Charter schools need reform. This proposal could kneecap them

The only nonprofit newsroom in California dedicated exclusively to covering statewide issues that impact all Californians is CalMatters. Welcome. For a Saturday morning summary of the most recent Golden State news and analysis, sign up for WeeklyMatters.

This article is featured on California Voices, a discussion platform that aims to increase public awareness of the state and highlight Californians who are directly affected by policies or their lack. Find out more here.

Many of the thousands of measures that the California Legislature considers each year are recurring issues that stem from long-standing racial, cultural, and economic tensions.

Conflicting interests attempt to outmaneuver their opponents. Notwithstanding the results of a particular legislative session, they will unavoidably conflict once again while enhancing their lobbying with attempts to sway public opinion and affect legislative elections.

There are several instances of the condition. There is the ongoing conflict between tribal casinos and cardrooms over gambling games, the ongoing struggle between personal injury lawyers and insurers over lawsuit regulations, and attempts by healthcare providers to broaden their practices while encroaching on the territory of other practitioners.

School boards and school unions in California’s public education system have been engaged in a political battle against charter schools for the past thirty years.

Despite being public schools, charter schools are exempt from many of the regulations that apply to traditional schools. In addition to receiving a portion of the more than $100 billion the state spends annually on public education, they enroll over 11% of California’s approximately 6 million public school students, spanning from pre-kindergarten to the 12th grade.

Proponents of charter schools claim that they address concerns raised by parents about the quality of education their kids get in conventional schools. Their detractors claim that they only enroll a small percentage of students and waste funds that would be better used to advance traditional education.

Due to the requirement that local education boards approve charters, disputes over them are frequently fought at the local level. The second-largest school system in the country, Los Angeles Unified, has been embroiled in an epic fight for years. Depending on whether unions or proponents of charter schools control the school board following each election cycle, it fluctuates.

The Capitol is heavily influenced by the public education establishment, especially its unions, who have pushed a number of laws that either make it harder to organize charters or try to regulate ones that are currently in operation.

Assembly Bill 84, this year’s iteration, has passed the Assembly and is currently awaiting consideration in the Senate.

Supported by school boards and school unions, the bill aims to address issues in charter schools that operate online or through other channels instead of providing classroom education.

Those are actual scandals. A3 Education, which operated a network of 19 online charter schools, was the most well-known. The district attorney’s office in San Diego County conducted an inquiry and determined that the system’s creators had embezzled hundreds of millions of dollars. More than $200 million in stolen money was recovered when they were prosecuted.

A3 Education and other scandals prompted the state to halt new non-classroom charters and to commission a study to identify the necessary adjustments to prevent fraud.

Read Next

California s war over charter schools rages on in court

Many of the suggestions made by the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the state’s Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team’s research are incorporated into AB 84. However, the bill goes further, including new accounting and operational procedures that may make it more challenging for various charters to be established or operate.

An whole new office of inspector general with extremely broad powers, based in the state Department of Education but chosen by the governor, would be created by a provision that was overlooked in the bill assessments that were given to lawmakers.

Democratic Assemblymen Robert Garcia and Al Muratsuchi, who are co-authors of SB 84, argue that it is necessary to relax the ban on non-classroom charters and avoid scandals like A3.

As far as it goes, that is true. However, by enforcing regulations that are similar to those for traditional schools, it would also provide the education establishment new powers to hinder new charters and make life more difficult for those that already exist.

Read More

A beloved Altadena school, destroyed in the Eaton fire, looks to the future

California charter school battles intensify as education finances get squeezed

CalMatters has further information.

Text

Receive breaking news on your mobile device.

Get it here

Use our app to stay up to date.

Register

Get free updates delivered straight to your inbox.

Safeguard independent news for California s future

CalMatters has been educating millions of Californians and holding our government and special interests accountable for a decade.

• We report what s happening.
• We ask the hard questions.
• We make our government transparent to Californians.

All donations are currently matched dollar for dollar. Would you kindly help CalMatters today?

Accountability lapses in the absence of independent, persistent reporting:

• People lose visibility into decisions that shape their future.
• Misinformation and special interests gain more ground.
• Public trust erodes.

Don’t allow that to occur. Donate now to support CalMatters’ fearless and independent journalism.

The news cannot wait, so give today.