+ 1-888-827-0150
+ 44-20-3006-2750
NYC Makes Efforts to Implement Fee for Charter Schools
One of the distinguishing features of NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio’s campaign was his pledge to implement rental fees for charter schools. His predecessor, former mayor Michael Bloomberg, who didn’t charge charter schools a cent—this was fine in theory but parents, students and educational activists were roused by the fact that a lot of Charter Schools are located in public school buildings which were originally allocated for state schools. In fact, according to the New York City Charter School Center, 63% of New York’s 183 charter schools are housed in public education buildings.
As mayor, one of the things which Bill de Blasio set out to do was to implement changes against (what he calls) Bloomberg’s favoritism toward charter schools. He redirected $210 million of the city’s funds which were originally set aside for the development of new charter schools. He also promised that he would block all proposals for new charter schools—specifically ones from Success Academy Charter Schools, who people have argued have more than enough. However, the Mayor has allowed all of the charter school proposals to move forward—including those from Success Academy.
Richard R. Buery, Jr. the deputy mayor for strategic policy initiatives clarifies that while they mayor still fully intends to keep his promise, they have to go about things with respect to legal and political systems—they also have to act to balance out the status quo in education; while favoritism for charter schools isn’t a good thing, neither is undermining the value of charter schools. Mr. de Blasio has yet to make a public announcement about the exact terms of his proposal but he confirms that the contributions given by each school will depend on their cash resources—those with more will give more and those with less will give less.
This move is controversial even if most states charge charter schools for the use of public school buildings because across states, it is usually the case that there is a fixed charge for charter schools to pay. This fee covers the remodeling of the public space, the facilities costs and the maintenance costs. In Denver, for example, charter schools pay $700 per student. Mr. Buery declined to say any more about Mr. de Blasio’s plans, only again emphasizing that they are planning their moves very carefully so that all steps taken are done so lawfully.
Activists and political critics have been asking some questions in social media—how will the mayor attempt to assess the wealth of charter schools? How does the government intend to level out the playing field for public schools when charter schools can afford to pay their teachers more? Also, will the assessment of the wealth be of the charter school per se or of the organization(s) running it?
For example, some very well-funded educational groups like New Visions for Public Schools and the Children’s Aid Society contribute to both charter schools and public schools. In particular, New Visions runs about 75 district schools and contributes $21 million of its budget to public education even if it runs 6 schools.
Charter school educators have come together to vehemently oppose Mr. de Blasio’s plan to charge them for rent. They argue that it’s unfair to charge them for using public spaces as independent education is relatively new and withdrawing money from their funds to put into the city treasury is going to be disruptive for their young systems. A study conducted by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research last month said that the best amount to charge charter schools would be $2,400 per student, given all costs which they incur—the results of the study also showed that should the government do this, two-thirds of the charter schools would have to cost-cut and would have to halt operations within the year.
Morty Ballen, chief executive of Executive Schools, a company which runs 4 charter schools in the city says that charter schools are the future of education. He points out that they’re the part of the educational system that has built their values on hard work and well-thoughtout innovations—the products of an effort to better education in the country. He says that penalizing charter schools because they’re doing well doesn’t just pose a threat to the growth of the education sector, it’s also highly illogical. Mr. Ballen asks the mayor whether or not it’s reasonable to punish people for ingenuity.
Those in favor of charging rent from charter schools, however, point out that a lot of charter schools can pay the rent—they simply don’t want to. To argue their point, they refer to different ads and marketing jingles put out by some charter school organizations, like Success Academy Charter Schools. They say that thousands of dollars which are spent on these publicity stunts could be put to better use in the public education sector.
Eva S. Moskowitz, who runs Success Academy, defends the organization by saying that the extra publicity was needed—especially given that charter schools are relatively new and not a lot of people know about the different programs which they offer. She says that alternative education may as well be useless if it exists but no one knows about it. Ms. Moskowitz says that Mr. de Blasio’s policies against charter schools is very discouraging. She says that it makes alternative education even more difficult and that it’s a shame that these things happen just when the alternative education programs were beginning to blossom.
The law, however, seems to rule in the favor of educational activists. Last year, a petition which was signed by 7,000 parents whose children were studying in the public sector sued the city, citing a provision in New York law that charter schools should pay rent for using public facilities. The case was dismissed, but the group has filed for an appeal. The Independent Budget Office says that if the parents win the lawsuit (should the appeal be approved), this will generate $92 million for the city’s funds.
They say that a possible compromise can be made: that charter schools aren’t charged any extra fees, but that they cease to use public buildings for their operations. Ms. Moskowitz argues that this isn’t a compromise at all as privately owned buildings are by far more expensive. She says she hopes that the mayor will realize what the consequences of his actions might result in and that he deliberate carefully before making his next move.
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE
NYC Makes Efforts to Implement Fee for Charter Schools
One of the distinguishing features of NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio’s campaign was his pledge to implement rental fees for charter schools. His predecessor, former mayor Michael Bloomberg, who didn’t charge charter schools a cent—this was fine in theory but parents, students and educational activists were roused by the fact that a lot of Charter Schools are located in public school buildings which were originally allocated for state schools. In fact, according to the New York City Charter School Center, 63% of New York’s 183 charter schools are housed in public education buildings.
As mayor, one of the things which Bill de Blasio set out to do was to implement changes against (what he calls) Bloomberg’s favoritism toward charter schools. He redirected $210 million of the city’s funds which were originally set aside for the development of new charter schools. He also promised that he would block all proposals for new charter schools—specifically ones from Success Academy Charter Schools, who people have argued have more than enough. However, the Mayor has allowed all of the charter school proposals to move forward—including those from Success Academy.
Richard R. Buery, Jr. the deputy mayor for strategic policy initiatives clarifies that while they mayor still fully intends to keep his promise, they have to go about things with respect to legal and political systems—they also have to act to balance out the status quo in education; while favoritism for charter schools isn’t a good thing, neither is undermining the value of charter schools. Mr. de Blasio has yet to make a public announcement about the exact terms of his proposal but he confirms that the contributions given by each school will depend on their cash resources—those with more will give more and those with less will give less.
This move is controversial even if most states charge charter schools for the use of public school buildings because across states, it is usually the case that there is a fixed charge for charter schools to pay. This fee covers the remodeling of the public space, the facilities costs and the maintenance costs. In Denver, for example, charter schools pay $700 per student. Mr. Buery declined to say any more about Mr. de Blasio’s plans, only again emphasizing that they are planning their moves very carefully so that all steps taken are done so lawfully.
Activists and political critics have been asking some questions in social media—how will the mayor attempt to assess the wealth of charter schools? How does the government intend to level out the playing field for public schools when charter schools can afford to pay their teachers more? Also, will the assessment of the wealth be of the charter school per se or of the organization(s) running it?
For example, some very well-funded educational groups like New Visions for Public Schools and the Children’s Aid Society contribute to both charter schools and public schools. In particular, New Visions runs about 75 district schools and contributes $21 million of its budget to public education even if it runs 6 schools.
Charter school educators have come together to vehemently oppose Mr. de Blasio’s plan to charge them for rent. They argue that it’s unfair to charge them for using public spaces as independent education is relatively new and withdrawing money from their funds to put into the city treasury is going to be disruptive for their young systems. A study conducted by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research last month said that the best amount to charge charter schools would be $2,400 per student, given all costs which they incur—the results of the study also showed that should the government do this, two-thirds of the charter schools would have to cost-cut and would have to halt operations within the year.
Morty Ballen, chief executive of Executive Schools, a company which runs 4 charter schools in the city says that charter schools are the future of education. He points out that they’re the part of the educational system that has built their values on hard work and well-thoughtout innovations—the products of an effort to better education in the country. He says that penalizing charter schools because they’re doing well doesn’t just pose a threat to the growth of the education sector, it’s also highly illogical. Mr. Ballen asks the mayor whether or not it’s reasonable to punish people for ingenuity.
Those in favor of charging rent from charter schools, however, point out that a lot of charter schools can pay the rent—they simply don’t want to. To argue their point, they refer to different ads and marketing jingles put out by some charter school organizations, like Success Academy Charter Schools. They say that thousands of dollars which are spent on these publicity stunts could be put to better use in the public education sector.
Eva S. Moskowitz, who runs Success Academy, defends the organization by saying that the extra publicity was needed—especially given that charter schools are relatively new and not a lot of people know about the different programs which they offer. She says that alternative education may as well be useless if it exists but no one knows about it. Ms. Moskowitz says that Mr. de Blasio’s policies against charter schools is very discouraging. She says that it makes alternative education even more difficult and that it’s a shame that these things happen just when the alternative education programs were beginning to blossom.
The law, however, seems to rule in the favor of educational activists. Last year, a petition which was signed by 7,000 parents whose children were studying in the public sector sued the city, citing a provision in New York law that charter schools should pay rent for using public facilities. The case was dismissed, but the group has filed for an appeal. The Independent Budget Office says that if the parents win the lawsuit (should the appeal be approved), this will generate $92 million for the city’s funds.
They say that a possible compromise can be made: that charter schools aren’t charged any extra fees, but that they cease to use public buildings for their operations. Ms. Moskowitz argues that this isn’t a compromise at all as privately owned buildings are by far more expensive. She says she hopes that the mayor will realize what the consequences of his actions might result in and that he deliberate carefully before making his next move.
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
