Here is a correspondence I sent to the CA Charter School panel. I would encourage supporters of charter schools to let the panel know your views. You can contact them at:
chartertaskforce@cde.ca.gov
Members of the Panel:
There was a time when the Democratic Party could truthfully state it was trying to help those least able to help themselves. That appears no longer to be the case, and now Democratic politicians are more and more able to be portrayed as against the less fortunate. As soon as those further from center were elected, the public sector teachers union used its Democratic legislative bidders to propose a rash of anti-charter legislation. This panel has a chance to serve as a moderating influence in this overall process.
I intend no disrespect to the panel, but your reason for being, purportedly to study the financial impact of public charter schools on traditional public schools, isn’t even a genuine question. Going back decades, the main cause of financial stress for school districts in California has been outlined in audits, CAFRs, and rating agency reports for school districts all over the state. Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB), negotiated with unions as part of a collective bargaining process that results from a conflict of interest, are the main cause of this financial distress. In LAUSD, where retired teachers receive perhaps the most generous health-care benefits anywhere, these costs reportedly take up to 15% of the budget. If you want to study why school districts face financial stress, OPEB is the place to start, not charter schools. And you might want to start that analysis with how unions are able to collectively bargain with elected officials whose campaigns they funded.
The benefits of charter schools are many. Charter schools have done better, especially for low-income, minority, and disenfranchised students and families. Charter schools’ track record of getting these students out of high school and into college puts to shame the decades-long track record of the union-run schools. A college degree, on average, means about $1.4 million more in earnings over a student’s lifetime. Charter schools have also done this on less public funding than traditional public schools when all taxes are considered. No matter how you slice it, charter schools are a public-policy win. What is happening now is nothing less than the unions admitting they cannot compete in the classroom, so they are using their political muscle to thwart competition from charter schools. And the Democratic Party is choosing to stand with the unions instead of standing with those it purports to represent. Democrats can be characterized as only favoring programs for the less fortunate when it makes those less fortunate beholden to the Party, not when a program allows the less fortunate to help themselves such as through a better public education. That is what charter schools do.
An interesting comparison is this: charter schools have to re-up every five years. How often does the teachers union have to do that? The answer: Never! The result is that the vast majority of teachers are members of a union they did not choose to belong to. Given the harmful impact of OPEB on school districts, would you not want to address that instead of limiting an effective public school option? The fact that you are not addressing this speaks volumes!
I could go on and on about how charters outperform traditional public schools. If I were a conservative political consultant, I would be salivating at the prospects of the 2020 election cycle. This process is clearly establishing the Democratic Party as saying “How high?” in response to your union funders’ demand to “Jump!” How high in this case means: to remove an important ability for the less fortunate to change the trajectory of their kids’ lives, the cost to society of which is less than the alternative, all to benefit a costly and under-performing union monopoly on public education. Public sector unions are using their contributions to the Democratic Party to drive away competition in public sector education, and to keep the monopoly intact. It is no different than if Ford did the same to limit the ability of General Motors to operate. No different at all. And when 2020 comes I would relish the chance to drive a wedge between the Democratic Party and one of its most important historical political bases.
Your panel should do the right thing. It should act as a moderating and honest voice in this whole dishonest debate. Do not place a moratorium on charter schools. Do not give school districts the ability to deny charters for financial reasons that don’t deal with the cause of school districts’ financial stress. Do not take away an important appeals process that helps keep the district authorization verdicts honest. Do not increase the cost of facilities by requiring union construction.
Do what you say you do: stand up for the little guys and keep the charter school movement in California strong and vibrant.