Interesting. They say that the state cannot fund a private company and call it public so that it is free to students. That makes sense. We would all be freaking out if a state funded Walmart because everyone should be able to afford socks, right?
It also says, “voters have no say in how these charter schools spend taxpayer funding,” because they don’t vote on the board like the public schools, they are appointed (in our state I believe half are appointed by public school district board members). But you do have a more direct way of controlling their spending, by choosing or not choosing that school. If my local public school is spending money in a way I disapprove of, my only recourse is to harass the board or vote for someone else on the board next time, and we all know how well that works. If I want to send my child to another school I have to pay for it myself and it’s usually pretty expensive, unless you home educate privately. If I don’t agree with the way the charter school spends money, I can choose another school and that school doesn’t get the money for my child.
Maybe Washington should make an amendment so that charter schools can operate in their state legally. Personally, I think we all need to rethink public education entirely.
Also, how does this effect California? We’ve been doing charter schools a lot longer than Washington, so my guess is that it will not effect us at all. But it has raised the question, so now I’m curious how California is different. What are our laws regarding charters? More research. Life learning, right? That’s what home education is all about after all!