Southern California legislators call for charter school reform
“The public is paying for them,” Assemblyman Roger Hernandez, D-West Covina, said afterward. “The accountability ought to be there and the protection for the employees ought to be there.”
Four Democrats, flanked by representatives of the California Teachers Association, the California Federation of Teachers and the California Labor Federation, announced four new pieces of legislation the legislators said will ensure the charter schools fulfill their stated mission.
Hernandez introduced Assembly Bill 787, which would not allow charter schools to be run for profit. Instead, it allows a charter school to operate as, or be operated by, a nonprofit public benefit corporation.
“Some, if not many, of the charter schools throughout California and the nation run their charter schools with some of their focus on bringing in profit at the end of the year,” Hernandez said. “This is an effort to ... make sure that our dollars are focused on a student-centered approach, not for the profiteering of CEOs.”
Not everyone believes the new law is necessary, though.
“Overall, I think charter schools are working reasonably well in California. There’s always room to improve, but I think we need to make sure this is about improving charters, rather than just going after charter schools,” said Gabe Rose, chief strategy officer of Parent Revolution, the organization that led to the passage of the 2010 parent-trigger law, which enables parents to force changes at failing public schools.
Those changes include potentially turning them into charter schools, as happened in the High Desert city of Adelanto.
“My impression,” Rose said, “is that there’s basically no for-profit charter schools in California right now, so this is a bit of a red herring.”
Assemblyman Mike Gipson, D-Compton, introduced Assembly Bill 709, which explicitly states that charter school board meetings are covered by California’s open meeting law, the Ralph M. Brown Act. (Charter schools receive their operating charter from public schools, are funded by public tax dollars and are officially public schools.)
California legislators approved the Charter Schools Act in 1992. As of fall 2013, there were 1,130 charter schools operating in the state, according to the California Charter Schools Association.
“Over the years, charter school enrollment in California has grown to the largest percentage in the nation,” Gipson wrote in an email Wednesday afternoon. “However, despite this growth, our state laws have not been updated to ensure these expanding schools are required to maintain an acceptable level of accountability and transparency with our teachers, students, and parents. Assembly Bill 709, which I have authored this year with the support of the California Teachers Association, is part of an ongoing effort to make sure all of our schools are held to a consistent standard.”
The assemblymen were joined on the steps by state Sens. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, and Tony Mendoza, D-Montebello.
Leno introduced Senate Bill 322, which would make it explicit that charter schools are to comply with a number of other laws covering public schools.
And Mendoza introduced Senate Bill 329, which tweaks the language of existing law regarding accounting in public school districts.
All four bills are supported by the California Teachers Association:
“All students should have the opportunity to attend a quality public school and all schools, whether they are charter or traditional schools, should be held to the same high standards. Student success should not depend on what their ZIP code happens to be,” CTA President Dean E. Vogel is quoted as saying in a news release issued by the union. “There is a role for charter schools in California’s education system and that role should be performed to the same high standards of integrity, transparency and openness required of traditional public schools.”
More than 500,000 students were attending charter schools statewide in the 2013-14 school year, according to the California Charter Schools Association.
In a statement posted on its website, the association was skeptical about the proposed laws highlighted at the Sacramento news conference.
“We believe current laws address (the lawmakers’) concerns and these proposals are unnecessary,” the statement, written by Myrna Castrejon, CCSA’s senior vice president of government affairs, reads in part. “They would impose unreasonable and excessive new requirements on charter schools that are not in line with the intent of the California Charter Schools Act of 1992 to provide autonomous, accountable and independent public schools. We look forward to the day when CTA and its supporters and allies accept that charter schools are here to stay, and that a far better use of time and energy would be working collaboratively to ensure that all kids in California can attend high quality schools just as charters schools are demonstrating is possible.”
Comments