these so called “special schools” – if money followed the child, even in public education it would encourage competition. The schools that serve the child and parents will have more people wanting to send their kids there and those that don’t will close. We need to bring back education grants.