Many public school authorities hate charter schools. It's not hard to
see why.
Charter schools embarrass local public schools because they often do
a better job educating children, for less money. For example, in the
1999-2000 school year, Ohio charter schools got $2300 less per pupil
in tax funds than local public schools. Charter schools therefore
spotlight regular public schools' failure to educate students with
more tax money at their disposal.
Charter schools also take money away from public schools. Every child
that transfers to a charter school makes the child's former public
school lose an average of $7500 a year in tax money. This tax money
is the life-blood of public schools. It is the source of their power,
of their very existence.
Finally, public-school authorities like their monopoly power over our
children's education. Charter schools are free from much of the
regulations and controls that regular public schools have to put up
with. Charter schools therefore threaten the public school monopoly
because they introduce a little competition into the system.
So what do angry or frightened local school districts do in response?
School authorities often harass charter schools by reducing their
funding, denying them access to school equipment or facilities,
putting new restrictions on existing charter schools, limiting the
number of new schools, or weakening charter-school laws.
They harass charter schools in other ways. For example, they create
convoluted application procedures or don't give new-school applicants
enough time to process their applications. They also use city
agencies, zoning boards, or fire departments to harass the schools
with regulations. For example, the Washington DC school district
harassed a local charter school with an asbestos removal issue that
forced the school to spend over $10 million in renovation costs.
Local school districts have an arsenal of regulatory guns with which
to harass charter schools, or reduce their numbers.
Teacher unions initially opposed charter schools. However, when
charter schools became popular, the unions changed tactics. They now
grudgingly give approval to charter schools, on certain conditions.
They often push for district control over the schools, collective
bargaining for charter-school teachers, or other restrictions.
Some teacher unions have renewed their open opposition to these
schools with their usual lawsuits. The Ohio Federation of Teachers
filed a lawsuit that seeks to declare Ohio's charter school laws
unconstitutional. Ohio's charter schools have been dragged into this
lawsuit, thereby forcing them to waste valuable time, money, and
resources on legal battles. Teacher unions use such lawsuits to try
to stop or slow down the charter school movement. Also, Washington
State, and some other states, still have no charter school laws
partly because of strong opposition by teacher unions and other
interest groups who oppose charter schools.
As a result of this harassment by state education bureaucrats, local
school districts, and teacher unions, there are not nearly enough
charter schools to fill the demand. There is a constant waiting list
for these schools, especially in low-income minority neighborhoods.
In the 2001-02 school year, the average charter school enrolled about
242 students. About 69 percent of these schools had waiting lists
averaging 166 students per school, or over half the school
enrollment.
The over 750,000 students currently enrolled in charter schools may
seem like a lot, but that number represents little more than 1.7
percent of the approximately forty-five million children who attend
public school each year. Yet charter schools have now been around for
over ten years.
As with vouchers, how long will it take, if ever, for charter schools
to come to your neighborhood? Fifty years? Parents should consider if
they want to wait around this long while their children suffer
through twelve years of public school.