Division I regional track finals
Fenwick graduation 2012
Ponitz graduation 2012
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2007 > February > 24 > Entry
Not all rules are bad
It was one of the central ideas of charter school movement — public schools are immobilzed by red tape from which they need to be released. Rules, rules, rules block true reform at every turn.
I think many public school folks would agree that there are too many rules. But some rules are there for a reason. And in my mind one of the most important rules for public institutions, schools or otherwise, is transparency. When the public is spending its money, it should be able to see how that money is spent and how the structures that money funds are operating.
In my experience covering charter schools in Dayton for the past nine years, transparency has been a concern. It’s not necessarily the case that charters are trying to hide anything. Most often, what I’ve seen is simply that charter school operators don’t know the rules when it comes to public access to documents and meetings.
Case in point — City Day Community School.
Meetings of public boards — school boards, library boards, city councils, etc. — are open to the public under Ohio law. Those boards can only meet behind closed doors if they meet very specific conditions for exemption from the state’s “Sunshiine Law” that requires openness.
These rules apply to the governing board of charter schools, just as they do to all public school boards. If there is one school in the city that should be familiar with the rules by now it’s nine-year-old City Day — one of the state’s oldest charter schools. Governing boards must advertise their meeting times and allow anyone who wishes to attend.
But when I went 10 minutes early to City Day’s 6 p.m. governing board meeting on Dec. 14, I found the board already discussing business. They were surprised to see me (I don’t think they get many visitors to their meetings) when I entered the closed room. I looked at my watch and asked if they had started the meeting early. No, they said, they were just finishing up and would begin the formal meeting at 6 p.m.
Well, I said, I’ll just sit down in the room while they finish up. When they asked me to wait outside, I pointed out that a majority of the governing board was in the room discussing board business and that constituted an official meeting under state law that must be open to the public.
“He’s right,” one member of the group said. They broke up while just two members stayed in the room to continue the discussion.
Then there was Thursday’s meeting of the City Day board. This time, interim board president Clinton Brown motioned that the board go into executive (closed) session to discuss “personnel and finances.” State Rep. Clayton Luckie, who was in attendance, immediately objected. “Finances” is never a permitted reason for a closed meeting under Ohio law.
Neither is “personnel,” I pointed out. To discuss a particular employee, the board had to state the reason for the closed meeting, such as to discuss the employee’s possible suspension, discipline, promotion, demotion, firing, change in compensation, etc.
Brown tried again, saying the board would go into executive session to discuss, “hiring, firing or promotion of employees.” It was close enough to be permitted under the Sunshine Law.
When I attend meetings at which things like this happen, I have an advantage in that I am pretty well versed in the state’s open meetings and open records laws because of the nature of my work. The average teachers, parent or community member who might attend such a meeting would have a hard time understanding how the school operates and how public money is spent if the board were to go into closed meetings for the sorts of reasons they stated.
This can also be a problem when it comes to documents. At times, I’ve asked Dayton charter schools for routine documents that are indisputably public — budget documents, employee salaries, etc. — only to find the schools unresponsive.
The only avenue to remedy these violations of state law it to go to court and sue the violators. The Dayton Daily News has done this in the past. We’ve sued the Dayton Board of Education twice since I’ve worked for the paper — once over documents and once over meetings. We won both times and the court ordered the board to comply with the law.
The newspaper does not file such lawsuits without careful consideration of the costs and benefits both to the paper and to the community. It’s an easier case to make that we need to enforce the law with a large school district. An individual charter school affects fewer people. For serious cases, I think the paper would take action, but the decentralized nature of the schools means opening a potential can of worms. We can’t sue every individual school in every case of violating the Sunshine Law.
This is where I think it’s time the state considered the need for educating charter schools about the open records and open meetings. Before charters are awarded, the potential operators should demonstrate understanding of the Sunshine Law and perhaps even be required to show it had legal counsel with First Amendment expertise.
I think this would be a good step toward ensuring public accountability.
Permalink | Comments (10) | Categories: Charter Schools and School Choice, City Day Investigation, My Favorite Posts
Comments
By The Center for Education Reform
February 28, 2007 2:29 PM | Link to this
Charter schools are changing the face of American education. Expanding school choice and competition inspires education leaders to focus their energies on improving outcomes for children. Find out more. See Charter Schools Today: Stories of Inspiration, Struggle & Success, by award-winning journalist Joe Williams and published by The Center for Education Reform. http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=document&documentID=2588§ionID=55By Mary
February 25, 2007 10:04 PM | Link to this
“teachermom” and “oldprof”, I was being a little tongue in cheek about having the civics teacher bring the staff up to speed. It is amazing how little students are learning about certain basic tenets of our democracy in charter or public schools. It also shows up in adult life. I do not think students in K-6 are unable to learn some of the important basics. Civics and history have been dumbed down in our schools.By teachermom
February 25, 2007 8:38 PM | Link to this
Husted is in the back pocket of billion dollar greedy companies, just like Fordham. All they care about is what is best for the wealthy companies. It’s frightening to consider the elimination of the middle class, a society with only poor and rich. These companies strive to make big $$ while hiring illegals, forcing employees to get benefits from the state (welfare) when they won’t give insurance. They dance around labor laws like denying benefits by just missing the forty-hour work week. The companies encourage employees to work “off the clock,” and do anything and everything to keep unions out. These are the people dumping billions into the charter schools. This is who Husted works for too, not the middle class citizens and their children. Get RID of this man and STOP SHOPPING at these companies !! There is NO TELLING what the kids are being taught at the charter schools ! I wouldn’t doubt if they (and their parents) were using materials that completely undermine what this country stands for.By Oldprof
February 25, 2007 9:04 AM | Link to this
Mary, the charters are mostly K-6 institutions. They shouldn’t be teaching any but the most rudimentary civics and history, and the person teaching is probably NOT an expert in history, civics, or law (if the teacher is licensed at all—and some aren’t—then it’s most likely in general elementary ed.). The big question here is this: if there are really too many rules, then how does creating an entirely new category of public schools, with an entirely different set of rules and procedures, benefit society? If John Husted really believed rules were the problem, WHY DOESN’T HE JUST REPEAL SOME RULES??? I suspect it’s because he has a different, anti-education agenda.By teachermom
February 25, 2007 1:26 AM | Link to this
Maybe consulting history teachers on Amendments at the charter schools isn’t the best idea. They don’t have the same liscensure, ratio of certified staff as public schools. They may have never even taken any core classes in history since they were in high school. Why would they follow/know the rules when they aren’t “Education People” to begin with ? They don’t follow the rules because they either don’t KNOW them, or they think they are ABOVE them. Is it any wonder ? Charters don’t have to follow the same guidelines on a lot of things. They are diverting public dollars and need to be held to the SAME standards in every aspect of education. This is what happens when companies like Wal-Mart are running these schools. They have thought they could get away with everything illegal too, but it’s catching up. Your best bet is to leave education up to the REAL school system, and not to a corrupt business community with hidden agendas.By wellwhynot
February 24, 2007 9:25 PM | Link to this
I think Keith is right. I used to work with a teacher who had previously taught in a Dayton charter school and left because so many rules were not being followed. If charter schools must exist, they should have to follow the same rules the public schools are required to follow.By Keith
February 24, 2007 7:47 PM | Link to this
I think Scott is being generous in his statement as to reasons charter schools are not responsive and do not follow those rules. There are many other rules not followed and the reasons are deeper than just lack of knowledge of said rules.By Mary
February 24, 2007 7:35 PM | Link to this
Well, it seems whoever teaches history or civics at the charter school could enlighten the staff. I believe the title of a free book I got at a Fordham event was “Where civics education went wrong”.By Scott Elliott
February 24, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this
Mary, the difference is — in my experience — school districts will respond to legal challenge short of a lawsuit. They at least have lawyers who know the law. When we complain to school districts, they generally consult their lawyers who tell them, “yes, you have to do it.” We’ve only had to sue school districts when they’ve gotten bad legal advice or ignored their lawyers. With charter schools, I’ve found them to frequently be unresponsive to our verbal and written complaints and requests. So to get even the most basic access it may take a lawsuit. And again, it’s likely often the case that the school operators don’t know the law and don’t have reliable legal advice with First Amendment expertise.By Mary
February 24, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this
Unfortunately, Scott, these same issues still crop up in many suburban public schools. We often have to cite pertinent Ohio Revised Code paragraphs to get public information, and then board members proceed to complain and say the school district is being inconvenienced by our requests. Board meetings in my district are essentially being run as pep rallies, not business meetings that might help enlighten the public and encourage their participation. I see similar complaints in the DDN speak up column from others.