Daily postings
from the Keystone State Education Coalition now reach more than 1500
Pennsylvania education policymakers – school directors, administrators,
legislators, members of the press and a broad array of education advocacy
organizations via emails, website, Facebook and Twitter.
These daily
emails are archived at http://keystonestateeducationcoalition.org
Follow us
on Twitter at @lfeinberg
Education Policy and Leadership Center
Education Notebook – Special Edition – FY 2012-13 State Budget – Monday, July 2, 2012
Inky
Editorial: Pa.
must revisit funding of charters
Inquirer Editorial Posted: Mon,
Jul. 2, 2012 ,
3:00 AM
A new report on the expense of
charter and cyber schools provides more proof that Pennsylvania needs to change its flawed
formula to fund them.
In doing so, State Auditor General
Jack Wagner believes taxpayers could save at least $365 million annually if
lawmakers revise the outdated 1997 charter school law, fix a funding inequity,
and provide more oversight to prevent mismanagement.
Only two cyber charters meet the
state's academic standards, yet four new cybers have been approved for the
fall.
Eliminate
the pension double-dip reimbursement that taxpayers pay to charter schools
PASBO/PARSS/PSBA/PLUS/PASA June 15th
Letter to Secretary Tomalis
PA
Charter Schools: $4 Billion Taxpayer Dollars With No Real Oversight
BY THE NUMBERS: Measure the Performance of PA Charter and
Cyber Charter Schools
SB1115 was a special education
bill that was on track for passage that was essentially hijacked late in the
state budget process as a vehicle for charter school reform. The bill passed the House by a vote of
120-77. The Senate did not consider the
amended version of SB1115, so charter school reform will have to wait until the
fall.
Governor’s
proposed Charter School Entities Funding Advisory Committee: we could save a
lot of time and effort if we just let Mr.
Gureghian and K12’s
CEO Ron Packard set the charter funding formula….
Here is the
section of SB1115 as amended defining the composition, powers and duties of the
Governor’s proposed Charter School Entities Funding Advisory Committee. Take a good look at the composition of the
committee. Of the 17 members, most are either political appointees or charter
school representatives. Only 3 represent
the school districts and taxpayers responsible for paying the bills. Did the 120 House members who voted for this
read this bill?
(1) The Governor shall convene a Statewide
advisory committee, to be known as the Charter School Entities Funding Advisory
Committee, to examine the financing of charter school entities in the public
education system. The committee shall examine how charter school entity finances
affect opportunities for teachers, parents, pupils and community members to
establish and maintain schools that operate independently from the existing
school district structure as a method to accomplish the requirements of section
1702-A. The Office of the Budget and the department shall provide
administrative support, meeting space and any other assistance required by the
committee to carry out its duties under this section.
(2) The committee shall consist of the following
members:
(i) One member of the Senate appointed by the
President pro tempore of the Senate.
(ii) One member of the Senate appointed by the
Majority Leader of the Senate.
(iii) One member of the Senate appointed by the
Minority Leader of the Senate.
(iv) One member of the House of Representatives
appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
(v) One member of the House of Representatives
appointed by the Majority Leader of the House of Representative.
(vi) One member of the minority party of the House
of Representatives appointed by the Minority Leader of the House of
Representatives.
(vii) The secretary or a designee.
(viii) The chairman of the State board or a
designee.
(ix) The following members who shall be appointed
by the Governor:
(A) One member who shall represent charter
schools.
(B) One member who shall represent regional
charter schools.
(C) One member who shall represent cyber charter
schools.
(D) One member who shall represent teachers, who
may be a public school teacher, a charter school teacher, a regional charter
school teacher, a cyber charter school teacher or a nonpublic school teacher.
(E) One member who shall represent school
administrators.
(F) One member who shall represent school board
members.
(G) One member who shall represent a business manager
of a school district .
(H) One member who shall represent a parent of a
child attending a charter school entity.
(I) One member who shall represent an institution
of higher education with experience in operating a charter school entity.
(3) Members of the committee shall be appointed
within twenty (20) days of the effective date of this section. Any vacancy on
the committee shall be filled by the original appointing officer or agency. The
committee shall select a chairman and vice chairman from among its membership
at an organizational meeting. The organizational meeting must take place no
later than thirty (30) days following the effective date of this section.
(4) The committee shall hold meetings at the call
of the chairman. The committee may hold public hearings on the matters to be
considered by the committee at locations throughout this Commonwealth. All
meetings and public hearings of the committee shall be deemed public meetings
for the purpose of 65 Pa.C.S. Ch.
7 (relating to open meetings). Nine members of the committee shall constitute a
quorum at any meeting. Each member of the committee may designate another
person to represent that member at meetings of the committee.
(5) Committee members shall receive no
compensation for their services but shall be reimbursed for all necessary
travel and other reasonable expenses incurred in connection with the
performance of their duties as members. Whenever possible, the committee shall
utilize the services and expertise of existing personnel and staff of State
government. The department may utilize undistributed funds not expended,
encumbered or committed from appropriations for grants and subsidies made to
the department, not to exceed $300,000, to carry out this section.
(6) The committee shall have the following powers
and duties:
(i) Meet with current charter
school entity operators
within this Commonwealth, including cyber charter schools with blended
programs.
(ii) Review charter school entity financing laws
in operation throughout the United States.
(iii) Evaluate and make recommendations on the
following:
(A) Powers and duties extended to charter school
entities as they relate to financing.
(B) Funding formulas for charter school entities,
including reimbursement procedures and funding under Title I of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-10, 20 U.S.C. Ch. 63 et
seq.).
(C) The process by which charter schools entities
are funded under section 1725-A.
(D) Student residency as it relates to funding.
(E) Special education and other special program
funding.
(F) Charter
school entity
transportation.
(G) Charter
school entity eligibility
to receive grants and funding.
(H) Appropriate assessment fees on charter school
entities.
(I) Consideration of recognizing charter school
entities for additional designations as a local education agency.
(iv) The committee shall, no later than November 30, 2012 ,
issue a report of its findings and recommendations to the Governor, the
President pro tempore of the Senate, the Minority Leader of the Senate, the
chairman and minority chairman of the Education Committee of the Senate, the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Minority Leader of the House of
Representatives and the chairman and minority chairman of the Education
Committee of the House of Representatives.
Corbett Shows Strong
Commitment to Conservative Education Reform
A Capitolwire Column By Peter L. DeCoursey Bureau Chief
Posted on the PA School Funding Campaign website
Posted on the PA School Funding Campaign website
HARRISBURG (June 22) – After years
of questions about how much Gov. Tom Corbett really cares about the
conservative education reforms he espouses, he just gave a clear answer in the
budget framework: education reform comes right at the top.
It even comes ahead of the reigning
goals that have dominated the governor’s tenure: spending less money and
fattening the state revenue surplus.
Even EITC vouchers, which are pretty
clearly the governor’s third priority in education reform, rank higher than his
spring-long obsession with ending the year with a $500 million revenue balance.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.