Governor responds to school chief’s strong opposition to charter amendment on Nov. ballot

A partial reposting of a post I contributed yesterday:

“If Dr. Barge pays a political price for doing the right thing for ALL of the children of Georgia (as he has done with his public statement of not supporting Georgia’s Constitutional amendment because, as he has stated, laws ALREADY exist in which the Superintendent of Georgia’s Schools can act as mediator with local Boards of Education who may not approve of certain charter schools in their districts), then the public will be able to see – in glaring daylight – who, specifically, will be trying to make Dr. Barge pay a political price for following his conscience. . . .

Citizens see more deeply into the political arena in education, in Georgia and nationally, than some are aware.”

• Link
• Report this comment

changing his position in a way that you agree with isn’t the same thing as “doing the right thing”…….

• Link
• Report this comment

Governor Deal is as weak as dish water on the issue. His staffers are driving the education agenda. It is so obvious that he does not know what to do or say on the matter. Spouting the selected party talking points and the armtwisting that he participated in was a shallow effort to push a repub ideology. No one considers the consequences on the children and educators in the field everyday. Make no mistake on the matter-it is about the money!

• Link
• Report this comment

Good point Maureen. In fact it was Deal who originally opposed Race to the Top and the. Flip flopped after pressure from Will Scbofield of Hall County and a few others.

Deal has zero room to talk. Stay the course John.

• Link
• Report this comment

HERE HERE DR. BARGE…Thanks for standing up for all struggling public school systems the current and previous governor seems to have forgotten. Governor Deal criticizes Dr. Barge for taking a position to support current public education with local control and not take the political postion to funnel more funds away from locally controlled public schools. Why add another layer of “government”? Governor Deal speaks of supporting his legislature’s 2/3 vote….if you believe there was no arm twisting during this debate and vote….JUST ASK YOUR LEGISLATOR….I did.

WAY TO GO DR. BARGE.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bad news Republicans you own this education funding disaster. The whole process of gutting public schools started with Sunny and continues today. You can’t try to deflect that someone was once a Democrat to keep from admitting that the Republicans who completely control the govt. and have for a decade are culpable.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bravo, bravo, bravo John Barge. The rest of the Republicans (not ever to be confused with conservative) have only interest in destroying the public school system in order to more easily segregate rich kids from the rest of us to further shrink the middle class.

It is amazing that so-called “conservatives” are intent on centralizing government control with BIGGER state bureaucracy. We can only hope the middle class and poor folks who have been duped into believing these individuals are “for” them will see clearly enough to dump this travesty in November.

• Link
• Report this comment

Not surprised that an education bureaucrat would oppose choice for parents of public school children. After all, the public school system is perfect, or at least it would be if we just gave it more and more funding [see, e.g., Washington DC which spends $18,667 per pupil per year, and it's an educational Utopia].
More likely, the bureacrats don’t want competition, which exposes incompetent teachers, administrators and methods to harsh light, and lets parents vote with their feet.

• Link
• Report this comment

Follow the money. Yes indeed with this crowd in the statehouse. Dr. Barge alluded to, and many people are beginning to awaken to, the fact that big bucks are involved and that there is a huge industry of for-profit choice school “managers”, mostly from out of state, just salivating at the prospect of potentially billions of dollars heading their way. Who gets the “finders fees”, campaign donations and employment of friends and relatives? I would look at the usual suspects. This will be the new way for politicians to get rich now that T-Splost has been defeated. Follow the money.

• Link
• Report this comment

Face it, they’re ALL liars, cheats, thieves, and scallywags. In every city, state, and federal building the country over. The only thing that will free us from political corruption and skulduggery is when we die. The whole world has simply gone to HE!!.

• Link
• Report this comment

Who is being scammed here? Any of Georgia’s 159 County Boards of Education, as well as the Georgia Department of Education, can authorize a charter school. Why is there a need for the taxpayers to pay for another government bureaucracy – The Charter Commission – to authorize a charter school? Someone is being scammed – and it is the GA voters if they pass this constitutional admendment!

• Link
• Report this comment

Although I am not a fan of Governer Deal, I am for charter schools. My property taxes have increased tremendously over the years and the public schools just got worse. I sent my son to a local charter school and he loved it! The teachers were engaged with the students and the books/supplies were brand new and state of the art while receiving less money than the public school. Every child deserves to learn in an environment that is free from distractions, bad attitudes and teachers that have no desire to be in the classroom. I know teachers are being blamed for a lot of things in the classroom but some of them don’t want to be there and it shows. I live in a great neighborhood but the local middle school is an embarassment. I refused to send my son there and wound up driving 17 miles each way and paying additional money for a private school. Not every parent has that ability. Charter schools provide a choice. Every child deserves the right to a good education and if public schools can’t/won’t do it, then good charter schools are the way to go.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry, i was typing too fast. Meant to say “legislature passed a law”.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Buckshot, I have to disagree. I have seen tons of research and while it is true that some charter schools may not perform better than public schools, I can almost assure you that in most communities where there is a public charter school and a traditional public school, the public charter school has higher achievement levels.

• Link
• Report this comment

More ridiculous comments from @Bootney. I know you are referring to me. Nice try.

• Link
• Report this comment

Leaders will punish Dr. Barge by punishing our children — his decision is not about his politics — by opposing he will lose — unless the voters demand their representatives and senators promise NOT TO PUNISH DOE and K12 for exercising their rights to freedom of speech and for living up to their obligations as elected officials to faithfully support the constitution and laws of this state.

• Link
• Report this comment

@JD – I don’t think your note is accurate. If you support the concept of charter schools, then you cannot allow them to be run by local school board monopolies. They’ll die on the vine. It is still unclear whether or not APS will face a lawsuit because of their 11th hour allocation change which resulted in the closing of Tech High. They allocated costs that should not have been allocated to Tech High and other charter schools.

Innovation needs to have space to breathe, so if you understand the dynamics of how markets operate, you cannot have it both ways. You’re saying that it’s ok to have a public charter school, but we want it to be the ostracized stepchild of the local public school. That’s not going to fly.

• Link
• Report this comment

From Dr. John Barge’s statement yesterday:

“What’s more, this constitutional amendment would direct taxpayer dollars into the pockets of out-of-state, for-profit charter school companies whose schools perform no better than traditional public schools and locally approved charter schools (and worse, in some cases).”

I am certain Dr. Barge had studied this issue, throroughly, before making the statement, above. He knows from where he speaks. Again, I am grateful to Dr. Barge for his following his conscience for all of the school children of Georgia.
———————————————————————-

JD, 11:22: “You can support the concept of Charter Schools but not support the amendment.” This is a true statement, and Dr. Barge’s statement of yesterday, also, confirmed this to be true.

• Link
• Report this comment

I like the sound of GOVERNOR BARGE!

• Link
• Report this comment

If they change the name to the “separate but equal school amendment ” it should pass with flying colors. Johnny Reb Values is the Golden Rule in Georgia.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ pluto

the only alleged option, was King Roy, who we knew was a liar and political lady of the night.
no sane voter was gonna put him back in office. only real support he got was from the yellow dogs.

the bigger, sadder issue is we the people decided Roy and Nate were our two best options

• Link
• Report this comment

@ bootney, I hope we apply the Gomer Pyle therem in the next election: “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me!”

• Link
• Report this comment

knowing Deal’s past – think Tony Soprano when it comes to grudges and alleged corruption Barge is in for a looooong next term if Nate is re-elected.

I’m writing in Ronald McDonald for gov. next time. if we’re gonna be stuck with clowns, lets at least have a good one who brings fries.

• Link
• Report this comment

“More money ain’t the answer!”

Because less money is working out sooooooo well.

• Link
• Report this comment

Buzzy – you are wrong. There is no mandate for an online class. You have either been reading your local paper of listening to the educrats because there is no mandate. If a child wants to take a class online from the Georgia Virtual School the local school district cannot prohibit them.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gov Deal is still hoping he won’t have to pay the loans back.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’d be curious how many of these responders are a. Public School emplyees or b. Do not have children in a public school. My experience is that people who are in those two categories are about the only ones who believe that what we have now is working, that the public schools are underfunded, and that the money should go to the school – regardless of whether the child does or not. The fact is that our public schools are an embarrassment to the state. The Governor and the majority of the Legislature have made significant contributions in trying to bring competition and innovation to our public education system. When you hear the superintendents complain, it’s always about money and NEVER about the kids. Barge changed his mind because he knows that competition is bad for public schools – it will force them to work for our money, to not expect a blank check whenever they say they need more money – what’s not to like about that?

• Link
• Report this comment

Please let me do what is best for my child. Charter school has been wonderful for us! Don’t judge someone before you’ve walked in their shoes. You don’t know what other people have been through in their school systems. You don’t know what other parents have to fight. And don’t think you’re immune, either.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gov Deal is still hoping he won’t have to pay the loans back.

He’ll have his Congressional pension; he’ll have his state pension, so he’ll be fine.

• Link
• Report this comment

@RealityCheck:

I’m curious to know more about your assertion. Has Barge ever publicly stated that he is in support of creating a separate commission to create charter schools? Or are you referring to some other statement that you perceive as a lie?

The bottom line is that coming out against a charter school commission does NOT equal coming out against public school choice. The two are not related.

If Dr. Barge simply stated he supported some type of public school choice, I don’t see where he has changed his position or lied.

I am as conservative and as Republican as they come. However, I see this as a play for my local tax dollars. I want to retain control of my tax dollars at the local level and not have them controlled by a state commission and/or private corporations. You may feel differently about your tax dollars but it doesn’t give you the right to hijack mine too.

All of this talk about “local control” through charter schools is baloney. Local taxpayers without children or without children who go to charter schools lose their local control.

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree with Barge – the issue is not if there will be charter schools or not, it is about who has the authority to approve them and I am all for local control over those decisions. I have 2 children in our neighborhood public school, but also have many friends who send their children to the charter schools in our area. I am grateful that we have that choice. However, as evidenced with the Fulton Science Academy Middle School debacle, our local school board had every reason to attempt to reign in that school & eventually deny its charter (the audit was very telling). The same decision was made at the state level. The current system, where local school boards have the say on charter schools, works. There are alternatives available, but giving the state the ability to take that control away, in the form of allocating local tax dollars to questionable school alternatives, takes away local control & cripples local school boards. And, if local school boards turn down applicants, there are almost always very good reasons. In fact, there are very few cases where charter schools, denied by local boards, win appeals to the state. If rural school systems want charter schools, then those parents need to appeal to their local boards or run for those offices.

• Link
• Report this comment

Let there be some choices for public education in Georgia. Georgia isn’t called the “Dummy State” by the rest of the country because their school systems are good. The current public school system and their current politicians receive a big fat FAIL!

• Link
• Report this comment

I support charter schools. My children went to their local public school and it was a horrible experience. I found that their were too many administrators. These administrators are making over 60,000 a year and they don’t teach any classes. The principals are running amuck with no supervision. I saw the principal go to lunch at 11 in the morning and not return for the rest of the day. The teachers are taking vacations and getting married during the school year. So they aren’t in the classroom. Where is the accountability? The crct is not a hard test but teachers stop teaching in February to teach to the test. The kids aren’t being challenged. I truly believe that we have to blowup this current system. Maybe charter schools and online schools are the start to a new system.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sounds like John Barge would make a much better governor than the flimsy excuse for one that we have now. To borrow a saying from my great-grandmother, Nathan Deal “ain’t got a lick of sense!”

• Link
• Report this comment

$400,000,000, not $400,000. Sorry.

• Link
• Report this comment

I have turned this computer inside/out trying to find the answer to one question,,,,where will the money (proposed 430 million over the next 5 years to cover just the 7 charters schools in question) come from? There is nothing else left to tap,,,,buses are overcrowded, teachers underpaid, class sizes increased and the list goes on. It has been suggested that the only $ left to take is away from the arts. We are talking statewide band programs, and any of the arts you can name. Can our government really take away something so valuable? We are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars spent by parents on these programs out of pocket each year for their amazing value to the community. Can you imagine going to a UGA game without hearing that band in the back ground or have the absence of 800 plus parents who would be there to support their effort? What about all the jobs lost, not just to teachers and instructors, but businesses that depend on local support of such programs such as Jackson Music. Does the government control us so much? We have a choice – VOTE NO

• Link
• Report this comment

@ outdated

I’m sorry I missed your missive earlier. sad to say you are not a predominant issue in my mind, life, or even even lint trap. I’m flattered however I occupy so much of yours.

regret to say I’ve been happily married nearly 30 years, so your dreams will go unfulfilled.

but as long as you insist on getting my attention, is it to post links to the studies I asked to see?
the ones which you claim will validate you?

continued refusal to do so might lead one to question your honesty in this matter.

• Link
• Report this comment

The charter school amendment has very little to do with “choice” or delivering a quality education option to children stuck in a struggling school system. It has everything to do with directing state tax dollars to for-profit education management corporations whose links with state elected officials may never be known. The state board of education already has the power to authorize charter schools that have been unfairly rejected by local school boards, so the creation of a separate school system under the authority of an unelected Charter School Commission adds bureaucracy where none is needed. Charter schools are not the issue; there are a growing number of charters under the auspices of local control and many do an excellent job. They offer choice and an opportunity to experiment with new ideas. In my opinion, voters need to think about why conservative elected leaders at the state level have invested so much of their political muscle to this cause and why they are willing to bypass the state school board, which is appointed by the Governor, to create another bureacracy to govern a separate school system outside the control of local voters. Common sense, a healthy degree of skepticism and a reasonable understanding of how things work in politics should prompt all of us to wonder who profits from the amendment. There is nothing from the performance of state charter schools under the old Charter School Commission to suggest students benefit, nor is there even evidence that the former state Charter School Commission offered any transparency or accountability with state tax dollars. The AJC ran a report a few months back on how state employees encountered huge problems trying to trace how tax dollars under the old Commission’s authority were spent. We know the for-profit education management corporations salivate at the prospect of entering this market, and while there is nothing wrong with making a profit there is every reason to question whether students will benefit. As we have seen with for-profit education management corporations in higher education, in many instances the only folks who benefit are the owners of the corporations. I hope I am wrong about this, but I fear that unsavory deals have already been made between some of our state elected officials and the owners of education management corporations, and those deals may only get more odious as time goes by if the amendment is passed. I have no evidence to support this, but I think it is a reasonable suspicion given the questionable ethics of many of the most powerful people in the legislature. In my opinion, state tax dollars, which have been systematically withdrawn from public schools under the guise of “austerity,” should be restored and no further effort should be made to redirect monies needed by our students to for-profit corporations. State School Superintendent Dr. John Barge has seen this political issue from the inside, and thank Goodness has enough integrity – if not political acumen – to change his mind and stand up against his party’s pursuit of self interest at the expense of young people. I believe Dr. Barge has committed political suicide by taking the course he has, but at least he will leave office with a clear conscience and the respect of those who continue to think that the state has a constitutional responsibiltiy to educate its children. Before you vote on the charter school amendment, please ask yourself why our state leaders, who have shown no interest in improving education in Georgia, would invest so much political capital in getting this amendment passed. It all comes down to following the money, in my opinion.

• Link
• Report this comment

“educrats”?

did I miss a meeting? did someone invent new slang while I was on line looking for work?

• Link
• Report this comment

@ mountain man

why would you care what other people think? if moving to a new district is really what’s best for a child, do it and who gives a damn the opinion of others.

I surely don’t – especially when it mattered to my child’s education

• Link
• Report this comment

Here is why Barge made the worst decision of his professional career (from the Center for Education Reform):

Barge Backs Down on Charter School Amendment

“Were you lying then or are you lying now?” That’s the question Georgia House Majority Whip Edward Lindsey (R-Atlanta) posed in a letter to State Superintendent John Barge after Barge suddenly revoked his support for the pending Charter School Amendment in Georgia. It’s a fair question. Barge ran for office strongly supporting the amendment in a state where charter schools are popular. But once in office and really put to the test, he caved to those representing the failed status quo.

The Charter School Amendment will allow the creation of an independent state commission to approve and monitor charter schools. This is important because when authorizing power is left solely in the hands of state and local boards, it results in less quantity and quality of charter schools. Data shows that states with multiple chartering authorities have almost three and a half times more charter schools than states that only allow local school board approval. And state test scores, credible research, and experience show that those states with multiple authorizers are home to the highest quality charter schools.

Georgia is a prime example of a state with a single authorizer creating a hostile environment for charters because school boards often view charter schools as competition and reject applications not based on merit, but on politics. That means less choices and opportunities for Georgia parents and students.

CER President Jeanne Allen made the following statement:
I’m extremely disappointed that John Barge would back down on such an important issue just because he faced some pressure from those looking to protect their turf. He’s shown himself to be more interested in protecting the interests of adults rather than that of students.

When people in position of leadership back down on important issues, it’s the kids that get hurt. It is my sincere hope that the charter amendment passes and that the students and parents of Georgia don’t have to suffer the consequences.

Barge needs to get an early copy of the movie Won’tBackDown to see what happens when good people stand firm on their principals and let the pressure strengthen their resolve, not destroy it.”

• Link
• Report this comment

here is the link of to the DoE’s press release (which has the supporting documents): http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/External-Affairs-and-Policy/communications/Pages/PressReleaseDetails.aspx?PressView=default&pid=54

• Link
• Report this comment

LD

August 15th, 2012
4:47 pm

Thank you.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ outdated

so, you don’t have access to the studies you claim after all?
imagine.

funny thing is, making comments attacking me and acting like a keyboard commando (puffing up all big and bad, secure in the knowledge you’ll never have to back it up) just further erodes any sense of
your integrity.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Maureen, you misread the entire press release and focused on the WRONG FACTS.

Georgia is a prime example of a state with a single authorizer creating a hostile environment for charters because school boards often view charter schools as competition and reject applications not based on merit, but on politics. That means less choices and opportunities for Georgia parents
and students.

You conveniently missed all of the language which is about Economics 101 and how monopolies will not embrace change.

How convenient of you!

• Link
• Report this comment

Hello??? Barge never said he didn’t want charter schools, he said he didn’t support the constitutional amendment to create a state commission, at significant cost in an already stressed budget, to do what the state already has the power to do. At the heart of this debate is funding. The state wants to create its own fleet of schools, beholden to noone locally, as a means to subvert true local control. Now before you scream about parent boards and them being public schools, think about it. They want to fund them, which sounds good on the surface. But somewhere in all the political doublespeak lies the fact that the state is going to have to pony up money it doesn’t have. Where will it come from?

I’m not opposed to charter schools per se. I think in places like APS and Dekalb where there is such rampant corruption, there should be charter schools, vouchers, whatever it takes to reform them. I’d love the state to exercise some muscle and clear both administrative systems out completely and start over. They won’t, of course, because that won’t further the real cause which is to eventually get rid of public schools in the state period. They want to privatize education, despite what they may say in public. My lack of support for, in fact absolute refusal to approve of this amendment is that it is but one play in a dirty political game, that in the end is going to subvert true local control.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Maureen, I have offered an olive branch to you, and you chose not to accept it. It is clear where your biases are and that your views do not represent the views of ALL Georgians.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bravo, Maureen. I suspect Bracey will be showing that happy grin of his from beyond. I know it’s a huge amount of work to monitor and moderate. I’d hope your efforts will encourage some of these folks to read and think a bit before posting.
Jer

• Link
• Report this comment

outdated: there is no monopoly on education. There are numerous charter schools already working and private schools that compete with public for students. What this is about is giving the legislature control of something the state BOE can already take care of, without any extra money being used. The state commission WILL cost money to run, and the schools it authorizes will cost money to run- where will that money come from when the state is already asking all depts. for more budget cuts? How exactly will they “find” the money for this without further reducing state funding for existing schools? They won’t, and you know it.

Successful charter schools already exist and new schools are fully able to apply for charter with local boards as it is now. If those boards unfairly reject the charters, they can appeal to the state BOE. The system for approving these schools already exists. So your “monopoly” argument continues to be incorrect.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ron F – clearly you have no idea how markets work.

• Link
• Report this comment

And again, you guys validate why I can’t offer any research, because ALL you can do is look at who is involved with the report instead of reading the damn thing which is loaded with facts and figures!

I bet that 90% of this audience is retired or soon-to-be-retired educators and you just can’t talk to digital immigrants about education reform and digital learning.

• Link
• Report this comment

John Barge was the only Republican I voted for along with the one that opposed Holly Cash and the stupid Balanced Calendar that my children hated. I am so glad I voted for him, since he is standing up to the Republican sell outs.

• Link
• Report this comment

you can find the annual report on Georgia’s Charter Schools here:
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/External-Affairs-and-Policy/Charter-Schools/Pages/Annual-Reports.aspx

from a quick glance, it doesn’t appear that the charter schools perform statistically any differently than the state’s traditional schools.

• Link
• Report this comment

This charter school stuff is all about Jan Jones, Edward Lindsey and Chip Rogers being able to resegregate schools. They want to make sure their slighly less wealthy friends can have all the advantages of private schools (no slow hispanics or blacks in need of remediation or other non-english speaking kids) slowing down their white kids. And yes…charter schools is all about grouping and making sure the rich get more. Shame on Nathan Deal for not loving all kids. Fix education rather than saving a few….that is your job Governor!

• Link
• Report this comment

Charter Starter: that data has been posted, and/or links to it throughout this blog. Unless I’m missing something, the numbers don’t show a stark difference, and in many cases, evidence to the contrary of your earlier post. If you have data that is more accurate or more comprehensive, it would be good to share it. The state’s data, which I’ve read numerous times, just doesn’t appear all that impressive as compared to existing public schools. If a majority of charters, with similar demographics, are in fact doing that much better, it would be helpful to many here to see a chart of that data.

• Link
• Report this comment

I just amazed that anyone — be they governor or legislator or Joe C. Voter — is surprised. Barge was, at the very most, maybe the best of an incredibly sorry lot of candidates. To expect anything particularly useful from him is simply asking more than was realistic.

• Link
• Report this comment

At risk of being irretrievably captured in the political vortex claiming that “it’s all about the money,” might I suggest that we Georgians demand comprehensive, systematic financial audits of all out publicly-funded K-12 educational entities, for starters. Before we provide additional funding to traditional or charter schools, should prudence not dictate we possess hard evidence that the money being provided to each traditional and charter school is being legally, effectively and efficiently spent.

And don’t tell me that internal, local and GDOE auditors already perform such audits? Three among the numerous oxymorons in GAPubEd include internal audit, local-firm audit and GDOE audit. Eyes from outside our state would be the only fresh, disinterested ones.

• Link
• Report this comment

CS2 – Let’s discuss that “does NOT touch districts’ funds” part you mentioned.

The reason for the lawsuit was that the Charter Schools Commission took state funding directly from students enrolled in GCPS and gave it to Ivy Prep. If the Commission had simply agreed to stop this parasitic funding practice, we wouldn’t be having this discussion because the lawsuit would have ended and the original Commission would still be operating. But, they refused to agree to this, didn’t they?

When Jan Jones and Ed Lindsey submitted HR1162, it had exactly this funding provision written into it. Think back to the original push for public support and you’ll realize this funding was never mentioned. The only conceivable reason is that the existence of a Commission was just a smokescreen to trick the public into writing this horrific funding inequity into our constitution.

The whole thing blew up in their faces when the House refused to pass the original version. It was only then the funding provision was not just removed, but replaced with the exact opposite language you mentioned – but this is clearly not what amendment supporters wanted.

Look at all the confusion over changing only three sentences. Lots of folks in Gwinnett were surprised when the state recently approved Ivy Prep’s charter because they were told the Supreme Court decision prevented the state from approving charter petitions. After that lie fell on its face, Tony Roberts said voters should support the amendment because the state’s authority to approve charters could be challenged in court:

“All opponents will have to do is go back to the court and say, ‘The state is in contempt of court,’ ‘They’re not following your directions,’ ‘They’re still violating the constitution,’”

As you should know, the state’s authority is already in the constitution and this court order is pure fiction. If this amendment is such a great idea, why do its supporters find it necessary to lie to the public?

You once told me that you know Lou Erste. If that’s true, you already know there is no need for a commission because all the hard work this man has done for charter schools speaks for itself.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ Dr. Craig Spinks – I agree and have said not very long ago that there needs to be an external forensic audit of public education (and bring charters along as well). Results would have tax payers (and likely teachers) quaking in anger at the rampant waste and bureaucratic priorities versus instructional priorities.

@ Ron F. – You are right, the numbers and links are out there and have been posted. I send you there for yourself so that folks won’t think I’m “spinning” things. Pull some of the Commission charters’ data from this past year. I think you will be pleasantly surprised at their performance, particularly given they have only been in operation 1 or 2 years and have been under a severe financial strain. The long and the short of it is that if they can do it better for less, it’s a win for students and tax payers.

@ Larry Major – We meet again. You are absolutely right that the prior Commission reduced funds proportionately for students the districts didn’t serve. I cannot believe that you would argue that a district should keep funds for kids they don’t teach. Does that truly, in your gut make sense? Why shouldn’t the money follow the child? But that was past. So let’s move on to now. The enabling legislation was very carefully crafted to ensure that the districts would not have the same concerns. They never, ever made comment about the state authorizing schools as long as their funds weren’t bothered. And indeed, had the Supreme Court not foolishly opened a can of worms with their interpretive antics, perhaps the state department would have been adequate to continue their work with some enabling legislation to provide equity to the charters. However, that little gray area that Justice Nahmias and the Attorney Journal mentioned creates a problem, hence the need for the Amendment to clarify. If it is “pure fiction,” then why are some of the biggest legal minds in Georgia concerned? If you are unconcerned with the state’s authority, then why are you so afraid for the voters to have an opportunity to confirm it?

Keep in mind that the districts DEMANDED that their funds not be touched, and they are not. The statute lays it out for those on a first grade reading level. So why are the districts in an uproar? Because now they want to dictate how the state spends the other part of the budget that was not K-12 education. They have not been able to satisfactorily demonstrate that with the taxpayers large investment, our Georgia students are achieving (even back to 2002 when QBE was fully funded we weren’t in a better place academically). And now, we have schools that have a chance to make a positive difference and push the bar a little higher and do it for LESS, they are adamantly opposed.

The districts want to fight against the very, very tiny amount dedicated to these charter students to ensure an adequate education. Barge puts a big number out there for charters over the next five years that everyone is trying to back into. Let’s reason through this. First, if districts approve quality charters and turn down poor quality ones, the Commission will have no reason to authorize ANY. Secondly, the law also says “subject to appropriation”, meaning that just like K-12 education, charters will be funded based on what the state can offer.

How, Mr. Major, can you possibly argue against giving children a close to equal amount to fund their education if the tax payer is not investing more to do so and it is not costing the districts anything? Whether you like the Governor or not, his office clearly showed that a child going to a traditional district school would cost the tax payers with local and state together MORE. I am trying to understand your reasoning, but I just keep coming back to you protecting the system rather than considering what is fiscally prudent and just plain fair. I respect your knowledge and experience, as it is abundantly clear you have both, but don’t understand your reasoning.

As for Mr. Erste, I thought I knew him. I was mistaken. He is not who I thought he was.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ Tony, I understand what you are saying, but may I pose a few questions for your consideration?

1. How do you define “adequate?” Is it solely funds, or does the state have a responsibility to ensure that “adequate” also encompasses assurance of outcomes for students?
2. Is there any connection between “adequate funds” and “adequate education” as demonstrated by outcomes?
3. When referring to adequacy related to funding, how much is “enough?” How do we know?

I can certainly speak to the charters’ perspective on these questions, but I am most interested to hear what you and others think.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ Ron F. – Please remember that the Commission, is only an appeals mechanism. Districts still will have the first right of approval/denial. If the districts fairly authorize and deny, additional Commission charters should be unnecessary. The funding for Commission schools was purposely set for less to provide incentive to work with the districts to obtain authorization. And the charters may not change their applications at all, so they will have to give their best effort the first time around.

As for the current Commission schools, again, the amount appropriated to these schools does not come out of K-12 education’s portion. This tiny, tiny fragment of the overall state non-K-12 budget is statistically insignificant, and future funding is subject to appropriation.

And finally, let’s take charters out of this for a moment and get to the root of everyone’s frustration – the lack of improvement in academic outcomes of students and more efficient use of tax dollars in K-12 education. What do you feel might actually incentivize districts to make substantial changes to how they do business and educate kids?

• Link
• Report this comment

I just saw an “update” to Dr. Barge’s statement on the DOE website where he says he has been consistent throughout and provides proof based on his comments to question #4. Does anyone find it disingenuous that he fails to address the next question where he rates this belief as STRONGLY supporting the Charter Schools Commission AND its prior funding mechanism (that reduced district funding) with the reason being, “This is simple. The money follows the student.”

I believe the man has contradicted himself, and based on what he is clarifying as his “intent” for the multiple authorizer approach, is even contradictory within the survey. If you disagree, please help me to understand how.

• Link
• Report this comment

1) Tax money does not fund students; it funds systems. 2. Schools earn money based upon enrollment. 3. Tax money should stay within schools in the system it was generated.

Example: My county has traditional schools, conversion charters, and start-up charters. Regardless of which type of county school my child attends, the amount earned by the school should be equal. Now, if my child attends a state charter, then that school should only earn its state dollars, not any of the county tax money.

I do not understand why so many think that the money paid by one county’s taxpayers should go into another county or system. If a Georgia student were to enroll in an Alabama charter school, would we be saying that Georgia funds should go to the Alabama school?

• Link
• Report this comment

@ LD – 2 things…

1. I agree with your reasoning about charters within districts. You should know that currently, START UP charters are funded at about 26% less than the district schools/students (and sometimes the disparity is even wider). That’s the reality of it. Plus, the districts keep 3% of the charter’s overall revenue for “administrative purposes.” How do you propose to provide equity?

2. With the new Commission being proposed, the districts will not lose any local funds at all (it is prohibited in HB 797). Not one dime. The state charters will earn their state funds and be provided a supplement from the NON K-12 portion of the state budget (so the districts’ state funds are also not being impacted negatively). The total amount the charters will earn will be, as the Governor’s office confirmed, about 66% of what a traditional public school student would earn. It sounds as if you actually should agree with the Charter Amendment since the locals are not losing any local funds at all.

• Link
• Report this comment

@CS2, I see you’re quite busy, but I just want to clarify a couple points.

The Commission did not deduct funds for students GCPS no longer educated; it deducted funding from kids who were enrolled in GCPS and gave it to Ivy Prep.

You shouldn’t believe I would argue any system should get state funding for kids they don’t teach because my position is the exact opposite. It was the Commission that took funding earned by kids enrolled in GCPS and gave it to Ivy Prep. I still have all the legal documents, if you’d like to review them.

No, this was positively NOT carefully crafted to avoid funding concerns, it was originally written to STOP the money from following the child, as you phrased it. I also have the original wording before it was changed, if you’d like to review it.

The “pure fiction” is this non-existent court order, but feel free to post a copy of it. Although I’m not sure why you think I’m afraid of it, the state’s authority to create special schools in already in our constitution. What Tony Roberts basically said was the constitution can be declared unconstitutional because it violates itself. There are no functioning minds, legal or otherwise, that would take this statement as anything but nonsense.

Finally, you have evidently assumed I am voting against this. You can’t possibly know how I’m going to vote because I have not yet decided. My fierce opposition to this Resolution was specifically directed at the original funding language which no longer exists.

You evidently assumed I am still opposing this amendment because I am correctly stating facts – and THAT CS2, is something you should really think about.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thank you Dr. Barge! What scares me is how deceptive the language is on what people who are not fully informed will be reading! Without the facts who does not support choice! But, as stated we already have that! This is about money and power! I will vote No! I intended to make sure my friend have the facts about this for profit agenda and how it will hurt communities and public schools!

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s important to be very clear on the Commission’s funding method because this funding mechanism is exactly what Jan Jones tried to write into our constitution with HR1162.

For brevity, I’m going to ignore things like individual T&E multipliers and the five mill deduction which has subsequently changed. Here is Ivy Prep’s QBE funding sheet (at the time the lawsuit was filed):
http://www.cpoga.org/img/allot_ivyprep_2010.pdf
The sixth line from the bottom – TOTAL STATE FUNDING ON THIS ALLOTMENT SHEET – is the QBE funding for these 306 kids. This funding follows these kids to any public school in Georgia. Had these same 306 kids enrolled in Buford City Schools, then Buford would have received this million dollars. If they enrolled in GCPS, then GCPS would have received this million dollars. They enrolled in Ivy Prep, so this money went directly to Ivy Prep. The problem is two lines below, Charter Commission Local Revenue for $1.2 million. To see where this money came from and why it’s a problem, look at the GCPS QBE sheet for the same year:
http://www.cpoga.org/img/allot_gcps_2010.pdf
Look at the sixth line from the bottom in this sheet. That is the QBE funding for the 159,956 kids enrolled in GCPS. Again, look two lines down at the Charter Commission Local Revenue and you will find a deduction of $849,944. THIS is where the Commission got the “Local Revenue” amount to give to Ivy Prep – they took it away from kids enrolled in GCPS and the other plaintiff school systems. It’s not an opinion.

If you didn’t know Jan Jones tried to reinstate this funding structure, don’t feel bad; very few people did know. The original wording in HR1162 was:

“The state is authorized to expend funds for the support and maintenance of special schools in such amount and manner as may be provided by law, which may include, but not be limited to, adjusting the proportion of state funds with respect to the affected local school systems”

This “adjustment” isn’t referring to the million dollars Ivy Prep received in normal QBE funding because this money never belonged to anyone other than Ivy Prep. It is referring what was called “Charter Commission Local Revenue” on these sheets and it is clearly taking legitimate QBE funding away from the kids who earned it and giving it to another school.

Since they are now bragging about how local funds aren’t affected, I can understand why you thought this was their original intent, but as you can see, it wasn’t. The above funding language is what they tried to push through the House and the ONLY reason this wording was completely reversed is because they failed to get what they really wanted.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ Larry, while I understand why you believe the funds were calculated from GCSS’s QBE earnings because the deduction shows up there, actually, it wasn’t. It was placed on the allotment sheet for transparency and accounting purposes for the districts.

John Dunn did an Elluminate session in the early part 2010 for the Commission Schools. Here is how (on Dunn’s slideshow) he says the calculation was done. This applies to local tax equivalencies, equalization, and local fair share deductions:

The total (local revenue/equalization/local fair share) amount is divided by district students and charter school(s) students combined. The amount per pupil is then multiplied by the number of students in the charter school.

In other words, there is no tie to QBE earnings in the calculation. Although it shows up on the allotment sheet since technically they were reducing state funds, the net effect to the district’s overall budget would be a proportionate drop in (local) funds with the number of students leaving for a Commission school.

From a numbers perspective this is fair. I think everyone wanting a Commission realized that it wasn’t going to fly though, even if it was initially proposed. 797 really was a bi-partisan effort to come to an agreement. There were a lot of hot heads going into that initial discussion over 797, and they came to an amicable agreement in the end.

As for Tony Robert’s statements…he isn’t a lawyer. What is absolutely true is that the decision left a gray area that could be challenged in court. That is a fact pointed out by folks smarter than you and me on the law.

My point is that if everyone is “fine” with the state’s current role in authorizing charters, why would there be any concern about the voting public affirming this? Why such a fight from opponents of charters and/or the Commission about giving the voters a voice?

And as for your delineation between the Commission being struck down and the SBOE authority, they are both “state” appointed entities. The decision called into question the authority of the STATE in authorization (not just the Commission).

• Link
• Report this comment

I applaud John Barge for his leadership in declaring the charter schools amendment should be defeated in November. I predict that Mr. Barge will be honored by all public school employees and parents who can see through this sorry scrim of vested interests. The folks who will get blasted with voters’ ire will be the good ol’ boys in the Legislature who thought this plum to the for-profit education management organizations was a good idea. (Can they have forgotten what happened to former Gov. Roy Barnes when he ran afoul of the teachers of this state?) This is NOT about charter schools, folks–it is all about control of tax money. Please don’t be fooled. We do not need an appointed state commission to overrule our local school boards over the approval of charter schools.

• Link
• Report this comment