Legislature(1997 - 1998)
05/01/1997 03:07 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 229 - CHARTER SCHOOL ESTABLISHMENT & OPERATION Number 1692 CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the next item on the agenda was HB 229, "An Act relating to the establishment and operation of charter schools." REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY, Sponsor of HB 229, introduced Mr. Boots, who provided information on HB 229. Number 1710 MIKE BOOTS, Member, Alaskans for Educational Choice, was in support of HB 229. He worked with a number of the proposed charter schools in Anchorage and with other proposed charter schools around the state. The charter schools are a means to an end. These schools help bring back people into the public education system who, for whatever reason, have become dissatisfied. Those people are increasingly moving their children into home school situations or private school situations. He referred to the increasing number of private schools and stated that he would be surprised if that growth rate discontinued. The very people who are able to afford those alternatives are likely to be property tax payers. Once those people leave those system, then their public education funding support diminishes. This creates an overall decline in public support for public education. MR. BOOTS felt that charter schools provided a way to deal with the dissatisfactions and to bring those dissatisfied people back into the public school setting. To have their children attend a public school, which is what charter schools are, is to reestablish support for public education. There are a large majority of people who are relatively satisfied with the public education and charter schools address the margins. Charter schools provide equity for those people who are dissatisfied with public education, but do not have the monetary resources to deal with this dissatisfaction. Number 1841 MR. BOOTS explained that creating charter schools provides an exterior incentive to the educational establishment. It gives that entity the opportunity to become more responsive to whatever it is that is causing dissatisfaction. In order to accomplish this goal and prevent manipulation, some omissions from the original charter school law need to be remedied. There are three major accomplishments envisioned in HB 229. One goal is to create an independent means of approval for charter school proposals, independent of the local school board. The bill is designed to maintain local control in the sense that it envisions a municipal charter school board as an alternative. Charter school proposals would still have the ability to go to their local school board or they could go to the locally appointed municipal charter school board. If they lived in an area where there was no municipality to create such a board or if the municipality refused to do so, then the charter school proposers would have the option to go to the state board. That state board would not be an option if the locality creates their own local board. MR. BOOTS hoped that the appointed board would be approved by an elected body such as the assembly or city council with some objective criteria by which charter school proposals would be judged. That criteria could be formulated on a local level and could be done through the school district as long as the rules applied to everyone. Number 1938 MR. BOOTS stated that the second thing HB 229 does is to create a system that cannot be manipulated. It provides an incentive for responsiveness by the bureaucracy, by removing the limit on the number of charter schools. The number of charter schools will reach a natural limit as that incentive creates responsiveness in regular schools and people become more satisfied. He explained that forming a charter school is not an easy undertaking. It takes hours and hours of work, planning, coordination of a great number of people; parents, teachers and the governing body, to make it all happen. Number 1970 MR. BOOTS said the third thing that HB 229 does is to establish provisions by which charter contracts will require, by grade level, stated levels of attainment of students and the methods by which those students will be assessed. The bill does not set out what those methods should be or what those levels of attainment will be, it simply requires that it be included in the contract. This provision would provide some accountability, the state doesn't want bad charter schools. If the charter school does not meet their objectives, then they would be closed down. Number 2005 CHAIRMAN BUNDE commented that the credo for this legislative session was smaller and smarter government. He felt HB 229 might be smarter, but it would not be smaller. He expressed concerns that HB 229 creates an unfunded mandate for the municipalities to create a second school board, it increases bureaucracy by creating another state school board and it undermines and circumvents the duly elected school board. He felt that elections were the way to address concerns about school boards. TAPE 97-41, SIDE A Number 0000 CARL ROSE, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School Boards, stated that his association is in support of charter schools, recognizing the latitude and the opportunity that they provide. Last week the National School Board Association took up this issue and passed a resolution that recognizes that charter schools are one of several mechanisms to improve or address the quality of education. The association was united on the issue of sole authority behind a charter school because it concerns such issues as local control, representative government and accountability at the ballot box. There should be the ability to decertify a school if the agreed upon contracted issues of student performance and fiscal management are not met. The association also unanimously agreed that there needs to be some way in which we can hold someone accountable for the criteria that is set for a charter school. There was also a need for some assurance that a charter school law would not foster racial, economic, social segregation or segregation of children with special needs. MR. ROSE stated that the charter school movement in Alaska is alive and well. He focused on three areas of concern with charter schools and with HB 229 in particular. One is the issue of entering into a contract with a school board, state charter board or municipality. The issue comes down to the local board and a sense of accountability, someone needs to be responsible for the educational progress of that school. An appointed body could be somewhat biased in terms of the creation of the school. A municipal authority was created for the purpose of municipal affairs and a local board runs for election in order to address the educational needs of a school district. He felt that three different entities could decertify a school, but he did not know if all three of those entities would be held accountable for the purpose of education. MR. ROSE stated that he is concerned about having unlimited numbers of charter schools because of the static level of educational funding. Schools are continuing to do more with less. The potential numbers of charter schools, which could be granted outside the authority of the local school board, would have serious consequences for any school district. These charter schools will be public schools, but they will not be held accountable in the same fashion. People who have to come up with the money and the resources to operate these schools will be accountable to the public. Until the state can determine the costs and successes of charter schools and formulate provisions to fund them, the number should be limited. MR. ROSE said that this law allowing charter schools has only been in effect one year. Many charter schools have been denied for various reasons. He could not say why any local school district would chose not to approve a charter school, but the elected people on those school boards probably have more of an ability to identify what the restricting issues might be. He concluded by saying that his association does not support HB 229, this bill shares the authority but only holds one group accountable and there is the additional issue of cost. Number 0405 NANCY BUELL, Ed. D., Director, Teaching and Learning Support, Department of Education, stated that the DOE and the State Board of Education, though not in an official capacity, would agree with both Mr. Rose and the chair. She commented that there could not be a more supportive school board for charter schools than the current state board. The school board does not want to turn down any schools that have been approved at the local level and they have not moved to do so. The board has directed the DOE to work endlessly with local districts and local boards to come up with charterable schools. DR. BUELL said half of the quota allowed by law has been formed, and the DOE has every reason to believe that this number will increase. At this point, it is the feeling of the DOE and the board that another board would not be a facilitating factor because of their realization that there are glitches in the present law. Hearings have been held to address a number of issues, one of which is funding. Almost no schools, that they know of, have been turned down at the local level. One of those schools that was turned down is still working with the local board and may be approved sometime in the future. Some of the pieces of HB 229 could be pieces that could be incorporated into future law, but at this point the state needs to work with the existing law to see what those glitches are. DR. BUELL said the United States Department of Education, which funds a competitive national charter school grant, assists local districts with planning and implementing charter schools. The U.S. Department of Education said that regardless of the law, states seem to go through the same type of phases with charter schools. At first, it is difficult to figure out what level of details are required in an application and what should be required of schools. Districts evolve and then the procedure appears to settle into place and it becomes an easier process for schools to get chartered. In studies, Alaska was perceived to have a weak law, and other states were perceived to have stronger laws because they had a structure in place that allowed a bypass of the local board and allowed for chartering at a municipal or state level. Those other states went through the same phases that Alaska is going through in terms of seeing the same kinds of applications and issues being raised. This tells us that it is not the law that is the issue, but the process of accommodating these needs. DR. BUELL stated that they would not recommend any great changes at this point, but would look forward to working on incorporating some requested changes in the law. Number 0671 JOHN CYR, President, National Education Association-Alaska (NEA- Alaska), stated that his organization is also on record as being supportive of charter schools. Charter schools are a testing ground for new ideas and ways of dealing with students in the manner in which they are applicable to regular schools. He expressed concern with funding and with sections of the bill. Some concerns have already been addressed and so he chose to focus on concerns which have not been raised. The bill states that a charter school is operated in the local school district where it is located. He asked whether a charter school could be chartered in one community and then operate in another community. MR. CYR said the bill also says that charter schools can establish contract provisions and local contracts, this is inconsistent with specific portions of this bill. He referred to page 4, line 27. He questioned what HB 229 would do for the operation of charter schools that isn't currently being done. Charter schools have been proposed and accepted throughout the state. The current law seems to be working, and although the mechanism changes with HB 229, he did not understand how it would work differently. MR. CYR expressed that the numbers were interesting. There has to be a realization that if the state is to have charter schools, the state has to address funding them. Even on a limited basis, there is still a drain to the local school district. He questioned that if the numbers increase, then will every school eventually become a charter school. The purpose of charter schools is to begin to explore a new way to bring parents into the schools. Number 0920 LAURIE PERKINS, Member, Juneau Charter School Committee, voiced support for HB 229 and for the issues raised by Mr. Boots. The issue of draining funding away from the current schools does not take into account that most charter school students come from families who are home schooled or attend private schools. Most of the founding members of the Juneau Charter School and most application requests have been for children who are currently being home schooled or are enrolled in private schools. Charter schools will actually bring more children into the public school environment. The charter school committee especially supports AS 14.03.028 which removes the limit currently placed on communities regarding the number of charter schools which can be established. If parents want to start a school in a community, they should not be limited by an arbitrary number under the current law. Facilities severely limit the number of students who can be served by a charter school. Removing an imposed limit on charter schools will allow communities to match their available facilities to the sizes and numbers of schools which are established. This bill will also raise the standards of accountability for charter schools. The additional requirement for performance standards can only increase the chances of a charter school's success. Number 1053 BECKY HUGGINS testified next via teleconference from Mat-Su. She explained that, after viewing the current charter school process in the Mat-Su area and following the process in other areas of the state, she strongly supports HB 229. The changes in this bill are positive, improving the application process and bringing a standardization of accountability. Number 1085 BILL THOMAS testified next via teleconference from Ketchikan. He stated that he was involved in the process of getting a charter school in Ketchikan. The statements from Mr. Boots are a breath of fresh air to people like himself. He felt that parents were excluded from the local Parent Teacher Association (PTA). He is supportive of charter schools. The provisions of the bill, the memorandum from Mr. Chenoweth and the sponsor statement are all in order and timely. He felt there were arbitrary limits placed on the number charter schools. Number 1292 LINDA SHARP testified next via teleconference from Anchorage. The charter school law was passed two years ago and the state is now entering the third year in which charter schools could be implemented. Anchorage will open the first charter schools this year. She stated that the people who are opposed to HB 229 are people who are earning $50,000 to $100,000 a year, they represent the establishment and want to keep a status quo. She encouraged the committee to ask the Anchorage School District for the test scores on all the schools they operate. If the establishment wants to maintain the status quo, then she wanted the legislature to hold them accountable to the schools which ought to close. MS. SHARP said this bill is a small step in the right direction. More radical suggestions could be proposed such as asking for a totally independent board for charter schools and asking charter schools to answer to that independent board alone. There could be a request that teachers be taken out of the teacher's union and that vouchers be supplied to allow students to attend whatever school they chose. This bill merely asks the mayor to appoint a local board of volunteers, that the charter school law require goals and tests to prove that the children have learned and it lifts the lid on the number of charter schools. She stated that school districts are not used to holding schools accountable for what children learn. She felt that schools, including charter schools, ought to be closed if they fail to educate children on an annual basis. Number 1473 NANCY SCHIERHORN, Member, Alaskans for Educational Choice, testified next via teleconference from Anchorage. She has been involved, in one way or another, with the charter school law for approximately a year and a half. She does not plan to send her children to the Anchorage charter schools that are opening, but is simply a strong supporter and advocate for school choice. She was frustrated about the lack of options existing in the Anchorage district or the inability to obtain access to those options, specifically the long waiting lists to obtain access to those alternatives. MS. SCHIERHORN has studied the charter school law in Alaska and in other states. Accountability for success is ultimately measured by attendance at the schools. An alternative review board for the charter school approval is not going to alter the parents' ability to decide whether or not the school is achieving its goals. She was active in last summer's process that the Anchorage School District undertook to implement procedures for the existing charter school laws. Those procedures resulted in approximately 20 to 25 pages incorporating almost all the existing district regulations, policies, procedures, et cetera. This paperwork needed to be completed before the application process began. MS. SCHIERHORN stated that the result of the Anchorage School District application process is that the school district has retained almost complete control of the approved charter schools. The district administrators are not subject to public elections. Even though the law states that it is the school board which approves or disapproves the charter schools, it would be unrealistic to view the Anchorage School District administrators as not playing an integral role in that project. The problems associated with not having an alternative review board is that it inhibits innovation, discourages people from proposing charter schools, makes it costly for the charter schools that are approved and subjects the charter schools to the politics of the district. These things allow the school district to retain its existing monopoly. Almost half of the states with charter school laws have some sort of alternative review, either a board or an appeals process. Charter schools are flourishing in those states. Alaska needs an alternative board or an appeals process and she urged the committee to listen to the comments of people who are working with this law. Number 1638 LARRY WIGET, Director of Government Relations, Anchorage School District, supported the testimony of Mr. Rose and his organization's resolution. He disagreed with the previous two speakers. The Anchorage School Board's position on the charter school laws is that they are diligently working to implement this process. The school district retains the liability for these charter schools. The school board and school district are asking that they have the opportunity to work out the glitches with the existing law, to put forth the charter schools under the guidelines of the existing law before the law is changed. The Anchorage School District has the possibility of putting in eight charter schools over the course of the next five years. Three charter schools will be opened in the fall and the district anticipates that more charter schools will be formed this year to add to the numerous options that are already available. Number 1717 CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked him to take a message back to the Anchorage School District and School Board that "failing to live up to the letter of the law, and I am not saying that that has occurred, but should that occur, is often begot serious and onerous regulation from the state. So, I want to encourage the Anchorage School Board to be diligent in their application of the existing school board law." Number 1756 BILL BJORK, President, Fairbanks Education Association, explained that after the charter school bill was passed, the Fairbanks Education Association and the North Star Borough School District cooperatively developed a process in Fairbanks which was instrumental in getting the first real charter school off the ground. Fairbanks has approved another charter school for next year, and another one will be proposed this year. For all three of these proposals, the Fairbanks Education Association worked cooperatively with the charter school proponents, entering into amicable negotiations and pointed out sections of the contract which could be problematic for these small schools. The association agreed to waivers for each of those schools and has worked throughout this year with the established charter school to ensure that they were successful and to do what they could to help them. MR. BJORK stated that the Fairbanks Education Association and the North Star Borough School District support charter schools. Charter schools provide exciting and enthusiastic choices for students within the public school system. Allowing an appointed board to approve charter schools that the local school board would have denied moves the decision out of the community. He felt that the support for charter schools would also move out the community. He was not advocating for the status quo, but that the legislature should look carefully. The education of these students is too important to move radically. Charter schools are an exciting alternative. Number 1861 CHAIRMAN BUNDE stated that this bill would be held over for further consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|