South Carolina district could be responsible for housing and transportation costs of charter schools
The Post and Courier reports that a state trial court has ruled that state legislation known as Act 189, applicable only to Charleston County, is valid under the state constitution. Act 189 prohibits Charleston County School District (CCSD) from denying a charter school anything that is otherwise available to a public school. The court’s ruling could mean that millions of dollars would be taken from neighborhood schools and given to charter schools. But some school officials said they still don't think the court answered the crucial question: What should a charter school receive from the district? The Charleston County School Board plans to meet to decide whether to appeal.
CCSD sued the state on the constitutionality of the law and contended that it was special legislation that conflicts with and supersedes the state's charter school law. A state attorney general's opinion on this issue previously held that the local law was valid. Statewide law calls for charter schools to pay their bills, such as teachers' salaries, rent and transportation, with an amount of money determined by formula; charter schools receive the average of what the district receives per student. But because the district doesn't charge a neighborhood school for its buildings and transportation, the district could be obligated to pay those costs, along with the amount required by formula, to charter schools, and that could add up to several million dollars more going to charter schools annually. The money for charter schools comes off the top of the district's budget, so that would leave less for the district's remaining schools.
According to school board member Arthur Ravenel Jr., who is a charter school supporter, some of the district's charter schools are almost destitute after paying their bills because they don't have everything that Act 189 assured them. He added that the ruling will help those struggling and predominately black charter schools. Board chairwoman Ruth Jordan, however, said she's hopeful that the board will have enough votes to pursue an appeal. She believes the board needs to exhaust every legal option, even if it means taking the case to the state Supreme Court. Jordan also said Act 189 will devastate the district financially; the financial strain it creates will slow down the district's progress and potentially even reverse it. Board member Gregg Meyers, on the other hand, doesn’t think the ruling answered the board's question about exactly what it must provide charter schools. He believes the focus of the legal debate over Act 189 should be on what the law means operationally for CCSD. The law’s requirement that the district "may not deny a charter school" doesn't necessarily mean it must hand over everything to the deprivation of other district schools, Meyers said.
Source: Post and Courier, 1/28/10, By Diette Courrege
[Editor’s Note: The trial court opinion is available at the first link below. In February 2009, the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that a local school district is required by state law to distribute the appropriate per pupil pro rata share of moneys included in district’s local current expense fund to charter schools operating in the district, with the exception of the revenue line related to textbooks supplied by the state. A summary of the decision is available at the second link below.]
CCSD v. Harrell
NSBA School Law pages on Sugar Creek Charter Sch., Inc. v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ.