Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106
02/20/2009 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview(s): Charter Schools | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 20, 2009
8:03 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Vice Chair
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Robert L. "Bob" Buch
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bryce Edgmon
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW(S): CHARTER SCHOOLS
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to report
WITNESS REGISTER
EDDY JEANS, Director
School Finance and Facilities Section
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the overview on charter schools.
KIKI ABRAHAMSON, President
Alaska Charter School Association; Head Teacher, Fireweed
Academy
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a report on charter schools in
Alaska.
CATHERINE REARDON, Legislative Aide
Alaska State Legislature; Parent
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions and presented
information on charter school funding.
BRENDA TAYLOR, President
Academic Policy Committee (APC)
Juneau Community Charter School (JCCS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the presentation
on charter schools.
MARJORIE HAMBURGER
Juneau Community Charter School
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced a group of students from the
Juneau Community Charter School.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:02:43 AM
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:03 a.m. Representatives Keller, Munoz,
Wilson, Gardner, Buch, and Seaton were present at the call to
order.
8:03:01 AM
^OVERVIEW(S): CHARTER SCHOOLS
CHAIR SEATON announced that the only order of business would be
an overview of charter schools by the Department of Education
and Early Development (EEC).
8:04:03 AM
EDDY JEANS, Director, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Department of Education and Early Development (EED), informed
the committee the department has a link on its website for
information about charter schools. On the website can be found
a directory of charter schools in the state, their regulations,
and a description of the application process. He noted there
are 24 charter schools operating in the state and charter school
legislation allows up to 60 schools.
8:05:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH requested the definition of a charter
school.
MR. JEANS said a charter school is a grassroots movement to
operate a school differently than a traditional public school,
but that still functions as a public school. The focus of the
school may be on an alternative to standard instructional
practices, on Alaska Native culture, or on a Montessori
educational model. According to regulations, a charter school
can limit the number of children served and must develop a
policy to be approved by the local school board and the state.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ added that a charter school operates under
a contract with the local school district.
8:07:13 AM
MR. JEANS, in response to Representative Seaton, explained that
a charter school must teach to all of the state standards and
pupils are required to take standard state assessments; however,
the governance of the school is different because it has a group
that sets academic policy and hires the principal and teachers
under the requirements of the contract with the school district.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON offered her understanding that a charter
school may be organized by a group of parents unhappy with a
traditional public school.
8:08:42 AM
MR. JEANS explained charter school legislation directs that
charter schools will be funded like any other school; however,
when the foundation funding formula was rewritten in 1998,
charter schools were put in a classification with alternative
schools. The reason for this was that charter schools can limit
the number of students and can focus on a specific program. In
addition, the legislation specified that a charter school needed
over 200 students to qualify as a separate site. This
legislation was amended in 2002, and reduced the minimum to 150
students to qualify as a separate site; in fact, there is
proposed legislation that would change the funding mechanism
again for charter schools serving fewer than 150 students. Mr.
Jeans advised there is a substantial loss of funding when a
school population is under 150 students. He opined the proposed
legislation is a "step in the right direction to help charter
schools, so they can plan and know what the funding level is
going to be from year to year."
8:10:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked whether there was hard data that
indicates charter schools have a higher graduation rate and
fewer drop-outs.
MR. JEANS offered to provide that information; however, charter
schools are more often than not elementary schools and do not
serve the secondary population. In further response to
Representative Gardner, he said he would provide the completion
data on charter school students who continue through to
secondary school.
8:11:40 AM
CHAIR SEATON also requested a comparison of charter and
traditional schools that meet adequate yearly progress (AYP).
He stated the committee's intent to look at charter school
success, individually and as a group.
8:12:21 AM
MR. JEANS cautioned the committee that comparing charter schools
and traditional schools can be difficult, as many charter
schools do not have a special needs population, or students with
limited English proficiency. Unless the student populations are
targeted, the comparison could be "apples to oranges."
CHAIR SEATON observed the committee needs some helpful
comparisons.
MR. JEANS acknowledged those questions come up; in fact, the
home school community is often surprised by comparisons with
like students at traditional high schools.
8:13:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON opined parental involvement makes a
difference in school success.
MR. JEANS added that when the factors of ethnicity, poverty
levels, limited English, and special education programs are
excluded, the various programs are comparable.
8:14:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER observed although charter schools may not
typically have students with the aforementioned challenges, the
option is there; in fact, some charter schools specialize in
language immersion.
MR. JEANS acknowledged charter schools are public schools and
they are required to accept the children who come to the
program. He repeated that charter schools can limit the number
of children who attend and that they can target their program.
8:16:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked for a comparison of charter school
laws in Alaska with those of other states, and a comparison of
Alaska charter schools with public schools in other states.
MR. JEANS advised a comparison is possible of Alaska charter
school law to that of other states; however, he questioned the
fairness of comparing "schools to schools in other states." He
said that most of the charter schools in Alaska are very
successful, provide parents with choices, and are supported by
the department.
8:17:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER then requested a description of the
department's staff support for charter schools.
MR. JEANS explained there is one person who is in charge of
supporting all of the schools of choice. That staff member
provides information to prospective charter school groups and
administrative assistance for correspondence schools, home
schools, and other alternative schools as well.
8:18:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked whether the information that the
department will be providing to the committee will include all
of the programs "that are out there, whether they're brick and
mortar or not."
MR. JEANS assured the committee the information will include a
mix of schools.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH observed the committee is trying to
determine funding and "where the money goes, and without
information like what we're requesting here, we really don't
know."
MR. JEANS agreed and said the charter school legislation
requires that funding generated by a charter school will go to
that school, with the exception that the district can charge an
"indirect rate." In some cases, districts and charter schools
negotiate in their contract what services the charter school
pays for.
8:20:21 AM
KIKI ABRAHAMSON, President, Alaska Charter School Association;
Head Teacher, Fireweed Academy, informed the committee public
charter schools are innovative public schools designed by
educators, parents, or civic leaders; are founded and attended
by choice; and are more accountable for their results than are
traditional public schools. Typically a group of parents will
identify the need for a charter school, not necessarily because
they do not like the existing public school, but to address a
certain population or teaching philosophy. She acknowledged the
charter school application process can take one to two years and
quite a bit of effort. Ms. Abrahamson opined charter schools
are one of the fastest and most successful growing reforms in
the country; in fact, the first public charter school was opened
in St. Paul, Minnesota, in 1992, and 16 years later there are
over 4,500 charter schools in 40 states and the District of
Columbia that serve over 1.3 million children.
8:23:28 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON further explained the first charter schools began
in Alaska in 1996 with one in the Matanuska-Susitna area, and
one in Fairbanks, and today there are twenty-four. She
described the grade levels served by charter schools across the
state and also that there are language immersion schools for
Spanish, German, and Alaska Native languages. Most charter
schools are elementary schools and differ, not in the population
served, but in the teaching methods used.
8:25:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked for a description of the different
teaching methods.
MS. ABRAHAMSON explained "a core knowledge school" will use
specific programs focused on academics. A Montessori school is
based on the principles established by Maria Montessori; a
Waldorf school is based on a similar method; and Fireweed
Academy, Tongass School of Arts and Sciences, and Kaleidoscope
Charter School are theme immersion schools based on integrated
curriculum that is focused on reasoning ability, problem
solving, and connections with the community.
8:27:28 AM
CHAIR SEATON noted the purpose for hearing an overview on this
subject is to gain a broad understanding of this aspect of
education.
8:28:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked whether Sand Lake Elementary, that has
a Japanese language immersion program, is a charter school.
MS. ABRAHAMSON indicated that Sand Lake is not a charter school
but an optional program within the school district. In some
cases, magnet programs have been converted to charter schools;
however, in Alaska, unlike the Lower 48, the only "charter
authorizers" are the school districts.
8:30:06 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked for definitions of alternative, magnet, and
charter schools.
MS. ABRAHAMSON clarified her expertise is with charter schools,
and she declined to provide a refined definition. She noted
that the Anchorage School District has many "optional programs,
or magnet schools; ... a magnet school can be a school within a
school." She opined magnet schools want to provide an
alternative program and are established within the parameters of
an already existing public school. A charter school differs in
the process that is followed to establish specific requirements.
For example, some optional schools in Anchorage are on a lottery
system, but all charter schools are required to have a lottery
if they have more applicants than they can accommodate.
8:32:21 AM
CATHERINE REARDON, Legislative Aide, Alaska State Legislature,
and a parent, added the magnet and optional programs are similar
to a charter school in that they are schools of choice; however,
a charter school is managed by a parent-elected board and the
"control of money and funding is different."
8:33:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked which charter schools are also
neighborhood schools in that they are a school of choice, but a
student living in that district "gets in no matter what." In
addition, she asked "are alternative and magnet schools ... the
same thing?"
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER expressed his understanding that a charter
school is defined by law and a magnet school may be dealt with
at the district level.
MS. ABRAHAMSON agreed. The charter school movement began as a
system for educational reform that did not require a voucher
system. She opined the federal government felt a voucher system
took funding away from the public school system in favor of
private schools, thus charter schools were an option for failing
schools that still kept the money in public schools. Ms.
Abrahamson directed the committee's attention to the committee
packet that contained the Alaska Public Charter Schools
Directory 2008-2009.
8:36:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ commented that the impetus for founding the
Juneau Community Charter School was to maintain a public
elementary school presence in the downtown area.
8:37:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER advised there is a Native immersion
school, a school within a school (SEWS), at East High School in
Anchorage.
8:38:13 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON stressed the Charter School Association strives
to correct the public's perception that charter schools are not
public schools. In fact, charter schools are similar to
traditional schools in that the mission for every school is to
provide students with the environment and opportunity to reach
their educational potential. Charter schools are free public
schools and do not require tuition. Admission is via lottery
and they are open to everyone in the district; for example,
Effie Kokrine Charter School is 90 percent Native, but is open
to any student in its district. Charter schools must meet all
of the same assessments and state standards as other public
schools; however, they do not have to follow the same
curriculum. The academic policy committee (APC) that is the
charter school's governing body hires a principal, but teachers
are hired by district procedures and all teachers are bound by
the same system as all public schools throughout the state.
8:41:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether charter schools require
teachers to have extra credentials.
MS. ABRAHAMSON advised some Montessori and Waldorf charter
school teachers have received special training, but it is not
required by law. In further response, she said this training
could happen in a variety of ways. Ms. Abrahamson turned to the
subject of how charter schools differ from traditional public
schools by offering choice, not only for families and students,
but also for teachers. Teachers may choose to work in a charter
school because they have an interest in the model, or the
methods being taught, or a passion for the population served by
the school. In other parts of the nation sponsors such as
museums, universities, and other organizations, have founded
charter schools to provide a choice for the community.
8:44:49 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON continued to explain the role accountability
plays for charter schools. She reported only three schools have
closed in the twelve years since the first charter school opened
in Alaska. A charter may be revoked if the school does not meet
or exceed district and state academic standards, if it is not
fiscally responsible, or if it breaks rules, laws, or
regulations. A charter school can apply for a waiver from the
state to alter its calendar, its schedule, and to deviate from
the district curriculum. She noted another common question is
how to monitor charter schools and suggested one way is through
the renewal of the charter, at which point the school must
reapply and provide the district with data to prove that the
program has demonstrated great achievement. She pointed out
many schools in Alaska are not meeting their AYP goal; however,
a charter school is held to a higher standard and if it is not
successful, it must close.
8:48:13 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON then addressed the topic of freedom: Each
charter school has the ability to control the curricula; to use
assessments beyond those required by the district and state; and
to use alternate reporting systems. In addition, the culture of
a charter school may be "freer" and rely on parental involvement
for programs.
8:49:46 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked whether charter schools can require parental
involvement.
MS. ABRAHAMSON affirmed some charter schools strongly request
parent volunteers; in fact, some charters have been written to
include that parental involvement is required - this may be
legal because parents have the choice to not place their
children in the school.
8:51:16 AM
MS. REARDON offered her survey of the existing charter schools
on this topic. She related three schools did not respond and
three schools ask parents to volunteer for a specific number of
hours. However, in only one school is it a requirement. At the
Juneau Community Charter School, 15 hours of volunteer time per
quarter is requested, but it is not mandatory.
8:52:57 AM
BRENDA TAYLOR, President, Academic Policy Committee, Juneau
Community Charter School, clarified parental involvement is
sometimes interpreted as classroom time or janitorial work, but
the fundamental goal is to get parents more deeply involved in
their children's education. Charter schools make a great deal
of effort to communicate with parents and to encourage all ways
to be involved in the education process.
8:54:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON suggested charter schools share their
successful methods of encouraging parental involvement with
traditional schools.
MS. TAYLOR said she was unsure whether there was a formal
structure for sharing information. Although it is improving,
the relationship between districts and charter schools has been
of a competitive nature, rather than a cooperative nature, due
to the competition for funding.
8:55:38 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON returned to the subject of procedural waivers and
the allocation of resources available to charter schools. A
major point of conflict with traditional schools was the pupil
teacher ratio (PTR). A charter school may have a lower PTR than
the neighborhood school because it is able to allocate its
resources for students and staffing with greater flexibility.
As a matter of fact, a charter school may be able to keep a
lower PTR by requiring its teachers to act as specialty
teachers, as well as classroom teachers. A classroom teacher
may also act as an administrator or teach physical education,
art, music, or language. She stated the state funding formula
puts a total amount of money in "the central office pot and then
they allocate that out to the schools, whereas the funding for a
charter school goes into that school, then it's up to that
school to decide how the money is going to be spent."
8:59:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked whether that situation creates an
incentive for a charter school to hire teachers who are lower on
the pay scale. Furthermore, what is the effect of a teacher who
stays on for ten years.
MS. ABRAHAMSON affirmed the current statute forces charter
schools to increase their PTR or close when their charters are
due to be renewed. In response to Representative Gardner, she
said the PTR ratio at her school went from 14 [students to one
teacher] to 19 students. A further complication was that the
APC can not hire someone based on the applicant's pay scale.
9:01:50 AM
MS. REARDON noted that the PTR at most of the elementary charter
schools is 22:1, which is the same as the "target" for the
Juneau School District. She opined this is the fiscal reality
of operating any school.
9:02:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON pointed out that a small school in the
Bush with ten students could close if that count were reduced by
one.
MS. TAYLOR reminded the committee charter schools fewer than 150
students are funded at .84 percent of the average daily
membership (ADM), as opposed to neighborhood schools that are
funded at 120 percent of ADM.
9:04:50 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON said the last freedom that charter schools have
is that they are governed by an APC. Frequently, there is a
liaison between a charter school and the district, but the APC
can act as the administration of a charter school and set the
policy on curriculum, schedules, and hiring.
9:06:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked whether parents serve on the APC.
MS. ABRAHAMSON said the APC at her school was made up of
parents, staff, and a community member.
9:06:40 AM
CHAIR SEATON recognized the witnesses online as well as the
charter school students in the gallery; Abigail Taylor-Roth,
Elia Krumm, Robert Newman, Kolson, and Gabe Cohen.
9:07:24 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON concluded the last difference between traditional
and charter schools is access to resources, despite the fact
that a charter school follows all of the federal, state, and
district laws and regulations, and is required to meet or exceed
district standards. Public charter schools have no [free]
access to facilities and typically pay costs for utilities,
maintenance, and operation. In addition, charter schools do not
receive state funding equal to traditional public schools and,
at the district level, frequently are not given funds from the
local contribution to schools. In some cases, school districts
provide a facility, or a shared facility, but that is not the
norm. She described some of the facilities in use around the
state.
9:10:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER surmised responding to a request for
proposal (RFP) from a charter school that must apply for renewal
every five years, is risky.
MS. ABRAHAMSON confirmed being in business with a charter school
is a huge risk.
9:10:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether charter schools are allowed
to use facilities such as a gym or a music room.
MS. ABRAHAMSON explained some charter schools have a memorandum
of agreement (MOA) with the school district that allows access
to shared facilities, staff, busing, or lunch program
arrangements.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON pondered how to expand on that practice.
MS. ABRAHAMSON opined the legislature could consider changing
the statute to allow charter schools access to existing public
facilities.
9:13:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER ascertained in order for a charter school
to thrive it must be on a good basis with the local school board
and school superintendent.
MS. ABRAHAMSON agreed; however, any partnership has contentious
issues. Academic achievement and sustainable growth is
dependant upon embracing education as a common goal for every
student in a school district.
9:15:00 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON, taking direction from the chair, returned to
complete her initial presentation. She cautioned that the data
she was providing was very difficult to interpret and was based
on diverse and small samples. She said in Alaska in 2007 and
2008, 21 charter schools represented 4 percent of the total of
506 schools in the state. In 2007, 170 schools did not meet AYP
and 3 of those, or 1.7 percent, were charter schools. In 2008,
207 schools did not meet AYP and 9 of those were charter
schools. An important point, she stated, is, given the fact
that charter schools are underfunded and do not have equal
access to facilities, that most do meet AYP. Additionally, some
of the charter schools that did not meet AYP were focused on at-
risk students and home-school programs. In fact, home-school
programs accept students at any time during the school year.
Ms. Abrahamson then presented statistics for the Alaska State
Performance Incentive Program (AKSPIP) that was designed to
provide incentives for schools that showed improvement in
individual students' growth. In 2007, 42 schools were awarded
incentive grants for levels of outstanding, excellent, strong,
and high, and 6 of those, or 14.3 percent, were charter schools.
In 2008, 32 schools were awarded grants and 3 of those, or 9.4
percent, were charter schools. Furthermore, nine schools
received AKSPIP grants both years, and two were charter schools.
She again expressed caution when interpreting this data as one
of the schools receiving AKSPIP grants, for both years, had
eleven students.
9:22:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked whether it could be said that the
AKSPIP grants are not effective in changing behavior because
they are not based on an even playing field.
MS. ABRAHAMSON opined that this program is not a good idea due
to the number of factors involved. Furthermore, the funds could
be more "direct to the student."
CHAIR SEATON stated funding for the third year of the AKSPIP
program was not included in the governor's budget.
9:24:27 AM
MS. REARDON provided the funding overview and directed attention
to the committee packet and a graph titled, "Adjusted Student
Count for Charter Schools vs. Neighborhood Schools." She
explained that the graph deals with the aspect of the foundation
formula called the "adjusted student count." One step in the
foundation formula, that adjusts the average daily membership
(ADM) according to the size of the school, puts charter schools
at a disadvantage. After the ADM, or school enrollment, is
adjusted, this is the figure on which the remainder of the
formula is based. Thus, charter schools are treated differently
than a neighborhood school, and this adjustment has a huge
impact on the finances of charter schools.
9:26:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked for a definition of neighborhood
schools.
MS. REARDON said a school run directly by the district is a
neighborhood school. Referring back to the graph, she said
charter schools are treated identically through the foundation
formula if they have 150 students or more. However, when
student enrollment falls to 149 students, charter schools lose
about 45 percent of state funds. She opined that this level of
funding is "unsustainable." The reason for this treatment is
that a smaller school is not regarded as a separate facility,
but as a part of the largest school in its district.
9:29:02 AM
MARJORIE HAMBURGER, Juneau Community Charter School, informed
the committee that some students from the Juneau Community
Charter School chose to come and hear the overview. The
committee took a moment to recognize the participants in the
gallery.
9:30:15 AM
MS. REARDON further explained when enrollment at a charter
school falls below 150, the host school district loses between
$500,000 and $750,000. In the case of a one year drop in
enrollment, this loss can be devastating to the school and the
district. For a charter school that is always below 150
students, the funding level is so much lower than neighborhood
schools it can not survive.
9:32:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON expressed her understanding of the effect
of enrollment on the foundation formula because of what has
occurred in the public schools in her district.
9:33:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked whether the issue of charter school
funding was addressed by the task force [on education.]
CHAIR SEATON affirmed that it was considered, and several issues
are involved. The task force recognized that "the right fix" is
needed and left this issue to the committee.
MS. ABRAHAMSON, in response to Representative Buch, said the ADM
is determined over four weeks.
9:35:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked for the difference between the ADM and
the adjusted student count (ASC).
MS. REARDON explained the ADM is the average number of students
attending a school during the first four weeks of October. The
adjusted student count is the increase or decrease in the ADM
that the state makes based on the size of the school. The law
requires the adjustment to acknowledge the economy of scale; it
is less costly to educate a child in a larger school than in a
smaller one. The smaller the school, the higher is the per-
student adjustment. She directed attention to the handout
titled, The Role of the "Adjusted Student Count" in School
Funding that indicated for a school with between 10 and 20
students, the adjusted student count is 39.6; therefore the
state base student allocation is 39 students. Furthermore, if
there are 75 kids in a neighborhood school, the school will get
credit for 122 students; a neighborhood school with 440 students
will get credit for 471 students. She emphasized that the state
does not expect a school to function based on the actual number
of kids, but increases the enrollment number before it is
multiplied by the other factors. Thus, a charter school with
fewer than 150 students is "lumped in" with the largest school
in the district and receives .84 percent credit for each
student. The source of the .84 percent credit is from the
"additional children" to the largest school. Therefore, when a
charter school reduces enrollment from 150 to 149 credit for
each child is reduced from a multiplier of 1.45 percent to .84
percent.
9:42:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER recalled the maximum number of charter
schools allowed in the state is 60 and questioned whether
funding problems are the reason that only 24 exist.
MS. REARDON agreed funding plays a significant role. A charter
school presents a risk to a school district if enrollment is not
met. Also, this restriction does not allow addressing the
specific needs of a smaller population of students in a medium
sized community.
9:44:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER opined the district has the option of
"filling the gap" and if there is an alternative school for a
specific population of 75 students, this restriction is on the
charter school, but not on other alternative schools.
MS. REARDON agreed districts have various options for counting
and formulating alternative programs, but a charter school is a
separate entity.
9:45:45 AM
MS. TAYLOR added that alternative schools have a threshold of
200 students. Furthermore, even a small alternative program is
formulated within a larger school and will retain the full
credit for each student.
9:46:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ observed local property taxes and direct
grants from the state support school facilities. She asked for
the amount the Juneau Community Charter School (JCCS) pays for
its facility.
9:47:22 AM
MS. REARDON said JCCS pays about $60,000 a year for three
classrooms. She estimated that some charter schools across the
state pay much more. State funds can be subsidized by the local
school district, but the state is funding less money for
[charter school] students. She emphasized that the core of the
problem is equity and it is hard for parents to understand why
charter school students, who may be schooled in the same
building, bring lesser amounts of money to the district.
9:49:21 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON offered additional examples of facility costs to
charter schools. In some cases, the charter school only pays
utilities, maintenance, insurance, and liability.
9:50:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked whether there was a rationale for
this legislation.
MS. ABRAHAMSON stated that her understanding is that when the
legislation was crafted in 1995, there was concern over whether
districts would divide larger schools into smaller charter
schools. Also, there was an effort to make charter schools more
cost efficient.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER anecdotally reported on his understanding
of the evolution of this aspect of the formula.
9:53:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how many charter schools are in
school buildings and how many are paying rent. In addition, she
noted the various funding percentages for different charter
schools.
CHAIR SEATON clarified the different funding rates and stated
his intention for the committee's policy decision to establish
equity.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON observed there are school funding
inequities between regions.
CHAIR SEATON explained how the formula is applied to school size
within each district, thus regional issues of rural versus urban
are not applicable.
MS. TAYLOR further clarified school populations in the Railbelt
are increasing; in fact, the Anchorage School District will not
approve a charter school with an enrollment of fewer than 150,
but in Juneau it is just the opposite.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out some teaching methods may require a
lower school population and existing legislation may interfere
with that.
9:58:20 AM
MS. ABRAHAMSON stated there are eight districts in the state
that have charter schools. To her knowledge, eight charter
schools are housed in district buildings. She concluded her
presentation with an example of shared space in district
buildings and then thanked the committee for its consideration
of this topic.
9:59:20 AM
CHAIR SEATON reviewed the agenda for the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:02 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 2009_Charter_School_Directory.pdf |
HEDC 2/20/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Charter School EED web-page.doc |
HEDC 2/20/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Charter School Statutes.doc |
HEDC 2/20/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| charter school funding statutes.doc |
HEDC 2/20/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Copy of charter per-student rate comparison.xls |
HEDC 2/20/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| school size factor calculation examples.doc |
HEDC 2/20/2009 8:00:00 AM |