Charter schools can grow rapidly, cost local districts. Texas needs to scrutinize them more

A recent Fort Worth Star Telegram article describes the rapid expansion of charter schools in Fort Worth. It’s important to review the critical implications on students, public school districts, and taxpayers – and most importantly, to ensure that the best interests of all students are served.

As a member of the elected State Board of Education, I vote on final approval of new charter schools. Board members must weigh the costs and benefits of each new charter applicant against the best interest of all students in our districts, including the majority of students who choose their local school districts. We will vote this week on a new applicant to open a charter school in Fort Worth.

A careful consideration of applications is critical because the stakes are high. Once a charter secures board approval and meets certain state requirements, it can apply to open an unlimited number of new charter campuses anywhere in Texas. The state commissioner of education has sole approval of expansion requests, with no public meeting, no input from parents and no vote from any elected representative who is directly accountable to voters.

Since 2010, the commissioner has approved 946 new charter campuses. Because of a special funding benefit for charters, most charter schools cost our school finance system an average of $1,150 per student more than neighboring school districts – meaning Texas taxpayers are paying hundreds of millions of dollars more per year.

Charter schools are a fast-growing segment of our state’s budget; state funds to charter schools have quadrupled since fiscal year 2010. Charter expansion also means that charter schools take on more debt to build new facilities — and many of those bonds are backed by our state’s Permanent School Fund.

Unlike public school districts, which must win voter approval to incur debt for new facilities, charter schools are private organizations with self-selected boards (including non-Texans) and can borrow money with a simple majority vote of their small boards.

This private control and disengagement from the public takes power and decision-making away from local parents, who have little voice in the process. I was stunned to learn that Fort Worth ISD has lost an estimated $350 million in revenue over the last three years to charter transfers. While you might think that the cost to educate each student simply transfers from Fort Worth ISD to a charter when a student transfers, that is not the case.

Unfortunately, school districts cannot cut costs dollar-for-dollar to the loss of revenue, because districts must continue to educate and support all students while maintaining many fixed costs, such as transportation, utilities and maintenance. It’s often not viable to reduce the number of teachers.

With largely the same costs but fewer dollars to spend, districts must reduce expenses, which can result in cuts to popular elective courses, sports, enrichment and student services. These cuts affect every student in the district.

The Star-Telegram also informed readers about high teacher turnover at charter schools and the negative impact this can have on student outcomes. Retention of well-qualified and experienced teachers is one of a school’s most important responsibilities.

One reason I have voted to veto some new charter applicants is because their affiliated out-of-state schools have consistently reported high rates of teacher turnover — up to 59 percent annually in some cases. I have also been concerned about charter applicants that send millions of Texas taxpayer dollars to their out-of-state charter management organizations. This public money should stay in Texas and be invested directly in our classrooms.

Because of these concerns and others, I’m joining a growing call to limit charter expansion and to open up the process to make it more democratic for parents and the public. The full impact of a new charter school on all students, public school districts and taxpayers should be calculated, disclosed to the public and formally considered in the process.