Does charter school funding leave taxpayers holding the bag?
Regular Get Schooled blog readers know Cherokee businessman John Konop as an astute commenter on the economics of education. He’s also a great debater as he focuses on the facts and does not get carried away with politics or ideology.
And he posts under his name, which signals that he stands behind his comments.
Konop has sparked debate in Cherokee County over questions on the funding of a charter school there and who gets stuck with the bill. Konop raised these issues with the Cherokee County School Board at a recent meeting.
Here is a followup letter he sent board member Michael Geist:
Dear Mr. Geist,
According to a recent newspaper article, it seems you are still very confused about why you’re getting so much negative feedback about the lack of fiscal controls in the charter school amendment that you support. I will once again clarify the issues by explaining how the Cherokee Charter Academy (CCA) was funded and how the current charter school amendment fails protect tax payers.
• CCA’s owner/operators (a private company) were given over $1million of taxpayer money as start-up capital.
• CCA’s owner/operators receive a management contract that pays them close to $1 million a year (a rate that is higher on a percentage basis than what Cherokee County currently spends on our public schools). These funds are above and beyond the additional, regular operating money that charter schools receive from the school district.
• CCA’s owner/operators were not required to purchase a guaranteed bond (a form of insurance) that pays the school district in the event the CCA closes midyear (and dumps over 1,000 students back into the system).
If the CCA goes out of business — which looks increasingly likely — its owner/operators get to keep the $1 million start-up capital (and/or whatever assets they bought with it) and have no liabilities. You supported giving a private company over a million dollars, guaranteed profit, and NO downside risk.
This is a terrible deal for taxpayers. You should NOT support forcing taxpayers to capitalize private companies or give them no-obligation government contracts. As a public school board member, your duty is to protect the school’s assets, not look for creative ways to squander them.
The taxpayers of Cherokee County have already been burned with similar deals. For example, we may lose $50 million that went to fund a private recycler that went bust (leaving taxpayers again holding the bag). As you well know, taxpayers across the country have already lost massive amounts of money in poorly structured charter schools deals. For the record, I support charter schools and believe they play an important and positive role in our education system. What I do not support is officeholders like you that make foolish and emotional decisions with taxpayer money.
In closing, Mr. Geist, here are some questions that the taxpayers of Cherokee County would like your answers to:
•Please list all the other school district services that a vendor can perform where taxpayers provide free start-up capital and guaranteed revenue, all with no penalty for failure to perform. Assuming you can’t provide such a list, why did you support the private owner/operators of the Cherokee Charter Academy receiving such a deal?
• Why do you support a charter amendment that does not include the taxpayer protections needed to prevent CCA-like deals from happening again?
Regards,
John Konop
–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
305 comments Add your comment
Middle Grades Math Teacher
September 10th, 2012
11:56 pm
No. It is late and I am tired. That should read “Assistant Superintendents’ secretaries.” While I apologize for my grammatical error, I would also think that you knew what I meant with that.
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
12:05 am
@ MGMT – I must be tired, too, because that didn’t occur to me. Thank for clarifying. Revert to point before last then. Goodnight, sleep well.
Bernie
September 11th, 2012
12:42 am
As I see it, the issue of CHARTER SCHOOLS comes down to this basic criteria. Does it PROVIDE for a Quality education for 100% of OUR Student population?
How about 50%?
If the answer is NO, to either Question. How can we in GOOD and Honest Faith as adults, even have this subject up for consideration as a TAXPAYER expenditure?
As former President Bill Clinton, stated last week at the DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION. “Folks, its ALL about the Arithmetic.” If the numbers are NOT ADDING UP, what is so hard about the decision?
John Konop
September 11th, 2012
6:48 am
The spin that comes from Charter is amazing. First you rationalize the start up capital that Cherokee charter got from tax payers, by pointing out it was matching dollars. And when I point out the matching dollars were mainly the first year profits guaranteed by tax payers, you now claim that the school did not get the money. Wow…..
When I point out tax payers took a way higher risk than Charter USA who is getting close to a million dollars a year in fees from tax payers, you point to a policy that has no teeth on the fees they take off the top from tax payers if the school goes bust. In fact Charter USA has a history after letting schools ho bust, for demanded their fee before tax payers had any claims on assets.
You may have good intentions, but you are either completely naive to finance and liabilities or you are somehow gaining from this irrational sweetheart deal for the private company.
I do not blame Charter USA for asking for this deal, the job of an executive is to get stock holders the highest amount of ROI. I question anyone in charge who would support this type of crony capitalism!
Eddie Hall
September 11th, 2012
7:10 am
I have found that if I voice my opinion and quote un biased data that shows what a potential failure this idea seems to be, I am viciously attacked with innuendo and malicious venom from some of those who support this mis guided venture. That alone tells me this is a bad thing. The pro amendment faction cannot stand on facts, and when presented with them, they of course can’t refute them, so they attack the source. Again, an indicator of a bad idea. The facts as I see them, and I stress I, are as follows;
Anytime you loose local control and send it to an appointed board in Atlanta, nothing good can happen.
The avenues exist NOW for charters to be granted, by elected officials and governed by locally ELELECTED officials.
The avenues exist to vote out, recall and replace Board of Educations that are not responsive, and make bad decisions. And yes they do exist!
Based on a report I saw listing campaign contributions, the vast majority of the money FOR the charter amendment is coming from OUTSIDE the state. Not a good sign. If the children were the basis for these folks good will, would pour the same money to reform the present laws and make them more effective for the underperforming districts that truly need drastic change and are willing do embracing anything to get it?
I could go on. Bottom line, if this fails and I hope it does, I encourage Gov. Deal and others to put OUR money where their mouths are, and our children are!
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
7:58 am
@ John – What in the heck are your talking about? First, you have YET to clarify where in the world you got $1M in start up money from – I asked, and you did not respond (again and again). Why don’t you stop throwing numbers out and give some sources for your information? Your credibility is waning.
I mentioned nothing about “matching funds.” What I said is that the management organization did not get the funds they were contracted to get this year. Because of the uncertainty with the funding and how late it came (an issue the districts NEVER have to worry about), the EMO invested start up funds to get the school going. This frequently happens with charters nationwide, as the cash-flow is not there early on and as enrollment ramps up. Management organizations have a vested interest in the success of a school, as if the school is not financially or academically healthy, they can lose a lot in an upfront investment (including man power during the application process) and the prospect of future business. That’s not spin, Mr. Konop, that’s basic economics in the education industry which you can go out and research for yourself if you want to verify. It’s the same economics that Ombudsman and other management organizations working with charters AND districts use.
Look, I’m not going to argue with you about management organizations any longer. I’m fine if you philosophically disagree with them, although given the number of for-profit companies that do business with K-12 education, I think your argument is pretty illogical. I do think there are some good EMOs and some not so good ones, like anything, and that boards need to carefully vet the companies and provide appropriate oversight of outcomes and how much is being invested. The long and the short of it is that 1) the charter schools only have so much money to educate kids (and it’s less than the districts) 2) if they are not achieving academically or fiscally responsible (and solvent0, they will close. End of story.
I am still awaiting your response to my questions. Do you refuse to answer them?
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
8:05 am
@ Middle Grades Math Teacher – Ok, so there are 6 Deputy Associate Supts. all making well over $100k – total is almost $750k per year for these 6, plus their secretaries puts you at over a million. Would any teacher say that all of these people are necessary for the instruction of children and that ALL of these jobs add direct value to the classroom? The principals in the schools have clerks, but I daresay none of them have a personal secretary, and the principals are killing themselves supporting the teachers, parents, and kids. I can assure you if you took that $1M and pushed it down to the schools – gave the principals some administrative support so they could focus on the curriculum and effective management and culture building, put some paras in the classrooms to lessen the student:teacher ratios for small group instruction, that would be money better spent. It’s all about priorities. Given what we are seeing with district waste (by MANY, not all), it gets tiresome hearing about their financial woes. The only woes should be coming from the school level staff who never get a piece of the pie that’s gulped up by central office bloat.
Charters deal with the school level, as THAT is where the magic happens and where the rubber meets the road.
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
8:09 am
@ Eddie Hall – “I have found that if I voice my opinion and quote un biased data that shows what a potential failure this idea seems to be, I am viciously attacked with innuendo and malicious venom from some of those who support this mis guided venture. That alone tells me this is a bad thing. The pro amendment faction cannot stand on facts, and when presented with them, they of course can’t refute them, so they attack the source.”
1. Tell me, please, what unbiased data you are using? Are you using what I choose to use – Open.georgia.gov, the state DOE website, the state budget…all published online?
2. Please tell me what I have NOT refuted and what questions I have not faced head on. Look at the many, many times I asked Mary Elizabeth and John Konop DIRECT questions that they refused to answer…over…and over…and over…
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
8:15 am
@ John – “I do not blame Charter USA for asking for this deal, the job of an executive is to get stock holders the highest amount of ROI. I question anyone in charge who would support this type of crony capitalism!”
I agree. And what IS the return on investment for taxpayers? It is student achievement. If the charters don’t provide that ROI, regardless of whether they are self managed or managed by an EMO, they can be shuttered.
Tell me what happens when a district doesn’t provide the ROI for taxpayers – when the investments are made into public education and it gets squandered and kids are failing. I’ve given you district after district with waste and most of these with poor achievement in the aggregate (Cherokee being an exception, as they achieve very well on the whole).
I ask you again – what is the safety net for the taxpayer if the districts don’t provide a good ROI? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. The taxpayer is out of luck. The business owner is surely out of luck, as they have no hope of a qualified work force. And most of all, the kids are out of luck, as those failing in K-12 education are in all probability destined to a life of poverty and possibly crime.
The title of the blog is a misnomer. It should be “Does K-12 Local Funding Leave Tax Payers Holding the Bag?” At least with charters there is high expectation of return on investment and a consequence if it isn’t achieved.
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
8:28 am
For profit expenses for local boards of education:
Textbooks: $72,209,604.27
Computer Software: $82,580,203.62
Computer Equipment: $154,361,659.25
Architects: $14,653,955.97
Construction: $896,197,738.76
Education is big business. Don’t think for a minute it’s not.
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
8:31 am
@ Bernie -
Sigh. The sad thing is that you don’t see the fallacy in your own argument. Let me turn this around for you…
Are traditional public schools ensuring achievement of 100% of our kids? How about 50% of our kids? If not, then how, as taxpayers can we even THINK about continuing to invest in them?
Sir, have your seen our state’s graduation rates? It’s certainly closer to 50% than 100%.
John Konop
September 11th, 2012
8:38 am
Charter is was in the paper that they were on the schools that got the Obama stimulus money. Please stop spinning. You really think the government should put services up for bid with a guarantee profit and free start up money? Also no penalties or obligation to fulfill the contact? Wow you have the God given to be for crony capitalism, but people like you are why this country is so far in the red……….
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
8:44 am
@bigbill, 11:54 pm
——————————————————————–
“Mary Elizabeth 9:30 PM
I really admire the way you keep plugging away, exposing and explaining these ‘national rightwing ideological trends’ which are ‘anti-traditional public schools’ and focusing on the various strategies employed by the wealthy extreme rightwing Republican proponents of this massive, nationwide movement to privatize public schools and convert the education of our nations children and college students into profit centers for their financial benefit. For that is exactly what is happening and must be fought on every front.”
——————————————————–
Thank you for your remarks, above, bigbill, and for the additional information that you shared in your post last evening.
Every voice counts, and every voice makes a difference. We must never lose faith in that foundational tenet of our nation and in its promise to future generations of Americans. We must never fail to exercise our individual voices and to share our knowledge, especially when we see truth beneath surface spin.
sneak peek into education
September 11th, 2012
8:50 am
@Charter Starter – You claim to be an educator but you post at great length throughout the day so this puts in question that you are a teacher. Your efforts and the length of your posts in order to brow beat others when the facts have been presented against your claims makes it clear that you are an insider who has “invested” in the for-profit charter business. The fact that you refuse to release your name only goes to substantiate this point too for if you are unable to reveal your true self, it casts a huge shadow of doubt that you are fighting the fight out of altruism. The murky business of for-profit charters is one which will only hurt our children (you claim that schools already do for-profit business with outside companies-unless they were in the business of making computers and producing text books it would be impossible to have these items for our students so your argument is moot). What happens if the company does go out of business-who has to take those students back? What about the consequences to them? It’s about money and so much more. The vultures are circling Georgia just now and hoping that in November they can swoop in and pick the bones of our children’s education clean-ALL FOR MONEY!!
John Konop
September 11th, 2012
9:17 am
What Charter is for:
If I think that the computer systems are bad in my school system, I should be able to get grant money from the government for free, paid by tax payers, and get a no obligation, nor penalty contract that pays me a million dollars a year off the top for attempting to provide the service. How many people think this financial structure makes any sense for tax payers and if so why?
CTR
September 11th, 2012
9:30 am
@Konop. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think you previously stated you are in support of Charters, not the amendment.
1) Is there anything you would change about the current procedure, ie, rejected local Charters can appeal to the State BOE?
2) How should those charter schools make up the funding gap since they would receive no local dollars?
3) Should traditional public schools be able to receive funds for children they don’t educate?
4) As referenced in the Supreme Court decision, if the authority of the State BOE to grant charters be challenged in the future, would you support an amendment, and if so, how would it differ from what is currently being put forth?
John Konop
September 11th, 2012
9:35 am
From Charter
…… Start up capital is not provided except through a Federal Implementation Grant, for which schools may only apply allowable expenses and must first invest and then have reimbursement requests approved by the state………
…CharterStarter, Too
September 10th, 2012
2:23 pm…
As I said the ‘investment” portion was about 1 years worth of guaranteed profits from tax payers. As I said the school got free cash from tax payers matched with the first year of profit for a contract that pays them about a million dollars a year. Also if they fail, they do not have to pay back any of the federal front money or fees collected at about a million a year. Once again Charter thinks this is how contracts should be done by the government.
Is this deal not the definition of crony capitalism?
John Konop
September 11th, 2012
9:51 am
….1) Is there anything you would change about the current procedure, ie, rejected local Charters can appeal to the State BOE?…
This should be done at the ballet box when voting for school board members. Our constitution does not guarantee results just a voice in your community.
…..2) How should those charter schools make up the funding gap since they would receive no local dollars?….
They should be coordinated on a local level to best utilize dollars and faculties.. The only exception would be on line charter/home school
…..3) Should traditional public schools be able to receive funds for children they don’t educate?….
I thought the system is based on per pupil formula?
4) As referenced in the Supreme Court decision, if the authority of the State BOE to grant charters be challenged in the future, would you support an amendment, and if so, how would it differ from what is currently being put forth?
I would require the following:
1) If a charter school gets up front money tax payer money via grants……it should be in the form of a loan that has a personal guarantee with off sets against the management fees. This is standard procedure for business loans in the private sector ie even SBA loans………
2) If the Charter school has a material amount of students some form of penalty should be in place to guarantee a school year. Small charter school should be exempt, this is to put controls in places like Cherokee charter that has close to 1000 students. You realize mid-year close would put a real strain in the system
3) If the state or county wants to take over the charter school that failed by companies like Charter USA, they should not have any rights to their fees.
Eddie Hall
September 11th, 2012
10:44 am
I agrre with John. I am NOT against charters per se, but I am against THIS amendment. I think problems exist in some places that need legislation to correct them. This is just nor it.
And as he said, and when enganged is my main talking point, the place to address this issue locally is at the ballot box. IF you lose, you try again, you don’t try and change the law for the whole state to make things work for your district.
dawgstyle
September 11th, 2012
10:46 am
I believe that CharterStarter has a vested interest in the charter school issue. How about it… are you employed by an organization that promotes charter schools? Is your job in jeopardy if the amendment fails?
CTR
September 11th, 2012
10:57 am
It’s my understanding when local districts deny charters that are then approved by the State BOE, the local district keeps their local dollars, since they are not directed to fund the charter, despite the fact the local traditional public school is not educating the child. Am I wrong?
John Konop
September 11th, 2012
11:15 am
……… It’s my understanding when local districts deny charters that are then approved by the State BOE, the local district keeps their local dollars, since they are not directed to fund the charter, despite the fact the local traditional public school is not educating the child. Am I wrong?….
Good question, my understanding it is still a per pupil funding. But clarification would be great.
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
11:35 am
Superintendent Barge has stated that he cannot support the Consitutional Amendment until traditional public schools are funded adequately. There is only so much money within the state’s budget to fund education, whether it is delivered to local districts or to state charter schools. One will effect the other financially, and that is why Superintendent Barge made his courageous decision in behalf of all of the students Georgia.
John Konop
September 11th, 2012
11:36 am
This was tax payer money……………It was free money not a loan. Is this not start-up money?
……..Cherokee Charter Academy, along with a several other charter schools throughout the state, secured a one-time funding grant from Gov. Deal, which helped the school to open its doors for the 2011-12 school year…………
http://cherokeetribune.com/view/full_story/18439189/article-Gov–Deal-to-sign-bill-at-charter-academy
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
11:37 am
“in Georgia.”
ELMom
September 11th, 2012
12:32 pm
Playing devil’s advocate a bit and perhaps I am incorrect but I’m trying to wrap my head around the different points of view. If the local system no longer has to pay to educate children in state approved charter schools doesn’t the system then gain local funds to put back into the local system while their state funding per pupil also remains the same?
For example APS currently gives charter schools roughly $6K per child (give or take. the number is irrelevant). APS currently spends roughly $15K per child in traditional schools. IF a charter is approved at the state level making it ineligible for local funds and say 100 children attend that state approved charter then APS is no longer obligated to spend $15K per child or $6K per child to educate those 100 children. Does that not now give APS an additional $1.5M or $600K to educate the children remaining in the traditional public schools or locally approved charter schools? Regardless of the exact dollar amounts aren’t the local systems retaining per pupil funds without having to educate the pupil?
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
12:34 pm
From another link (provided below) within the link provided by John Konop, at 11:36 am:
——————————————————————-
Beginning paragraphs of the article:
“Cherokee Charter Academy’s funding woes were quickly subdued Thursday after hearing Gov. Nathan Deal’s pledge to hand out $10 million in bridge funding to Georgia charter schools that were affected by a state Supreme Court ruling in May.
Deal’s pledge came as the local charter academy was scrambling to round up $2.9 million in additional funds to open its inaugural class as planned in August.
Lyn Carden, a board member of the Georgia Charter Education Foundation, Cherokee Charter Academy’s nonprofit governing entity, was in high spirits Thursday night when reached by phone. She said school officials have not been told how much of the pledge money the academy will receive, but she said it is its understanding the state will provide all money needed to bridge the funding gap created when the Cherokee County Board of Education denied the academy’s resubmitted charter application last month.” . . .
————————————————————————–
Ending paragraphs of the article:
“Thursday’s action by the governor might leave the Cherokee School District impacted too. Losing students to a new school could equate to further reductions in state funding.
There was no official response released by the school system Thursday; however, school spokeswoman Barbara Jacoby earlier stated in an email on behalf of Superintendent Frank Petruzielo, ‘If all 995 students are current school district students, or kindergartners previously expected to enroll, the state funding decrease could be as much as $3.7 million for [the next fiscal year].’
The school system is already facing $26.6 million in state austerity cuts and a $9 million reduction in property tax collections.”
————————————————————-
Link to the above article, found under “similar stories,” at the end of the link provided by John Konop, at 11:36 am:
http://cherokeetribune.com/view/full_story/14707729/article-Deal%E2%80%99s-pledge-will-help-Cherokee-Charter?#
ELMom
September 11th, 2012
12:49 pm
@Mary Elizabeth was your last response supposed to be for me? I understand that state funding will remain per pupil for all schools and so if fewer students attend a school for whatever reason (transfer to private schools, charter schools or moved) then I do expect for the state funding for that school to decrease based on the decreased number of students and the per pupil funding that follows the child. My question was about LOCAL per pupil funds.
“The school system is already facing $26.6 million in state austerity cuts and a $9 million reduction in property tax collections”. All systems including the GA University System are facing and have faced cuts for years.I’m not clear how this relates to my question. Clarification would be appreciated.
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
1:53 pm
ELMom, 12:49 pm
No, my 12:34 pm post was not written to address your post at 12:32 pm. I was researching and constructing my post while you were posting. I did not see your post until after I had posted my own remarks.
I wrote my 12:34 pm post in order to offer readers a concrete example, apllied, of my 11:35 am post’s content, which stated:
“Superintendent Barge has stated that he cannot support the Consitutional Amendment until traditional public schools are funded adequately. There is only so much money within the state’s budget to fund education, whether it is delivered to local districts or to state charter schools. One will effect the other financially, and that is why Superintendent Barge made his courageous decision in behalf of all of the students Georgia.”
Bernie
September 11th, 2012
2:14 pm
CharterStarter, Too @ 8:31 am – So your belief is that we should give up on the same system that YOU, I and everyone here is a product of? Sacrifice the needs of the MANY for the very selective FEW?
In my view this is a return of the good ole SEGREGATION POLICIES that were once enamored and supported of years gone by. it was rejected than and should be rejected TODAY!
I am of the school that Public school is for ALL STUDENTS. We should allocate all state funding and resources to insure that education is of a quality commensurate with the times. No Additional STATE FUNDS should not be allocated for a select few.
For those who are not happy with the present public school system, there are THOUSANDS OF Private schools willing to take your kids for a FEE! If you want to Play then you must PAY!!
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
2:51 pm
Correction: “a concrete example, applied (not apllied).”
My typing is getting rusty, I’m afraid – my apologies.
3schoolkids
September 11th, 2012
7:09 pm
The question is if the student is not in a “local” school seat, then doesn’t that free up more money for the students that remain in the “local” school? The answer is no. It means the local tax money for that student does not get put into the local school budget. You cannot fund a seat that is not there.
Pro charters will argue that is great, that just means the county school budget will be lower and that is good for taxpayers. They fail to point out that if the State is FULLY funding that seat (in some cases at higher rates than public schools and most locally approved charters), that money is coming from the State budget and where does the State get its money? These legislators have been very crafty as our county governments have property tax caps so the school budget cannot grow from property tax increases (and therefore there is no local money to replace austerity cuts). Is there a State tax cap in HB797 or HB1162? NO!
Here is the link to the QBE reports: http://app3.doe.k12.ga.us/ows-bin/owa/qbe_reports.public_menu?p_fy=2000
2012-2013 school year estimates are posted under Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. Choose System Allotment Sheets then scroll to the desired system (each State Special Charter is treated as its own system and these are located at the BOTTOM of the page).
Of particular note is the “State Special Charter Supplement”, which in some cases makes up about 50% of a state charter funding. I believe this money includes the “extra” money Nathan wanted to give them for transportation, nutrition, facilities help. Since it is not broken out what the money is to be used for it is sort of a “State Charter Slush Fund”. For example, a State Special Charter like Cherokee Charter could use the money to help improve their bus service or school meals and STILL CHARGE FEES to its students for those services.
So, even though the local districts are more top heavy on central admin and super/principal salaries, the State Special Charters have this supplement that in some of the smaller rural counties far outpaces the county overhead. But it is supposed to be ok because the charter commission will monitor what that money is being spent on.
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
7:31 pm
@ Konop – You say, “Charter is was in the paper that they were on the schools that got the Obama stimulus money. Please stop spinning. You really think the government should put services up for bid with a guarantee profit and free start up money? Also no penalties or obligation to fulfill the contact? Wow you have the God given to be for crony capitalism, but people like you are why this country is so far in the red……….”
How am I spinning? I asked you a question, as I did not know the answer (and it is clear you don’t either). Now knowing to what you were referring, the state charters were in a lurch in May after the Supreme Court decision. They could no longer be funded under the structure with which they were funded -they lost almost 50% of the equivalent to their local funds through this decision, which was immediate. With kids starting school in August and teachers on the payroll, a 50% revenue cut was not something any of them could handle and sustain. So yes, the Governor provided an equalization grant to get them through that year. It was $10M spread over 16 schools and about 15,000 students (which was approximately $667 per student added to their approximately $3000 per pupil in state funds.) Please keep in mind that the state average for local funds is $3686… Meanwhile, the districts kept ALL of the local funds for kids they no longer taught. As I understand it, you, like others against this amendment, would rather students in our state, through no fault of their own, be educated on less than half of what peer students in their district would be funded at….JUST SO the districts can keep their ‘local control.” You would really want kids marginalized like that?
And as for it being “tax payer money,” these kids’ parents, grandparents, and other family members are taxpayers, too, so they are just as entitled to equitable funding as any other student and any state grants provided.
@ Eddie – Sir, do you know how much easier it would have been to go through the legislature and make a legislative change? Versus getting 2/3 of the House AND Senate to approve a Constitutional Amendment. Just from a practical sense, don’t you think we’d take the easier route if it was possible? That would be a “sure fire” way to achieve the objective of state authority/appeals body. The Amendment is up in the air until the voters decide. Who would do all the work and then choose the uncertain path?
@ EL Mom – Yes, that is EXACTLY it. HB 797 (here: http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/en-US/display/20112012/HB/797) – see lines 317-320. It shows that the districts keep ALL local funds (yes, even for kids they no longer teach.)
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
7:41 pm
@ 3schoolkids – The question is if the student is not in a “local” school seat, then doesn’t that free up more money for the students that remain in the “local” school? The answer is no. It means the local tax money for that student does not get put into the local school budget. You cannot fund a seat that is not there.”
This is INACCURATE. Local funds are not allotted on a “per child” basis. Go here and look on the left to find a Primer on Georgia School Funding (pg. 25 starts with Local Funding). Please read it if your going to try to share your wisdom with the masses: http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/Finance-and-Business-Operations/Budget-Services/Pages/default.aspx. For Cherokee County, that means they had $3494.74 x 900 Cherokee County students no longer taught = $3,127,446 added to their budget to spread across the rest of the Cherokee students. And I have to say this….did the district take that $3M and apply it towards reducing austerity cuts? Nope. They gave their Superintendent and his secretaries a 6.5% raise though.
Let me ask you something. Does your school district charge kids who do not qualify for free and reduced meals for lunch? Do you, as a mom of 3 kids, pay for their lunch money every week? Under your post, it seems like you should be DEMANDING that Cherokee County pay for their lunches out of their operational budget. Really, ma’am. Does that make sense to you?
As for state funds, they wouldn’t earn those funds even if the charter was locally approved, so it’s a moot point.
CharterStarter, Too
September 11th, 2012
7:44 pm
2 corrections to last post –
you’re (pardon the typo)
Apply it to FURLOUGH DAYS
Middle Grades Math Teacher
September 11th, 2012
8:28 pm
@Charter Starter — re: funding — so glad to see that you are emphasizing that the district gets the local funding. But you’re not addressing the STATE funding that is diverted to charters from public schools. State funds are diverted to charters at the tune of 2.5 times the rate of a public school student, thanks to HB 797. Smacks of “separate but (supposedly) equal” to me. Hmmmm…. didn’t we get rid of that some decades back, but are still dealing with the fallout? I’m afraid we’re heading down that path again, which is one major reason I’m against 1162. We don’t need a dual, state-run education system. Choices are out there for parents already. The state doesn’t need to involve itself further.
You are complaining that the assistant superintendents make over $100,000 each. True. Put them with the superintendent and you’ve got $900,000 in salaries. I’d love to see what Jonathan Hage, CEO of Charter Schools USA, or Bill Bennett, CEO of K12 online, make in salary and other compensation. My guess is these 7 in CCSD don’t even make what ONE of these CEOs do. But we don’t know because they won’t divulge that information. Oh, wait… K12 is being investigated for ethical violations of contracts… http://stateimpact.npr.org/florida/2012/09/11/florida-investigates-k12-nations-largest-online-educator/
So what would happen if you would eliminate not only the 6 assistant supers, but everyone in the Superintendent’s organizational chart, which can be found online? We’d save close to $4 million! Wow! But, this is not remotely a practical (or legally responsible) suggestion. There would be no staff to implement board policies, run basic operations of the school district or keep the district in legal/policy compliance. There’d be no payroll, no curriculum, no staff development, no special education administration/supervision, no testing, no website, no computer support in classrooms or technology training, no open records or media response, no benefits administration or risk management, no personnel oversight of employees, schools or principals, no transportation coordination, no student discipline hearings, no county academic competitions, no background checks for employees, no RFP process for purchasing, no SACS CASI accreditation renewal process, no Race To The Top coordination, no construction oversight, no budget development or implementation oversight, among other things. And that $4 million savings would only cut half of the furlough days for this year. But it wouldn’t matter, because there’d be no one to process payroll anyway.
Cherokee also has the lowest percentage of certified personnel who are in administration (4.6%) in the metro area.
Twenty years ago I was excited by the dawn of the charter school age, a way to foster true innovation. But today, the so-called charters are run for profit, and offer a McCurriculum. It’s sad to see. The original vision was SO promising.
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
9:30 pm
In case any readers missed the article on page B1 of the “Metro”section” of today’s AJC, I would like to quote from it, for readers:
Truth-O-Meter from “PolitiFact Georgia” headline: “Finding claim for charter schools close to the mark.” The AJC PolitiFact rated Herb Garrett’s statement as “Mostly True.”
————————————————
“Herb Garrett, executive director of the Georgia School Superintendent’s Association, recently sent a letter to education officials and other interested parties noting that state special charter schools will receive more money per pupil than those attending traditonal public schools under a revised formula set by the Georgia Legislature. . . .
“In 2003, the state began the first of several austerity cuts, due to declining revenue. For four of the prior past five years, local school districts were shorted millions that they were due under the Quality Basic Education Act, the state formula for funding public education, the AJC reported in 2010. . . .
“The QBE formula gives money to schools based on each student and ‘indirect’ costs, such as administration. Georgia requires local systems to pay an amount equal to five mills of property tax generated within their taxing authority for those educational costs with the school district.
“(Maureen) Downey asked state Education Department spokesman Matt Cardoza to review Garrett’s claim that state charter schools will receive more money per pupil under the new formula.
“His answer: ‘I’ve confirmed that those numbers are correct. Our financial review team ran the numbers based on what the legislation says.’
“The AJC recentlly examined the question of which types of schools get more money. An article concluded that state-approved charter schools would get more money per pupil, citing an analysis of school funding completed for Gov. Nathan Deal, who backs the amendment. However, traditional schools will get local money that state-approved charter schools do not. In 2011, the state Supreme Court ruled state lawmakers do not have the power to grant the state authority to approve and fund charter schools over the objection of local school boards.
“In conclusion, Garrett was correct on his larger point that state-approved charter schools will get more money per pupil under the proposed amendment than traditional public schools. Garrett admitted he was incorrect about the secondary part of his clalim that state-approved charter schools are exempt from austerity cuts.
“We give Garrett a grade of Mostly True.”
Mary Elizabeth
September 11th, 2012
9:44 pm
@Middle Grades Math Teacher, 8:28 pm
“Twenty years ago I was excited by the dawn of the charter school age, a way to foster true innovation. But today, the so-called charters are run for profit, and offer a McCurriculum. It’s sad to see. The original vision was SO promising.”
=================================================
I will share with you a paragraph from an article that I have cited often on this blog, in case you had missed this particular paragraph from that article, earlier:
“This backdoor model—of a nonprofit funneling dollars to a separate, for-profit entity—is common. Kent Fischer explained it in the St. Petersburg Times:
The profit motive drives business…. More and more, it’s driving Florida school reform. The vehicle: charter schools. This was not the plan. These schools were to be ‘incubators of innovation,’ free of the rules that govern traditional districts. Local school boards would decide who gets the charters, which spell out how a school will operate and what it will teach. To keep this deal, lawmakers specified that only nonprofit groups would get charters. But six years later, profit has become pivotal…. For-profit corporations create nonprofit foundations to obtain the charters, and then hire themselves to run the schools.34″
http://www.isreview.org/issues/62/feat-charterschools.shtml
Middle Grades Math Teacher
September 11th, 2012
10:17 pm
Mary Elizabeth- thanks for the article! Scary how incestuous the leadership is in the for-profit charters. Create the foundation and hire yourself….wow!
3schoolkids
September 11th, 2012
10:35 pm
Charter Starter Too,
I sincerely apologize for my misinformation in regards to local per student funding. Thank you for the link to the DOE webpage. I did not realize the state required funding for the local share of the seat whether there is a student there or not.
Unfortunately it is not quite a situation where they can bank the money. It is already tied up in the operational costs you mentioned. I do not live in Cherokee county and only used Cherokee Charter as it was the subject of Mr. Konop’s letter. I think you can agree that there are certain leveraged costs or economies of scale that are not financially impacted much when you remove 900 students from a cluster of nearby schools. Especially when there is bound to be a percentage of students that return to the local districted schools during the year.
Yes, I have paid for school lunches in the past-even though the school was receiving funds for free/reduced lunches-point made. If you are saying that the funds provided for free/reduced lunch are not enough to cover the cost of the program and the school shouldn’t be required to pay the difference from operational costs, this is a good example of a funding problem that impacts all schools and should be remedied for them all. However, part of the cuts to state school funding made this year included nutrition and transportation so I believe I am entitled to have difficulty accepting providing restorative supplements to the state special charters for those programs but not the rest of the public schools.
I have attached the Georgia Budget & Policy Institute’s analysis of the FY2013 budget impacts on education. The graph on page 4 explains my problem with the charter referendum and the funding already in effect which was created by HB797.
http://gbpi.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/fy2013_Budget-Analysis_Ed_k12_01232012.pdf
Mary Elizabeth
September 12th, 2012
12:10 am
@Middle Grades Math Teacher, 10:17 pm
You are most welcome. I have lifted the following words by educational writer Jonathan Kozol
(from the same article that I cited in my 9:44 pm post), which I think you might, also, appreciate:
——————————————————
“Charter schools are, according to Kozol, a bridge toward vouchers:
In the long run, charter schools are being strategically used to pave the way for vouchers. The voucher advocates, who are very powerful and funded by right-wing foundations and families, recognize that the word ‘voucher’ has been successfully discredited…. They have now shrewdly decided the best way to break down resistance to vouchers is by supporting charters, which represents a halfway step in the same direction. One of the intentions of this, by creating selective institutions, usually with extra forms of funding, is to discredit the entire public enterprise in America. We already have the privatization of the military, as we’ve seen with the private military contractors in Iraq; we’ve seen the privatization of the prison system. Well, the next step is the privatization of public schools. It’s a matter of ideology. In rare occasions, a charter school created by teachers in the public system and in collaboration with activist parents in the community have had at least short-term success…. They tend very quickly—even when they’re started by teachers with the best intentions—to enter into collaboration with the private sector.9″
——————————————————————————-
I would alert you, as well as the reading public, to watch for voucher legislative bills that may be initiated in Georgia’s coming legislative session, especially if the Constitutional amendment for a State Commission for Charter Schools is approved in this November’s election.
I would, also, recommend that readers pay close attention to the specific legislators who might sponsor those voucher bills. Notice if any of those legislators have connections to national organizations which support the privatization of public schools, in order to better assess how political legislative bills involving vouchers may have become in Georgia.
Pardon My Blog
September 12th, 2012
8:30 am
Just do away with publicly funded “Charter Schools”. If people don’t like the public schools then they can start their own private school at their own expense, not at the taxpayers’ expense.
CharterStarter, Too
September 12th, 2012
8:35 am
@ MIddle Grades Math Teacher –
The Governor’s Office ran the numbers on charter – that was discussed at length in this blog: http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2012/08/14/governors-deputy-charters-still-operate-with-less-funds-than-traditional-schools/
It is clear that when you look at funding holistically for a traditional district child versus a state charter student, the charter student will be (and is) funded 38% LESS.
The tax payer does not care if it is state or local funds – their tax burden has not changed. Children have to be educated. How can you argue that a district doesn’t have “enough” and then ignore the fact that charters are EDUCATING KIDS on less. One would think economy of scale would allow districts to provide services cheaper….truth is, they aren’t. Charters are more efficient.
CharterStarter, Too
September 12th, 2012
9:05 am
@ Middle Grades Math Teacher – Let me be very clear, as you have now entered the realm of absurdity with your interpretation of my comments about central office expenditures.
There is a need for central office. CO has a variety of responsibilities like personnel, finance, legal and regulatory compliance, plant management, etc. My ISSUE is with how districts choose to staff CO with NON ESSENTIAL personnel.
What is “NON ESSENTIAL personnel?’ It is any person that does not directly impact one of 3 things: 1) student achievement 2) fiscal stewardship 3) legal/regulatory compliance. Those are the 3 things the district is responsible for doing.
I have found through experience working at the school level that many positions at CO push down unnecessary work, matrices, spreadsheet, data collections, etc. to principals and other school staff – work that doesn’t really do anything to improve student success, but certainly justifies an unnecessary position at CO. Any principal will tell you how ridiculous some of the paperwork is that CO sends down. If they would provide some true decision making authority and let the principals LEAD, we might see some positive changes in schools. Charters do that.
I don’t mind the CEO of a district (the Superintendent) making a fair wage. What is “fair?” There are compensation experts who run those numbers. I can tell you that it’s probably not the lowest 5 superintendent salaries in the state, nor is it the highest 5. If you look at the variance in per pupil amounts that go towards just the superintendent’s salary, that’s also a good indicator. We have districts who are spending in excess of $1500 PER PUPIL to pay for a superintendent’s salary. In short, salaries of the superintendents (and all other staff) should be carefully evaluated based on the market for the job here in Georgia and level of responsibility.
Travel is something that could be and should be monitored by boards. We have superintendents in this district spending more than $10,000 per year in travel (highest amount over $13,000 – that’s Newton County). We have others spending $0. What’s reasonable? Boards spent from $6500 to $0 on travel for each member. What’s reasonable? I do not mean to say that travel should be cut altogether, but what I will say is that it should be carefully budgeted and tough choices should be made about travel expenditures, as these are more often than not NOT ESSENTIAL. NO public servant should be traveling to resorts and staying in high end hotels. Policies should be strict on per diem costs for travel, and these policies should be better monitored and enforced. I do not believe district office staff and boards should be permitted to spend non essential travel dollars dollars when our student field trips are being cut to $0. You put the kids FIRST.
And finally, my biggest beef is with districts who furlough their front line and do not furlough CO to the same degree – OR HIGHER. Teacher morale is at an all time low for what I believe to be a lot of reasons – too much paperwork and meetings that have absolutely no impact on the quality of their instruction, lack of support for discipline, and on top of that cuts to pay. The MOST IMPORTANT morale to ensure is high is with those working directly with our children. Does that mean teachers should take cuts? Cuts are a necessary evil in a slow economy, and all sectors are feeling the impacts; however, our instructional staff should be protected to the extent it is possible and boards should use good sense in furloughing staff and cutting teaching positions and those at central office as well.
PRIORITY: 1. Kids 2. Anyone DIRECTLY impacting kids 3. Anybody else.
CharterStarter, Too
September 12th, 2012
9:09 am
@ Middle Grades Math Teacher and Konop –
The problem I see with both of you and your posts is that you have a very, very narrow view of charter schools. You are focusing all of your energy around 1 school or 1 model. Go visit Pataula, Heritage, Museum School, International Community School, DeKalb PATH Academy, Fulton Leadership Academy, Brighten Academy, CCAT, Drew, Atlanta Neighborhood Charter School, Amana….
Not one of these has management companies, and not a single one uses “out of the box curriculum.” These are authentic school models and charter plans. They are making a difference with kids and in their communities.
I respect the fact that you disagree with for-profit management. You must, be consistent though, as many districts pay for-profit management companies as well. It’s just a small piece of the the education sector.
Broaden your horizons some – I think you would be pleasantly surprised at what you find.
sneak peek into education
September 12th, 2012
9:14 am
@Charter Starter 8:35-I beg to differ; I do think that the public cares where their tax dollars, whether they are state or local, are spent. I, for one, do not want my tax dollars spent on a charter school that is linked to a for-profit management company. I think that there are many on this blog who feel the same.
CharterStarter, Too
September 12th, 2012
9:20 am
@ 3schoolkids -
I really appreciate you acknowledging your error on the funding piece. A few things to consider further…
I agree that there are some “fixed” costs. There are some things to consider as you think about fixed versus variable costs…
1. What is the natural trends in ebb and flow of students into and out of a school district? How much do charter(s) in that district impact this average change per year?
2. What “fixed” costs are truly unchangeable (i.e., teacher student ratios, salary scale), and which of the “fixed” costs are truly variable (i.e., the number of central office administrators).
Dr. Ben Scafidi, a well respected professor at Georgia College, produced the document attached. I encourage you to read it. It’s interesting and may give you a different perspective. http://www.edchoice.org/CMSModules/EdChoice/FileLibrary/796/The-Fiscal-Effects-of-School-Choice-Programs.pdf
As for cuts to transportation and food service – you must understand that most of the charters were not funded for either of these in the first place. Please go and check the state chartered special schools system allotment sheets (they are not in alpha order, so just scroll down). You will see that the districts earned these grants, but the majority of charters got nothing for them (other than nursing). http://app3.doe.k12.ga.us/ows-bin/owa/qbe_reports.public_menu?p_fy=2000
I appreciate the dialogue.
CTR
September 12th, 2012
9:26 am
My child attends Coweta Charter Academy, a commission approved school and a Charter Schools USA school, and here is why I’ll be voting yes.
1) My child attends a public charter school where every child that is there has chosen to be there.
2) My child’s school has put on paper their mission and responsibilities to which they are accountable.
3) I know that if my child’s school does not meet expectation they can be closed. Real accountability.
4) I know every member of the local governing council, their names are on their website and I can contact them. I also have the personal phone number of the principal.
5) Before attending a charter, my child attended our local traditional public and we were not satisfied for many reasons, primarily a lack of academic rigor, and a lack of enthusiasm for teaching that was ubiquitous in all aspects of school.
IN EXCHANGE, I’m willing to forgo my local tax dollars which, despite Mr Konop’s misinformation, will continue to go to the local district, although my child does not attend his old traditional public school. I’m willing to allow my child to be taught for less net dollars in an improvised Church facility, with limited school-provided transportation, in exchange for the reasons provided above.
Furthermore, to the naysayers, this amendment really does not affect the status quo, which you are protecting. In fact, your school now has more money available to do whatever they choose. Your child can continue to attend their school, or you may choose to attend a charter. Either way, the local money stays put. You can continue to elect your school board members as is. You can keep what you have. And if you are really afraid of a five member commission becoming a bureaucratic good ol boy network for Governor Deal, please vote no. Please keep what you have, it wasn’t for us.
CharterStarter, Too
September 12th, 2012
9:27 am
@ Sneak Peek – What I SAID is that the typical tax payer won’t care if the bulk of the tax funds flow from state or local, they will care about the bottom line for expenditures on education. I am quite certain you are right that some will disagree with tax dollars going to for-profit management fees….then they will also disagree with DISTRICTS using these for-profit management companies as well, right?
sneak peek into education
September 12th, 2012
10:04 am
@Charter-I merely repeated what you said-now you are twisting it and trying to divert from you own comments. It is clear that you have a dog in the fight with your relentless attempts to brow beat those who disagree with you. Since this is obvious, why don’t you reveal who you are so the bloggers can assess for themselves why you are so dogmatic on the topic of charters? You call others for not answering YOUR questions, now answer this simple one.