Financial conflicts over charter schools

The value that seems to be the primary issue with charter school funding is equity. Both charter schools and public schools across the nation claim that the other has an unfair advantage in funding. It is interesting to see that in different areas of the country, one group or the other seems to claim unfairness. For example, in Los Angeles protesters claim that charter schools do not get enough funding to purchase facilities to have their schools. This article related to this area can be found at http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/06/local/me-charter6. Examples of public schools claiming funding inequity can be found as well. In Georgia Gwinnett Schools are suing over charter school funding. Gwinnett recently lost $850,000 in local funding to a charter school. Gwinnett argues that it is not fair to use local money to pay for charters. They may have a strong case because in many states only state or federal money is used to fund charter schools. The link to the article about this case is http://www.ajc.com/news/gwinnett/gwinnett-schools-suing-over-136047.html. Another case in which public schools are suing over the use of local funds to pay for charters is taking place in Louisiana. A description of this case can be found at http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/65960542.html?showAll=y&c=y. It seems in this equity debate that in general, supporters of charter schools argue that they do not get enough funding for facilities while public schools say it is unfair for charters to get funds raised by local taxes.
Another interesting document I found on the Internet was a description of how charter schools in California should go about getting funding for their facilities. It is called Charter School Finance 101 and can be found at http://www.frbsf.org/publications/community/investments/0405/article4.html. Funding for facilities is an issue of quality for charter schools. In many cases they use closed public schools or businesses as their school buildings so there are a lot of expensive maintenance issues. In some cases they cannot afford to purchase or rent a building. I am not sure where I stand on this issue of funding facilities expenses for charter schools. Some states increase the per pupil allotment for charter school students above that of public school students to help pay for the costs of facilities. Is it this additional funding enough or too much? I will decide after I do more research.
President Obama is a proponent of charter schools so he has proposed an increase in funding for charter schools in the FY 2010 Education Budget. Obama supports charter schools because he believes they give students a choice in their education especially when they live in an area where the school is underperforming. Details about his budget proposal for charter school funding can be found at http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS292454+26-Feb-2009+PRN20090226.

charter school funding of buildings

One issue that stands out about charter school funding is that facilities assistance is not given to charter schools. Charter schools are not allotted funds specifically for facility purchase, lease, or maintenance. They have to use money from their per pupil allotment to pay these costs. In traditional schools per pupil allotments are used for instructional purposes and the schools use bond issues and tax revenue from the capital projects fund to pay for their physical plant. Charter schools legally do not have this means to raise funds for their buildings. A report from the Center for Education Reform at http://www.edreform.com/_upload/CER-CSFundingGap2005.pdf details this gap in charter school funding.
This limit on charter school funding raises issues of equity and quality. If charter schools are not given the means to raise funds for their physical plant that traditional public schools are, they are at a disadvantage in providing and maintaining buildings for their students. The Supreme Court has ruled that charters are public schools so they should have a legal means to raise capital funs just like traditional schools. This funding issue also is an issue of quality. If charter schools cannot afford to maintain their buildings or renovate the old buildings that they can afford to purchase to use as schools, they can be unsafe for children to attend. This funding gap has not gone unnoticed. In North Carolina a lawsuit is being filed on behalf of 7 charter schools arguing that the charter schools be able to request construction funding. Details of the case can be found at http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090921/POLITICS/90921035.
In some areas of the country such as the District of Columbia, public schools claim that charters have unfair funding advantage. This viewpoint can be found at http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:Y8wBHBQ078IJ:www.saveourschoolsdc.org/pdf/ChartersSchools_vs_PublicSchools.pdf+charter+schools+vs+public+schools&hl=en&sig=AFQjCNGFWWOY-zLjHvCsOGF2S_hqwjhHSg. According to this comparison by Save Our Schools DC, charter schools get the same per pupil funding agreement that the DC public schools get and a per capita facilities allowance of nearly $2400 per student that is not determined by physical plant expenses resulting in a windfall. It will be interesting to sort out all of this out as I do my research. I have a feeling the DC charter schools get additional funding because they are so close the Washington, DC political machine.

charter schools

After doing some preliminary research on the use of property taxes to fund public schools I found this is a very compelling issue not only in Indiana but around the country. However, I did not feel there was enough accessible material out there to write a term paper on the subject. I have decided to switch the topic of my term paper to charter schools. If there is enough material, I would like to narrow my focus to the funding of charter schools since school finance is my area of interest.
Charter schools naturally deal with choice. It gives children who attend underperforming schools the option of attending a publicly funded charter school which may have a different approach to teaching. Proponents argue that by providing choice charter schools will make all schools better because they create competition between public schools and charter schools.
Charter schools pose an issue of quality. Does the performance of children at charter schools warrant the use of public funds to finance them? A report by Caroline Hoxby on New York City charter schools suggests they do. This report can be found at http://www.nber.org/~schools/charterschoolseval/how_NYC_charter_schools_affect_achievement_sept2009.pdf.
If charter schools are improving the education of some children, then a question of equity comes into play. Charter schools argue that they are not receiving the same level of funding as public schools (about 21% less nation wide) and they deserve equal funding since they are also a public entity. There are two good reports on this issue of funding equity that can be found at http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n34.html and http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/Charter%20School%20Funding%202005%20FINAL.pdf. The second report is 153 pages so it needs to be perused to decide what is useful in it.
Using public funds to pay for charter schools also brings forward an issue of efficiency. Public school superintendents argue that charter schools are draining their corporations’ funds in a way that limits their capability to be competitive especially in urban districts where there is a large concentration of charter schools. There are several articles in the Indianapolis Star in which Indianapolis School Superintendent Eugene White express this concern. Overall, charter schools present a broad array of issues in which funding seems to be a prevalent one. I hope to write my paper on charter schools with a focus on funding.

school funding issue

Changes in school funding have been made to lower people’s property taxes. These changes are creating hardships for school districts in Indiana and across the nation. Last year, Indiana changed from funding the General Fund (the fund used to pay teachers and run schools) with property taxes to funding it with sales tax, income tax, and lottery revenue. These taxes are more unstable than property taxes and are not creating enough revenue for schools in the current economic downturn. As a result, schools are cutting programs and hiring fewer teachers. Schools are resorting to holding referendums to pass bond issues that will be used to pay for staff. Many of these bond issues hold the risk of not passing and they are not a permanent solution to the lack revenues from unstable taxes. While there is great fallout from not funding schools with property taxes, the conflict of this issue is between the property tax payers and the state. Property tax payers do not want to foot the bill for schools through their property taxes. In Indiana, the state has given in to property tax payers and funded schools through other taxes. Schools will suffer as long as states do not use historically stable property taxes for funding education, instead giving property tax payers relief.
A link to a report which discusses the impact of not using local taxes to fund schools in Indiana is http://ceep.indiana.edu/projects/PDF/PB_V7N2_Summer_2009_EPB.pdf.
An article that discusses the issue and conflict created by using property taxes to fund schools in Texas is http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/MYSA062906_01A_school_property_tax_17029ae_html25827.html.
A link to a blog that discusses the issue of older people not liking to have to pay property taxes to support the younger generation’s schools is http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=07&year=2008&base_name=why_local_property_taxes_shoul.