Tag Archives: Jay Shaw

“No other state has had a positive outcome for a charter-positive ballot initiative” —former T-SPLOST proponents now pushing charter schools

The same people who pushed the failed T-SPLOST tax referendum on the July primary ballot are now pushing the charter school referendum on the November general election ballot. Four of their leaders are the same specific individuals, including one from right here in Lowndes County. They’re pushing something they admit has failed in every other state. Let’s not be the first to fall for it.

According to the Georgia Charter Schools Association (GCSA),

No other state has had a positive outcome for a charter-positive ballot initiative

So even one of the major proponents of charter schools admits no other state’s voters have thought they were a good idea. Their slides lay out a pair of statewide major money campaigns to push the referendum anyway.

We know about this because these slides fell into the hands of the AJC, and Jim Galloway published them today, saying:

Continue reading →

Charter school bait and switch

Proponents of the state-forced charter school constitutional amendment Mr. Moneybags on the November ballot have a website that is full of bait and switch. Most of it is about what they claim are the benefits of charter schools. But that’s not what the referendum is about. Local school boards can already authorize charter schools, and many of them have. The referendum would change the Georgia Constitution to authorize an appointed state board to force charter schools on local elected school boards that don’t want them, granting more money per student than in public schools, with the difference to be made up from local property and sales taxes. The most substantive thing I have found on the proponents’ website says that last is not so, but unconvincingly.

Tony Roberts, President of Georgia Charter Schools Association wrote to All Charter School Leaders and Board Members 7 August 2012, Response to Letter from Herb Garrett of Georgia Superintendents Association,

Tony Roberts One final, but important point, local school superintendents and board members were adamantly against any local dollars going to charter schools that were denied by a local school board. The final version of HB 797 was negotiated to ensure that was the case — the language is written right there into the law. So, to recap, they insist on no local money going to state-approved charters, and then get upset about the state money going to charters.

Curiously, he doesn’t cite that purported language. The closest thing I can find in HB 797 is a paragraph I already quoted:

Continue reading →

Public schools to be treated less favorably than state-dictated charter schools?

Do you want to pay more local taxes for state-dictated and state-run charter schools? Ellis Black (R-174) In HB 797, one of the state laws we’re being asked to ratify with the charter school referendum on the ballot in November, in addition to the magic accounting rules that would grant charter schools much more money per student than public schools, it would create a state-wide charter school board that will take away all oversight from the local school board for any charter schools the state imposes on any locality. Yet it does not provide additional state funding for the extra money per student for charter schools, and it does explicitly address assessed valuation of local taxes.

The state takes all control over local chartered schools from the local school board in section 2A(7), last paragraph:

Amy Carter (R-175) The local board shall not be responsible for the fiscal management, accounting, or oversight of the state chartered special school.

Yet the state provides no additional funding for the additional money per student for charter schools:

Jason Shaw (R-176) 2A(5) No deduction shall be made to any state funding which a local school system is otherwise authorized to receive pursuant to this chapter as a direct result or consequence of the enrollment in a state charter school of a specific student or students who reside in the geographical area of the local school system.

(6) Funding for state chartered special schools pursuant to this subsection shall be subject to appropriations by the General Assembly and such schools shall be treated consistently with all other public schools in this state, pursuant to the respective statutory funding formulas and grants.

The bill also inserts each of those paragraphs again elsewhere, in case the point wasn’t clear enough.

So where is the extra money to come from? Here’s a hint:

Continue reading →