Charter operators are grasping at funding straws. They now want access to public school referendum tax dollars. But charters do not provide the same transparency of budget, expenditures, or governance and decision-making that public schools do. Before local property taxes go to charters, we should know how much their teachers are being paid and if they are getting insurance and benefits. We should know what is being spent in the classroom versus what is being spent on administrative costs. And we should know that we have a democratic voice in their governance—we should be able to elect their board members. In other words, to receive local property taxes, they should look and act a lot more like public schools than they do now.
Charters are not the only underfunded schools in Indiana. In the months leading up to May and November—election season in Indiana—parents, teachers, and community leaders meet, strategize, and hammer out the logistics of campaigns. They donate time and money, make calls and knock on doors, because they want their local school districts to be able to continue to offer theater and music, world languages, p.e., and art. They want reasonable class sizes. And they want to retain teachers, coaches, janitors, and bus drivers. They can’t depend on the state of Indiana to provide what’s needed. Their unpaid volunteer labor is required just to get a question on the ballot, and to make a case for why voters should say “yes.” Indiana is a referendum state, and has been for over a decade. What we call a “referendum” is known in other parts of the country as a “school tax levy”—a self-imposed additional property tax taken on by local voters to augment state funding for public schools. Usually this is for construction efforts, like building an addition or replacing windows. But in Indiana, it is also for day-to-day operations, like paying a classroom teacher. For example, the operational school tax levy, or referendum, for Monroe County Community School Corporation pays for 80 classroom teachers. What brought Indiana public schools to such dire straits? Then-governor Mitch Daniels centralized the bulk of school funding and then cut the state school budget by $300 million in 2009. Indiana has underfunded its schools every year since. Not only has school funding not kept up with inflation, but lawmakers have channeled billions in public funds into private schools (through the school choice voucher program) and charter schools, which are called public schools in statute but are privately managed and appoint their own boards. Simply to maintain adequate levels of staffing and programs for students, school districts must pass referenda. In this way, referenda are an instrument of disparity: districts that have the capacity—in terms of a tax base, volunteers, and businesses and individuals willing to pitch in to pay for a campaign—can pass a referendum and maintain the quality of their schools. School districts that don’t are forced to make painful cuts, losing teachers and programs. Now, with House Bill 1072, which passed out of committee Thursday, Jan 20, 2022, legislators want to force school districts to share those desperately needed referendum funds with charter schools attended by children living in the school district boundaries. The state’s Legislative Services Agency calculated what the cost of this would be in the fiscal note attached to the bill: “In 2021, there were a combined 67 school operating or safety referenda levies. If school corporations were required to distribute a portion of their levies to nonvirtual charter schools, charter schools would have received an estimated $24.8 M of the $402.8 M certified referenda levies.” In other words, had the proposed law been in place in 2021, 6% of the money generated by school referenda would have gone to charter schools. This is offensive on multiple levels. To state it baldly: Charter schools do not share the basic mission of serving all students in a community. They do not welcome and make room for every child. They do not answer to communities through elected boards. They should not be funded at the expense of the schools that do. Here are seven reasons that lawmakers should reject House Bill 1072:
House Bill 1072 now goes to the full House for consideration. Contact your legislator and tell them to vote NO. Let sharing referendum funds be a local decision as it involves local tax dollars. P.S. Want to get more specific about who to contact? Back in the dark ages…oh actually, back in 2020, it was controversial to even imagine giving school districts the option to share referendum proceeds with charters. An addendum to a bill that was sneaked in at the last moment said that districts *could* share referendum proceeds with charters. That addendum barely made it through. These senators voted against the amendment. Ask them to vote NO again. Sen Alting (R) Sen Becker (R) Sen Bohacek (R) Sen Boots (R) Sen Breaux (D) Sen Buchanan (R) Sen Crider (R) Seon Donato (R) Sen JD Ford (D) Sen Freeman (R) Sen Glick (R) Sen Grooms (R) (retired, replaced by Kevin Boehnlein) Sen Koch (R) Sen Lanane (D) Sen Melton (D) Sen Mrvan (D) Sen Neimeyer (R) Sen Niezgodski (D) Sen Randolph (D) Sen Ruckelshaus (R) (replaced by Fady Qaddoura) Sen Stoops (D) (retired, replaced by Shelli Yoder) Sen Taylor (D) Sen Tomes (R) Sen Walker (R) Sen Young (R) These representatives voted against the bill when it came back from the Senate with the new language. Ask them to vote NO again. Rep Cook (R) Rep Frye (R) Rep Lyness (R) Rep McNamara (R) Rep Pressel (R) Rep VanNatter (R) Rep Vermillion (R) Rep Young (R) And if you live in one of these districts, your district passed an operating or school safety referendum in 2016 or later. Contact your legislators and tell them to vote NO on HB 1072. Anderson Community School Corporation, Madison County Avon Community School Corporation, Hendricks County Barr-Reeve Community Schools, Daviess County Bartholomew Consolidated School Corporation, Bartholomew County Beech Grove City School Corporation, Marion County Benton Community School Corporation, Benton County Bremen Public Schools, Marshall County Brown County Schools, Brown County Cannelton City School Corporation, Perry County Carmel Clay School Corporation, Hamilton County Clark-Pleasant Community School Corporation, Johnson County Clinton Central School Corporation, Clinton County Crown Point Community School Corporation, Lake County Culver Community School Corporation, Marshall County Duneland School Corporation, Porter County Eminence Community School Corporation, Morgan County Franklin Community School Corporation, Johnson County Frontier School Corporation, White County Gary Community School Corporation, Lake County Goshen Community Schools, Elkhart County Hamilton Community School Corporation, DeKalb & Steuben Counties Hamilton Southeastern Schools, Hamilton County Hanover Community School Corporation, Lake County Indianapolis Public Schools, Marion County Lake Central School Corporation, Lake County Lake Station Community Schools, Lake County Lanesville Community School Corporation, Harrison County Monroe County Community School Corporation, Monroe County MSD Boone Township, Porter County MSD Decatur Township, Marion County MSD of Southwest Allen County, Allen County MSD of Warren Township, Marion County MSD Washington Township, Marion County MSD Wayne Township, Marion County Noblesville School Corporation, Hamilton County Noblesville Schools, Hamilton County Northeast Dubois County School Corporation, Dubois County Oregon Davis School Corporation, Starke County Prairie Heights Community School Corporation, LaGrange County River Forest Community School Corporation, Lake County School City of Hammond, Lake County School City of Hobart, Lake County School City of Mishawaka, St. Joseph County School Town of Munster, Lake County School Town of Speedway, Marion County Sheridan Community Schools, Hamilton County Smith-Green Community School Corporation South Bend Community School Corporation, St Joseph County Southeast Dubois County School Corporation, Dubois County Southern Wells Community Schools, Wells County Tri-County School Corporation, White County Union Township Community School Corporation, Porter County Vigo County School Corporation, Vigo County Wa-Nee Community School Corporation, Elkhart County West Lafayette School Corporation, Tippecanoe County Western Wayne Schools, Wayne County Westfield Washington Schools, Hamilton County Westview School Corporation, LaGrange County Zionsville Community Schools, Boone County –Jenny Robinson and Keri Miksza P.S. Our state Indiana Coalition for Public Education has clipped some excellent testimony on HB 1072: Dr. Robert Taylor, executive director of the Indiana Association of School Superintendents, expresses his concerns about charters being prone to closing. Representative Cherrish Pryor, House District 94, remembers how charters were sold as being able to do a better job with less money.
Indiana Coalition for Public Education–Monroe County (ICPE–Monroe County) advocates for all children to have high quality, equitable, well-funded schools that are subject to democratic oversight by their communities.
We are a nonpartisan and nonprofit group of parents, grandparents, caregivers, teachers, and other community members of Monroe County and surrounding areas. Join Us.
When you accept a chunk of someone else's money, there is often a motive or a favor owed. Don Corleone comes to mind: "I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."
What favors do some IPS school board members and Indiana legislators owe? Long overdue, here is all. the. money received during the 2020 election from wealthy folks who support the privatization of public education. You can read part 1 and part 2 here. Do these elected officials work for their communities or their donors? Most of us are aware that many of these legislators (all these folks in this list below are Republicans) would have been elected without this money because Indiana is a conservative state. 
The spending of large amounts in city school board races is new but not too new. And some donations are so large, that it makes a $25 donation from someone who has a legitimate stake in the game—a parent with children in the district—seem insignificant.
Also, the fact that this money appears to come mostly from out of state and then gets sent right back out is sad. Is this democracy? Is this representing you and your neighbors? Is this the only way to get change in IPS? And what change is that? Whose change is that? Is that Reed Hastings change? He doesn't believe in elected school boards last we read. And he founded a company that is a disruptor. How do kids and communities handle disruption? Folks like Reid Hastings and Alice Walton may believe they are doing good. These donations are a fraction of what they are personally worth. It's like you and me donating $20 to a campaign. They may not fully realize the ripple effect. Or maybe they might. At the end of the day, you have to wonder what favors do these elected officials— legislators, school board members—owe and to whom? Will this lead to the further privatization of public education masked under the guise of "choice"? Well, it seems like that was a success this past legislative session based on the American Federation for Children, the Wall Street Journal, and Jeb Bush. And if legislators were so successful in pushing more policy that supports the privatization of public education following their landslide win in 2020, what's on the to-do list for IPS board members? Will this lead to the privatization of IPS? Well over $1.5 million was spent in the name of education privatization in the 2020 election in Indiana. It's a drop compared to the giant, leaky bucket of tuition support funding in Indiana. But these elected decision makers will have control over how tax dollars are used. Read more on this matter: "Indianapolis Public Schools for Sale" "Dark Money Clouds IPS Election" "Why Is There So Much Money Fighting in the IPS School Board Race" "IPS School Board Race Election Results"
–Keri Miksza
P.S. If you have yet to see the documentary Indiana's Choice, please take the time to do so. It is related to the above. And save the dates: May 10th at 6pm on "Bring It On" on 91.3 WFHB, contributors to the film and members of ICPE will discuss Indiana's Choice. "Bring It On" is Indiana’s only weekly radio program committed to exploring the people, issues and events impacting the African-American community. It is also available on Apple Podcasts, May 19th at 7pm there will a film panel discussion on Zoom sponsored by a host of organizations. Stay tuned for more information.
Indiana Coalition for Public Education–Monroe County (ICPE–Monroe County) advocates for all children to have high quality, equitable, well-funded schools that are subject to democratic oversight by their communities.
We are a nonpartisan and nonprofit group of parents, grandparents, caregivers, teachers, and other community members of Monroe County and surrounding areas. BackgroundIn January 2020, a faculty member from the O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs approached the Indiana Coalition for Public Education–Monroe County to see if we might be interested in being a “client” for a capstone course for master’s degree students. We were thrilled to participate and proposed three questions as possible areas for the students’ research. The O’Neill capstone team, led by Dr. Ashlyn Nelson, selected our most local and concrete question, which dealt with Monroe County Community School Corporation (MCCSC) school attendance zone boundaries and their impact on segregation of students by race and income. The capstone team launched an examination of the MCCSC school catchment zones with two questions. (1) Are there significant differences across schools in the distribution of students by race or income? (2) If so, would it be practical and plausible for the school district to redraw these zones with the goal of achieving a more equitable demographic balance of students within our schools? They concluded their work in July and presented a report over Zoom to our board Sunday, July 26, 2020. How does the question of redrawing school catchment zones overlap with the ICPE–Monroe County mission? Our group’s vision is for all children to have high-quality, equitable, well-funded schools that are subject to democratic oversight by their communities. At their best, public schools bring students from myriad backgrounds together and provide environments where children get to know, respect, and learn along with others of diverse races, family incomes, religions, and worldviews. We believe that integration by income and race can help realize the full potential of our public schools. Schools’ standardized test scores mirror free and reduced lunch rates (a proxy for family income); this holds true across all school types, whether public, charter, or private voucher school. In Indiana, schools that serve low-income populations are routinely penalized for low test scores by the A-F system. Mixing student populations more by income has the potential to protect our schools and neighborhoods from the state’s punitive school grading system. The drawing of school attendance zones can only be undertaken by the school system itself, led by the superintendent and our elected school board (in consultation with experts/experienced consultants and the MCCSC community). The capstone report makes recommendations to ICPE–Monroe County, but we ask that when you read it you consider these as recommendations to the Monroe County Community School Corporation. Summary of the O'Neill capstone reportThe O’Neill capstone report begins with a summary of research supporting integration of schools by income and race (page 6 of the report):  The capstone project sought not only to evaluate the current school boundaries’ impact on equity but also to determine if alternative boundaries could be drawn to provide more equitable representation in each school. The team made extensive use of geographic information system (GIS) and census data. An examination of enrollments in MCCSC schools indicates high and middle schools are reasonably well balanced in terms of race and poverty. However, there is considerable disparity across the 13 elementary schools. The team found the percentage of black and Hispanic students ranged from 25% to 0% and the percentage of free or reduced lunch ranged from 84% to 9%. Importantly, it was not just one extreme school creating this wide range; rather, the schools are spread out along a continuum. The following charts are from page 8 of the capstone report.   With this disparity established, the team looked to explore alternative school boundary lines. They interviewed almost 20 citizens of Monroe County, including school board members, business leaders, representatives of organizations serving those in poverty, and individuals involved in the 2005 redrawing of the MCCSC boundaries. Some key groups of stakeholders were not among those interviewed: Due to delays in obtaining evidence of exempt status from Indiana University’s Institutional Review Board, the capstone team was not able to interview MCCSC administrators or teachers, and they were not able to make contact with students (because of FERPA) or PTO members. Overall, interviewees identified challenges the district would face in redrawing boundaries, but indicated the benefits would justify the effort. The team also looked to strategies used in other parts of the country to achieve equity. Using input from the interviewees and examples from the literature, the team used GIS and census data to examine alternative approaches to redrawing boundaries with an eye to bringing poverty rates and Black and Hispanic rates closer to the district average across schools. They proposed new boundary maps and compared the poverty rates and Black and Hispanic student rates with those in the current maps. Because of limitations in the data available to the capstone team, the team’s proposed new maps do not reflect accurately the poverty rates at the different schools, and therefore should not be perceived as a starting point for actual boundary proposals, but rather as indicative of a strategy for redrawing boundaries. The capstone team emphasized that MCCSC, should it embark on redistricting, would have access to all the relevant street-by-street student data. The model the capstone team recommends as most effective in producing equity is one in which some school boundaries are not contiguous. Allowing noncontiguity was a powerful tool that significantly increased the ability to achieve more economic and racial balance because the students receiving free and reduced lunch tend to live in concentrated locales. The team also examined transportation time, an issue identified by several interviewees, and found that the boundaries they proposed did not increase transportation times significantly for most students. Other political factors: How school choice changes the equation In Indiana, privatization efforts that were marketed to voters as “school choice” have defunded public schools and made it harder for them to undertake difficult tasks such as redrawing school attendance zones. State vouchers for private school tuition were introduced in 2011, and have been steadily expanded by the Indiana legislature ever since. Charter schools were also expanded in 2011 and garner increasing amounts of state funding. Legislation also allowed students to leave their own public school district for another (so-called “public-to-public transfer”). The choice environment casts families as consumers. They can turn away from the public school system to charter or voucher schools, or leave their own school district for another, and state tuition funds will follow them. The job of school boards is therefore more complicated than before. We now have two brick-and-mortar charter schools in Monroe County, as well as a number of online charter options, and seven local private schools accepting vouchers. School board members have to weigh the likely gains for students of school populations that are more equitably balanced by race and income with the potential fiscal impact (whose brunt would also be felt by students) of a redistricting process that could, at least in the short term, make some families unhappy and lead them to flee the public school system. Conclusion We share the O’Neill capstone report in the spirit of contributing to ongoing discussions regarding diversity and equity in MCCSC schools. We hope the thoughtful and methodical work by this team of talented master’s degree students can help spark a larger conversation about how we as a community can best address racial and economic disparities in our community schools’ populations. We believe the data they have gathered and analyzed to be powerful, and that they have made a strong case for the benefits and plausibility of redistricting school attendance boundaries with the goal of reducing those disparities across schools. At the same time, we recognize the challenge of a process such as redistricting amid the likelihood of funding shortfalls related to the pandemic and a state legislature that continues to find more ways to funnel taxpayer money out of the public school system and into private hands and privately managed schools. Any process undertaken by the school district would need to establish common ground and clear goals, and engage the full community so as to be understood broadly to be worthwhile and fair. NB: Please note that the report is the work of master’s students in the O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs. We are grateful to them for their intense and valuable work. Any practical maps will need to be based on fuller, more specific data than what was available to the capstone team. P.S. Why did we wait until 2021 to share a report which was given to us in July 2020? As coronavirus cases mounted in July, the question of whether our schools should open in person during the pandemic was being contested and negotiated throughout the nation. Our community was no exception. Our school board members were besieged by heated demands from all sides. Our district was working around the clock to figure out the safest and most effective way to deliver both in-person and online instruction, and our group called on the state to issue science-based metrics and guidance for school districts. Once school started in early August (all online for about a month), parents were frantically trying to figure out how to use the technology to ensure that their kids were able to access their online classrooms. With MCCSC’s superintendent search put on hold by the pandemic, our long-serving superintendent had postponed her retirement in order to see our district through until they could complete the search. Additionally, a school board election was underway, and our group held two school board forums. We are all volunteers working with finite amounts of time. We wanted to present the report with adequate context in a more stable environment, both of pandemic understanding and of district leadership. Indiana Coalition for Public Education–Monroe County (ICPE–Monroe County) advocates for all children to have high quality, equitable, well-funded schools that are subject to democratic oversight by their communities.
We are a nonpartisan and nonprofit group of parents, grandparents, caregivers, teachers, and other community members of Monroe County and surrounding areas. |
Categories
All
Archives
April 2022
Friends
|
RSS Feed
Proudly powered by Weebly