NYSCOSS Stance

cmurray  posted on: 09/21/12 09:17 AM

Below are exerpts from the online NYCOSS service about this issue. We all have copies of the full text of the bill through Bob Oaks's office if we are in his district. Anybody else need it? CHARTER DEAL INKED Bill passes in middle of night The legislature returned to Albany Thursday to enact a new piece of charter school legislation. The action was taken presumably in time to permit the Governor to sign the pay raise legislation by Monday. Working into the wee hours of the morning, the Senate and the Assembly each passed a new charter school bill which would provide for the following: Governance - Total of 100 new schools, 50 by (Republican controlled) SUNY and 50 by the (Assembly controlled) Regents or local boards of educa-tion. The Regents would have sign off pow-ers on local school plans, but can only comment on SUNY plans. There is no limit on the number of public schools which could convert to charter status (but such conversion would be subject to a form of local referen-dum); - Charter schools would operate on a renew-able 5 year charter; - The schools must serve at least 50 students with at least 3 teachers; - Charter schools would be subject to Freedom of Information and Open Meetings Laws; Teachers - Schools with average daily attendance of more than 250 pupils would be required to unionize and must be represented by the same organization (NYSUT or NEA) as the district in which they are formed. They would receive retirement benefits like regular school teachers and be subject to the Civil Service Law.; - No more than 5 teachers (or 30% whichever is less) of the teachers may be uncertified; - Student attendance would be determined by lottery. Only students living in the district or previously attending the school (or their sib-lings) could have preferential treatment; Financing - Charter schools would receive the approved operating expense associated with the district of residence of every student who attends the charter school; - Districts would be required to make the payments in 6 equal installments beginning in July or risk having the amount deducted from state aid; - The charter school would estimate the num-ber of students expected for purposes of de-termining this amount, any reconciliation would not take place until a year later; - Charter schools would be tax-free entities and would be empowered to issue bonds and other debt without voter approval; Accountability - Charter schools would be required to hold students to at least the same graduation re-quirements as regular public schools; - They would also have to meet all health and safety requirements, civil rights laws, and student assessment requirements required of other regular public schools. ANALYSIS Albany has become less of a city where weighty policies are debated and decided on their own merits and more of a bazaar where rug merchants haggle price and barter their wares. Last year, when the Senate, Assembly, and Governor couldn’t agree on whether they could afford the STAR and LADDER programs and tax cuts (respectively), they simply agreed to a 3 way swap and enacted them all. This cynicism has reached a new level in this special session of the Legislature. After trying several possible combinations of trades (Pay raises for charter schools, Pay raises for charter schools, school discipline and principal tenure) the Legislature and Governor finally hit on a winning combination: the Governor will sign the pay raise bill passed by the Legislature last week and in return, the Legislature has passed the Northeast Dairy Compact, some modest budget process reforms, and charter school legislation. While the charter school bill meets many of the tests we outlined in our Policy Report (on the web at www.nyscoss.org), it still contains may flaws which render objectionable the package as a whole. Probably the worst feature is the financing mechanism devised by the Legislature. Funding Issue Charter schools estimate the number of pupils expected from each surrounding district, and receive both the state aid and local levy associated with each pupil (calculated as Approved Operating Expense) in their dis-trict of residence. If the charter school overestimates its enrollment the reconciliation isn’t performed until the next school year. Worse is the realization that this will simply be an erosion of resources in the public school. The marginal cost of each additional student is essential nothing. Another chair is added to a class, the student already lives on a bus route and the building is heated and lit anyway. By the same token, the marginal savings from the elimination of a few students is also negligible. Removing a portion of a school district’s revenue without a corresponding drop in expenditures will mean that the difference will have to be made up somewhere. As a result, we see this charter school legislation as having one of two possible effects: either it will result in higher local property taxes as districts backfill revenue holes created by the charter schools, or it will result in degradation of the program of the district as it struggles to make due with fewer resources. Either scenario is unacceptable. The New York State Council of School Superintendents, while not opposed to the concept of charter schools generally, finds that this legislation will have a detrimental effect on public school districts, particularly in poor, rural and urban areas, and therefore cannot be supported. Furthermore, we take exception to the manner in which legislation with such broad implications was rushed to a vote in the waning moments of the year by a lame duck Legislature intent on ensuring their own pay raises. NYSCOSS will work in the upcoming session to enact changes to this legislation which will render charter schools funding neutral to the local school district. In this way, the charter school itself can thrive or die on its own merits with less impact on the public school districts nearby. -- Thomas Rogers Associate Director New York State Council of School Superintendents 518-449-1063