The Charter School Invasion and Its Acquisition of Local Tax Dollars

   In the July 7 edition of the Daily Oklahoman: Point of View: It's time to irrigate OKC's charter school deserts, Amber Northern (senior vice-president for research) and Michael Petrilli (president) of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, advocate for the acquisition of more tax dollars for charter schools. They say - "The biggest barrier (to charter schools obtaining more state and local funding) is massive funding inequality (between traditional public schools and corporate charter schools). State law doesn't guarantee charters any local dollars, which contributes to them receiving 36% less in total per-pupil than their traditional public school counterparts. On top of this, charters have less money and access to adequate facilities. Such policies dissuade able operators (millionaire developers) from opening new schools in the city, and make it difficult for the ones that are already there to expand ... There is, nevertheless, hope (for private and corporate acquisition of state and local tax dollars). Oklahoma can enact legislation that makes charter funding more equitable." (At the expense of traditional public schools).
   Before examining the facts related to Northern and Petrilli's outlandish claims concerning the "charter school desert" in Oklahoma - Diane Ravitch, in REIGN OF ERROR The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools, had this to say about charter schools:
   "Charter schools became the hot new idea in American education, beloved by advocates of school choice (vouchers) on the corporate right (and left). Corporate conservatives at the ..., the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and ALEC... realized that charters were the next best thing to vouchers. NCLB,led by Barack Obama and Arne Duncan, recommended charter schools as an option to replace low- performing public schools... Major foundations, including the Walton Family Foundation... and dozens of others lavished funding on the expansion of charter schools and charter chains. The U.S. Department of Education, led by Arne Duncan, required states to lift their limits on charter schools if they wanted to be eligible for the billions of dollars in President Obama's Race to the Top competition."
   I think the connections of the recent opinion piece to the corporate tax dollar grab are evident, but what's not so clear are the connections between the corporate reform movement and elected officials, which is usually money. The Oklahoma connection for the national institutes, profitable non-profits, national and world corporations, and U.S. Department of Education has been Brent Bushey, the Executive Director for the Oklahoma Public School Resource Center (OPSRC) mentioned in a previous article.
   The massive barrier spoken about by the Fordham Institute in the charter school desert is their lack of tax $billions. Again, they claim that charter schools receive 36% less funding than traditional public schools, which helps create the charter school desert. They are hoping this inaccurate statement will convince readers that Oklahoma charter schools are mistreated by the state legislature, and the only way to rectify this claimed funding inequality is by favorable legislation. This ALEC legislation will no doubt be forwarded during the next regular legislative session.
   Some facts which dispel the big lie that charter schools  receive inequitable state and local funding: A traditional public school (A) and a corporate charter school (B), both with 3000 students, receive state and federal funding. School (A) receives $6 million in state funding ($2000 per student), while School (B) receives $10 million ($3,333 per student). It appears as if the inequity exists for traditional public schools, not corporate charters - but this lone fact is just as inaccurate as stating that corporate charters receive 36% less in total per-pupil... As a matter of fact, School (A) received $4,000 in per-pupil revenue from state and local sources, which was more than the $3,333 received by School (B). (Note: Both schools receive the same amount in federal funding). In addition, School (A) just built a new high school for its students which local taxpayers voted to do, that accounted for part of that $4,000 in local revenue. For School (A), the $4,000 in state and local funds is used to pay utilities, bus transportation, counselors, nurses, maintenance of facilities, insurance costs, administrators, teaching assistants, etc... This reduces that amount down to approx. $2,500 which can be spent for teachers and other instructional needs. School (B) has none of the above necessary expenditures, so is able to spend $3,333 for teachers, administrators, and instruction. The cumulative effect (all revenue) of applying Oklahoma's school funding formula to both schools is that the corporate charter (often virtual) receives approximately 33% more than the traditional public school for discretionary  operating expenses. To be very clear - corporate charter reformers want more local tax dollars, so that corporate CEO's can become more wealthy.
   This is what the corporate reformers such as Brent Bushey, Amber Northern, and Michael Petrilli do: They convince local citizens, under the guise of corporate charters being mistreated, to increase their own tax bill - in order to irrigate charter school deserts!
   Northern and Petrilli go on to lament that "Of all the locales desperate for charter schools, portions of Oklahoma City are among the areas that need them most (areas ripe for accessing local tax dollars). What they do not say, however, is that the "inner city south area" charter school desert will quickly become a "charter school oasis" with an infusion of $60 million - for two new corporate charter schools. The $60 million in local property tax dollars (ad valorem) will come from the Oklahoma City Wheeler District and be used to fund the two schools... for OKC Public Schools. It's all a property tax "shell game", however, as the $60 million could be used by all public schools to pay for more teachers, fund teacher pay raises, and fund operational costs. Those that understand the Oklahoma public school funding formula know that the $60 million will ultimately come from all traditional public schools and only benefit the two new charter schools and the corporate developer. This is how the corporate shell game works: Normally, traditional public schools receive local ad valorem (property tax) funding from local taxpayers to supplement any state aid they may receive. This local ad valorem revenue is chargeable to a school's state aid, however, so the total funding received by the school is less ad valorem. For instance, if a school is calculated to receive $1 million in state aid based on it's number of students, and received $300,000 in ad valorem revenue the year before - the total state aid is reduced by $300,000. The school will only receive $700,000, instead of the original $1 million. The very real $60 million that OKC will receive to build the two new charter schools will not be chargeable to its state aid! If the $60 million were chargeable to OKC schools state aid, then its total aid would be reduced. The $60 million reduction for OKC schools would then be assigned to all other traditional public schools in Oklahoma... to pay for new teachers, etc. It's a corporate developer's dream! Conservatives and traditional public school advocates should be livid about this corporate welfare scheme!
   Northern and Petrilli assert that Oklahoma can enact legislation that makes charter funding more equitable. Translated from corporate rhetoric, this means - Corporations can buy lawmakers and other elected officials, who will pass favorable laws designed to allow corporate access to local tax dollars. It's becoming more clear to determine what motivates "out-of-state" corporate and profitable non-profits - follow the money to the next blog...