Charter vs. traditional school funding: A formula for confusion
In a story Monday, I explored the perceived gap between the amount of per-pupil cash allocated to charters and the amount given to traditional schools. The story started with the question: Why, in the city schools budget, do charters receive $9,300 and traditional schools' $5,000.
For three days, I spoke and emailed with dozens of people--many of whom were grateful for my even attempting to sort it out--and poured through our archives to figure it out.
It all comes down to a formula. A very, complex formula derived from a simple request charters made six years ago.
It all started in 2005 when the first wave of charters led a hard-fought campaign that started with the state board of education and ended in Maryland's second-highest court.
Charter leaders believed that an innovative school was restrained by the traditional funding model. Charters wanted the total amount of money spent on each student in cash, rather than the traditional model of deducting central office costs before determining per-pupil allotments.
The state board granted charters the formula--with a few stipulations like paying 2 percent in administrative costs--along with more cash and flexibility.
In 2006, district leaders decided to fight the decision in court, arguing that the formula would end up shortchanging traditional schools. They lost the fight.
The final decision, ruling in favor of charters, was handed down by the Maryland Court of Appeals the month Alonso arrived in 2007--with a plan to open more charters, and a new formula for how the district could have "Fair Student Funding," in tying money to enrollment numbers.
But, Alonso said that as charter enrollment continues to increase, "the present solution cannot hold," affirming the fears the district had six years ago.Alonso wants to revisit the charter formula. He said that by design, the formula exempts charters from central office budget crunches, shifting the burden of flat revenues and increased costs to traditional schools.
Charter leaders resent the simplification of the allotments, and denounce the notion that their students receive more per-pupil funding.
While the same amount of money is spent on every student, charters see it in cash and traditional schools see it in services. The $9,300 and $5,000 reflect those differences, they say.
Of course, charters also have expenses that traditional schools don't. Though, some would argue that charters use a lot of district services that they don't 'pay for.
It seems that this debate has been brewing for some time. Now that it's boiled over, charter and district leaders have vowed to figure out the formula that will adequately fund all schools. School leaders and advocates say that whatever the solution, it has to result in fair funding for all.
Baltimoresun.com's 
Comments
This is exactly the dilemma that school systems face when approving charter schools. At some point, and we are seeing it now, charters will take more than their share of funding from the system, thereby decreasing the amount of money left for the "non-charter" schools. This is not an obvious outcome just by looking at the law, but it is a very real unintended consequence of the charter school legislation. Baltimore City and the state legislature really have to revisit this in light of current fiscal circumstances to fine tune the law and make it equitable to both charters and non-charters.
Posted by: Jeff | May 24, 2011 11:57 AM
Thanks for digging into this topic. It seems to me a basic deregulation issue: would a principal rather have services done by central office so they can focus on instruction, or would they prefer the cash? That's what I want to know from principals of traditional publics - do they want the same deregulated deal the public charters have?
Posted by: Cambell | May 24, 2011 9:58 PM
"The Baltimore school board approved Tuesday a $1.3 billion budget for next year that gives principals less discretion over spending "
Are we witnessing cracks in the great wall of reform where money trumps principles?
But really, how could they not see this coming when it is happening in most of the districts that embraced this type of reform? Struggles over limited resources normally end up badly.
Posted by: OverTheTop | May 25, 2011 9:23 AM
@ BS Paper article subject "Fair Student Funding," & the role of Parent/ Stakeholders/Citizens lack of Input during the Proposed Open Public Budget Process
BALTIMORE CITY
PUBLIC SHOOLS POLICY
BALTIMORE CITY BOARD OF SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS
Public Participation During Board Meetings
I. Purpose
The Board recognizes the importance of receiving public comment on matters of educational interest. Therefore, the Board remains committed to designating a portion of each of its regularly scheduled public business meetings to receive public comment on agenda items.
The purpose of this policy is to preserve the orderly transaction of Board business and to provide guidelines for the effective, efficient, and responsible community input on educational issues during regular business meetings of the Board.
II. Policy Standards
A. Public Participation during Board Meetings
1. Time shall be set aside at the beginning of each regularly scheduled board meeting for public comment. All public comments should address agenda items or items of educational interest.
1.A representative from each of the following groups is eligible to speak for up to five minutes provided that they notify the Board Executive by Close of Business the Thursday prior to the board meeting:
2.The list of recognized organizations that are pre-registered to speak before the board include:
1.American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME);
2.Public School Administrators and Supervisors Association (PSASA);
3.City Union of Baltimore (CUB);
4.Parent and Community Advisory Board (PCAB);
5.Associated Student Congress for Baltimore City (ASCBC);
6.Baltimore Teacher Union (BTU);
7.Special Education Citizens Advisory Committee (SECAC);
8.A representative of City Schools’ Parent Teacher Associations (PTA).
3. Up to ten members of the public may register for an opportunity to speak by signing Public Comment Sign-up sheet located at the Information Desk in the front lobby. The Public Comment Sign-up sheet will be made available on the day of the regularly scheduled public board meeting from 4:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. or until the ten speaking opportunities have been taken. Groups shall designate only one (1) person to speak on their behalf; no more than one entry on the sign-up sheet will be recognized at a board meeting. Each person wishing to speak MUST complete the following information on the Public Comment Sign-up sheet or they may void their opportunity to speak:
a. name;
b. address;
c. email address (if applicable)
d. telephone number (if applicable);
e. school / civic / community affiliation; and
f. agenda topic about which the registrant wishes to speak.
4. Each speaker shall be limited to three minutes. Individuals that have not fully completed the Public Comment Sign-up sheet may not be called for public comment.
5. No speaker may use the opportunity to air employee grievances or make complaints on behalf of specific, individual students. Speakers are prohibited from discussing any matters that might come before the Board in the form of an appeal.
6. Speakers may not yield their time to another individual.
7. Time shall be kept by designated staff, and an audible warning shall be given at the conclusion of the three minutes of allotted time. When the speaker’s time has expired, he or she may thereafter conclude his or her remarks in a sentence or two, but may not exceed an additional 15 seconds time. The Chair shall then call for the next speaker.
8. The Chair shall rule out of order the comments of any speaker who verbally and personally attacks a school system employee or Board member. Any comments made after the speaker is ruled out of order shall not be part of the formal record (minutes) of the meeting.
9. The Chair shall also rule out of order the comments of any speaker who strays from the agenda item/topic on which the person signed up to speak.
10.A person attending an open session of the Board may not engage in any conduct that disrupts the session or that interferes with the right of members of the public to attend and observe the session.
III. Implementation Strategies
A. The CEO is directed to create and implement administrative regulations that will enable members of the public to have regular access to either senior staff or their designees. Members of the public may bring issues of concern to the attention of senior staff.
B. The CEO shall provide the Board with periodic updates regarding the resolution of these issues of public concern.
IV. Legal and Policy References
A. Policy References
Related Board Policies: BEA
Replaces Board Rule 103.05
.
.
.
.
Posted by: Interested & Engaged Parent of City Schools | May 25, 2011 9:40 AM