Hopkins' LAC Argues Against Diverting Referendum Levies to Charters

(UPDATED: 11:21 a.m. Feb. 15) Legislative Action Coalition is urging lawmakers to reject a bill that would send referendum levy money to charter schools that students in the district attend.

Currently, school districts keep the entire amount of voter-approved operating levies. Under House File 1860, that money would follow students who left the district to attend charter schools within the district’s boundaries.The bill is scheduled to come up for a vote in the House Education Finance Committee on Wednesday.

On Tuesday, the Legislative Action Coalition, which helps the School Board advocate for education-related legislation, sent a letter expressing concern with the bill to Edina Rep. Keith Downey (R-District 41A)—an Education Finance Committee member whose district covers a sliver of the Hopkins school district.

The letter notes that the power to levy and spend money rests with elected school boards who are accountable to voters. If the bill passes, though, the money would go to unaccountable charter school boards that would not be subject to public oversight if voters feel there is fiscal mismanagement.

Charter schools also would receive the money without ever making their case for financial need to voters in a referendum.

“The proposal in essence creates a safe harbor source of revenue that lacks any sort of oversight or justification requirement,” the letter states. “Creating a buffer between the expenditure of tax dollars and the corresponding accountability is ultimately damaging to everyone—the taxpayer, the student, and the school.”

Coalition members also worry about other effects they say would undermine the school choice that legislators want to foster. Because the money only follows students to charters within their home district, it would encourage charters to locate in districts with high levies and to recruit “more valuable” in-district students who bring with them the additional levy funding.

“The original stated purpose of charter schools was to create a zone of educational innovation where best practices could be developed and then shared with the larger educational community. The proposals in HF 1860 create incentives for animosity between traditional school districts and charters,” the letter states.

But Barbara Wornson, executive director of the , said the change is needed to account for the state’s reduced role in school funding. Ideally, all public schools would be able to rely on the state for their money. But that’s less and less the case.

With property taxes accounting for a larger portion of school revenues, she said, there’s a funding gap between charters and traditional school districts. It’s only fair that charters have access to referendum levy money.

“I think (the proposal) has to be taken in context,” Wornson said. “I don’t want any charter school to be a burden on the district, but the reason we exist at all is to be an alternative.”

Wornson also disputes the coalition’s accusation that charter directors are unaccountable. She said families vote with their feet whenever they choose to send their children to charter schools.

“They all pay taxes in their school district even though they do not attend those schools,” she said.

Education Finance Committee members are scheduled to take up the issue at 12:30 p.m. Wednesday.

(Click on the PDF to the right of the article to read the letter.)