A House committee approved a bill expanding charter schools in a party-line vote over arguments from Democrats that a main element is unconstitutional.
The bill eliminating the 100-school cap on charters is significantly different form the bill that passed the Senate last month. House Democrats were able to add limits on growth and include provisions that would have new charters make efforts to develop transportation plans for low-income children who live within three miles and develop a food service plan for poor students.
Democrats, who said they did not want lack of transportation or food service to keep poor children from attending charters, said the new provisions were not strong enough.
"It moves in the direction of less socioeconomic diversity in our public schools," said Paul Luebke, a Durham Democrat.
And Democrats continued their campaign against a provision that would set up group separate from the State Board of Education as the main decision-maker on charters. Democrats argue that the proposed N.C. Charter School Commission is unconstitutional because it gives jurisdiction over a form of public schools to a group other than the school board. The school board could override a commission decision by a two-thirds vote. "
The commission is unconstitutional on its face and thereby renders the whole process unconstitutional," said Rep. Rick Glazier, a Fayetteville Democrat.
Sen. Richard Stevens, a Cary Republican and the bill's sponsor, said he did not agree with Glazier's interpretation of the constitution.
"I don't think the constitution says what you say it says," Stevens said.
Adding up to 50 new charters a year is going to require a lot more attention than the state board can give, he said.
Comments
Why is this a partisan issue?
March 16, 2011 - 3:42pm — majorjimI was dismayed to see that even after numerous compromises the charter school bill did not get a single Democratic vote in the House Education Committee. It's hard to understand why Democrats, who for the last twelve years (when they had complete control of both the legislature and the governor's office) made no effort whatsoever to require our public charter schools to provide comprehensive, full-service transportation services, or full-service cafeterias, now find that it is imperative for them to do so. So imperative, in fact, that it justifies a "line in the sand" stand against a bill that would simply make a popular and effective school model available to more North Carolina families.
Most disheartening of all is the position of Rep. Glazier on the 'constitutional' issue. Article IX of North Carolina's Constitution does state that the State Board of Education will supervise all public schools, but it goes on to say that that power is "subject to the laws of the General Assembly." Using that legal reasoning Rep. Glazier has authored dozens of bills over the years telling the SBE how to exercise its authority. Our public school law is repleat with the phrase "The State Board of Education shall..." Many of these laws were written by Rep. Glazier himself. Now that someone else has proposed a bill that essentially does the same thing, it's suddenly un-consitutional.
Public charter schools are great deal for students, parents, taxpayers, and educators. The only ones who have anything to fear from them are those in the traditional education establishment who can't stand the thought of losing some of their power or prestige, and the money that comes with it. This should not be a partisan issue. Democrats have long championed the cause of quality educational opportunities--they should not confuse that with the institutional interests of school districts.