Vol. 4, No. 20
May 28, 2002

* CALIFORNIA DREAMIN': California Teachers Association president Wayne Johnson is no doubt asking himself rhetorically, "What kind of place do we live in where the most powerful union in the state can't buy control of the educational system?" after a bill he was pushing to give the union more control of schools was seriously watered-down. The CTA was attempting to gain control of every aspect of schooling, from hirings and firings to textbook selection. Just last week, in an effort to avoid an outright veto by Governor Gray Davis, the CTA apparently backed off the most contentious parts -- subjecting curricular decisions and textbook selection to collective bargaining -- of a bill for which they have lobbied heavily. The veto threat came despite nearly $4.5 million the CTA has spent supporting candidates and causes since January 2001.

* PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS: One company's foray into public education is stirring up the print and broadcast media, and Edison School Inc.'s falling stock prices and school break-ups have some naysayers arguing that the time of private management of public schools is just about over. But Edison's troubles -- and the media mania around them -- have more to do with the political climate in cities like Philadelphia than they have to do with the concept of public-private partnerships. With the scope of its reach across the country, Edison will no doubt survive the financial and educational skeptics. And with more than a dozen other national companies and school managers -- for profit and not-for-profit -- still thriving and still in demand among the parents and teachers who are clamoring for charters, the Edison feeding frenzy is likely to pass. For more information on this industry, check out CER's A Consumer's Guide to Public Private Partnerships, available by calling 1-800-521-2118. Click here to go to the Executive Summary. (For more on what's happening in Philly, go to In the News.)

* CHARTERS: A series of political challenges of varying degrees are brewing in the states:

* Ohio: A state judge will decide the fate of Ohio's charter school law. Last week, supporters and opponents of Ohio's law agreed to let a Franklin County Common Pleas Judge decide the legality of the law. The suit was brought by the Ohio Federation of Teachers, the Ohio PTA, the Ohio School Board Association and the League of Women Voters state chapter. Also included in the suit are several local school employee unions. Their complaints revolve around the unique partnerships or arrangements made possible under the state's charter law, such as for-profit management and the emergence of cyber schools in the state. Supporters of the five-year old law dispute the claims of the opposition, which, as usual, appear politically motivated. A ruling from the judge expected in several months.

* California: Indio Charter School in Riverside County has experienced unprecedented rollbacks despite being the best scoring public school in its county. Last year, the school was guaranteed to receive a certain amount of operational and administrative funding, but was docked approximately $700,000 due to what seemed to be bureaucratic inertia. The state department of education (DOE) failed to resolve the charters' problems for almost a year, and last week the school's attorney finally had a chance to meet with DOE officials to resolve the issue. The meeting ended with a guarantee from the DOE that the funds would be released after officials reviewed some papers. But just as the charter's leaders were breathing a sigh of relief, the DOE reneged on its promise, and has refused, again, to release the funds. If the school doesn't get what's due to it within 11 days, it will have to close its doors forever. This is a shameful display by the DOE, and as a result hundreds of kids in the best scoring school in Riverside County will lose out.

* Tennessee: A charter school bill in name only was voted out of the House last week, and is now awaiting a hearing and vote in the Senate education committee. While charter proponents and advocates were once enthusiastic about this bill, because initial drafts seemed to provide a certain level of autonomy and necessary flexibility, that enthusiasm has waned. The bill limits the creation of new charter schools to only those in areas where there are failing schools, and rather than free charters from regulations (which is the whole point), it requires charters to apply for waivers from the state. Unless the Senate makes some major changes, this bill is dead on arrival, and is likely to mirror the laws that are ranked in the F category on the national rankings.

* New Hampshire: More bad news on charters comes from the Live Free or Die State, where Governor Jeanne Shaheen last week vetoed a bill that the legislature passed and which was the last hope for charters to actually get off the ground this year. The state's charter law, passed in 1995, was very progressive with regard to how charters could function, but to get approved they must pass through cumbersome school district and then state approvals. The vetoed bill would have allowed multiple authorizers in New Hampshire, allowing charters to go to an entity other than the school district first. Legislators in both chambers are scrambling to get a 2/3 majority to override the veto, but they appear unlikely to get the numbers they need to do so. Other states that are deliberating over charter school laws must take heed of what has happened in New Hampshire. It's a prime example of what happens when you have a charter school law that requires a charter applicant to pass through a school district approval process to start. In most states, it's akin to passing through the eye of a needle, which is why that approach is most often advocated by the school boards and employee groups.

* Illinois: A few weeks ago, the CER Newswire reported on a bill that was defeated in Michigan following a nasty political battle. Last week, Illinois seemed to follow the same path. The state legislature is deliberating a piece of legislation that increases the charter school cap in Chicago, but with it adds three other provisions that would adversely affect the charter school law. Among the limitations in this bill is the restriction that charter schools can operate only on one campus, that for-profit management companies may no longer operate or manage charter schools, and that at least 75% of the teaching staff at a charter school must be certified. This bill is similar to the "one step forward, two steps back" bill that was signed last month by Governor Barnes in Georgia. These kinds of bills are difficult to oppose, because the allure of lifting a cap is a temptation that makes the other changes seem insignificant. If charters aren't permitted extensive flexibility, however, it's unlikely they'll be in existence for very long.

SUBSCRIBE to CER's Education Reform Newswire -- have these regular newswires delivered right to your email box (for free!).

SEARCH the Newswire Library.

BROWSE the Newswire Library

The CER Newswire may be redistributed in its entirety with proper attribution. The CER Newswire is published by The Center for Education Reform, the nation's leading authority on school reform. CER is dedicated to making schools better for America's children by improving educational access and excellence for all. CER works with parents, teachers and policymakers to advance meaningful education improvement initiatives.

###

CER Home Page Newswire Archives E-Mail CER CER Publications