New Charters in 2012?

Could it really be...?



The Raleigh News & Observer reports today that the State Board of Education might actually consider allowing a few new charter schools to open their doors in the fall of 2012 after all.  Heres' the link:

http://projects.newsobserver.com/node/22710

Believe it or not, they may actually be serious about this.  A plan for reviewing 'fast track' charter school applications has been written and is on the board's agenda for the August 31-September 1 meeting.  You can see the plan here: 

http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/stateboard/meetings/2011/09/lfi/09lfi01.pdf

In brief, the idea is to have the newly formed Public Charter School Advisory Council review existing applications that would have been approved last go-around, had there been no cap, and make recommendations to the board as to which of these should be approved for 2012.  Existing schools that want to convert to charters would also be allowed to submit fast track applications, as would currently successful charter schools that wanted to replicate or spin off another campus. 

There are a lot of things that could still derail this move, of course, starting with the board's discussion and vote next week.  As anyone who has spent any time observing the operations of the board knows, very little of substance ever happens in an open board meeting; the real decisions having already been made in private beforehand.  And of course, the advisory council that would have to review all the applications doesn't actually exist yet, so...yeah. 

Still, this is the best charter news to come from the state board since...well, it's the only good charter news that Charter Guy can ever remember coming from the board.

Meet the new board, same as the old board

The old guy

The new guy



Governor Beverly Perdue has finally submitted the names of her nominees to fill the vacant expired spots on the State Board of Education.  Loyal readers will recall that the terms of two of the board's district representatives expired back in March, but those members have continued to serve due to a quirk in the law that the Perdue administration believes somehow trumps the Constitution's defined eight-year terms (see, "What's that smell?  SBE appointees WAY past their expiration dates," charternation, August 7th).  Board Chairman Bill Harrison's term also expired in March, yet he gavels on.

So to replace State Education District One's Jean Wooland the governor has chosen--Jean Wooland.  And to replace Chairman Bill Harrison, the guv's pick is--Bill Harrison.  Only district seven's Tom Speed is actually rotating off.  If Perdue gets her way, William Woltz would take his place (more about him in the coming days). 

After all, why change personnel when things are going so swimmingly (cough, cough, EOGs, cough, cough)?

The legislature is scheduled to consider these appointments during its September mini-session, and if they are approved the three anti-charter amigos would serve until 2019 (eight year terms, remember?).  That's six and one-half years into the administration of any pro-charter governor who might possibly be elected to replace Perdue in November of 2012. 

On the other hand, suppose the legislature doesn't vote to approve them?  Maybe they just leave those names and positions out of the appointment bill, just lets them continue to serve, waiting to see what happens on election day?  Then a new governor could nominate replacements upon taking office in January of 2013, get some people of his own choosing on the board right away...just say'n. 

Pat McCrory, are you out there?  Might want to give Speaker Tillis and Senate President Berger a call. 

From their cold, dead fingers...

Charter school advocates who are hoping that the election of a new governor in 2012 will usher in a  pro-charter era in state government need to take a close look at the details of the new Public Charter School Advisory Council which the state board of education is slooooooooowly putting together.  Those stalwart guardians of the education status quo have written the rules for the new council in such a way that anti-charter appointees will continue to dominate it for years.  The details can be found here:

http://sbepolicy.dpi.state.nc.us/

In brief, the council will be made up of 15 members and will have only advisory functions; the state board will remain in complete control of all aspects of charter school policy.  The governor will appoint a majority of the members (8), while the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tem of the Senate will each get to nominate three members.  The Superintendent of Public Instruction will nominate the final member.

We know what kind of lackeys our current governor plans to fill the board with, and we can assume that the superintendent's lone nominee will be no charter supporter either.  That's nine reliably anti-charter votes to start with.  Assuming that our legislative leaders nominate only pro-charter candidates for the six seats they control on the council, the council will begin life with a 9-6 anti-charter majority. 

You might think that simply electing a pro-charter governor (and superintendent) in 2012 would solve the problem, and it would--but not right away. 

That's because the people our current officials are appointing to the council are going to be serving for a long time yet to come--most of them for four years.  To make matters worse, the terms of these initial appointees are staggered in such a way that the governor's and superintendent's picks serve longer terms than those nominated by the legislators.

Six of the governor's picks will serve full four year terms, as will the superintendent's choice.  One of the governor's appointees will serve for three years, and the last one for only two.  That means that even if  the governor is replaced with a pro-charter candidate in 2012, there will only be one opening on the council in 2013 and one in 2014 for the new governor to fill.

And that's assuming that the state board really does get the council up and running before the end of this year.  If the board can somehow delay the official launching of the council until January 1, 2012 or later, you can add one year to those earliest replacement dates above. 

There's more mischief in the details.  The governor is not required to pick anyone with any knowledge of or experience in charter schools.  In fact, her appointees don't even have to pretend to be supportive of charter schools.  The legislative nominees are just that--nominees.  They must apparently be approved by the full board before being seated.  And two of them must be either district school board members or employees of district schools. 

All this goes to show that the legislature can pass all the laws they want to, but if they don't keep a close watch on how the bureaucracy is implementing those laws they don't do a bit of good. 

What's that smell? SBE appointees WAY past their expiration dates

Jean W. Wooland was appointed to the State Board of Education in September of 2010 by Governor Perdue to fill the vacancy left by the untimely death of Kathy Taft.  According to her "member profile" on the State Board's website (http://www.ncpublicschools.org/stateboard/about/profiles), Ms. Wooland represents the state's First Educational District (northeastern North Carolina), lives in Plymouth, and is a long-time teacher union (NCAE) activist. 

Her profile also states that her term expired on March 31st, 2011, over four months ago.  Yet Ms. Wooland continues to serve on the board. 

Boone attorney Robert Speed, appointed by former governor and convicted felon Mike Easley in 2003, also continues to serve on the board despite his term having expired at the end of March as well. 

How can this be?  It 'be' because Governor Perdue has figured out how to use a little-known statute to avoid having her appointees confirmed by the (Republican-controlled) General Assembly.  According to G.S. 128-7 "All officers shall continue in their respective offices until their successors are elected or appointed, and duly qualified." 

Taken at face value, the statute would seem to indicate that if a governor had a crony on a board or commission whose term was up but she didn't want to risk losing in a confirmation battle in the legislature, she could keep him around forever by simply never naming a replacement.  The appointee's 'term' would then be indefinite, at least as long as said governor was in office.  That appears to be what she's trying to do here with Ms. Woolard and Mr. Speed.

There's a huge problem in this case, however.  The term for state board of education members is set, not by some statute, but by the North Carolina Constitution.  That term is explicitly defined as eight years, no more, no less (Article IX, Section 4, "Appointments shall be for overlapping terms of eight years").   

As every public school student, or at least every public charter school student knows, statutes cannot overrule constitutions.  If the Constitution of the great state of North Carolina says the term is for eight years, then the term is for eight years--end of arguement. And end of Ms. Woolard's and Mr. Speed's terms.  Or at least it would be if anyone were to take the board to court and make a case out of this. 

Perhaps the governor will renominate the pair, or two others like them in her 'apointments bill, which the GA will consider during its September mini-session.   But what if she doesn't?  The Constitution says that state board appointees must be confirmed by the General Assembly.  Will Republicans in the legislature let her get away with extending current members indefinitely, and thus doing an end run around our Constitution?