Washington State Senate Passes Charter Bill, Legislative Battle Advances to House
The Washington Supreme Court decision regarding charter schools has been covered by The Seventy Four. You can find comprehensive coverage of the decision on our website.
On Wednesday, state senators in Washington voted 27-20 to save charter schools in the state. The decision came after a heated debate about the responsibility of the legislature towards public education and who should have oversight over charter schools.
The passage of the bill marks a significant step forward in the campaign initiated by charter school parents, students, educators, and supporters in September. This campaign was started after the state Supreme Court declared Washington’s nine charter schools unconstitutional.
Shirline Wilson, a parent at Rainier Prep charter school, expressed her excitement about the bill’s passage, stating, "I’m just exhilarated. I’m completely charged and excited that we’re making progress and that the legislators have listened to their constituents and recognized the value of charters in Washington state."
The bill was sponsored by a group of bipartisan senators and quickly advanced through committee since the beginning of the legislative session last week. Emotional testimonies from charter school students played a crucial role in shaping the process, as they pleaded with lawmakers not to take away the option that gave them their first taste of academic success.
During the Senate floor discussions on Wednesday, one of the bill sponsors, Senator Steve Litzow, highlighted that the bill addresses only one of the many challenges faced by K-12 students in the state. Litzow emphasized the significant achievement gap between middle-class and affluent white students and low-income students of color in Washington state. He stressed the need for a different approach to education and stated that this bill is just one step towards that.
However, some legislators argued against the bill, questioning whether addressing the issue of fully funding education should take precedence over the fate of charter schools. The legislature is currently being fined $100,000 a day by the state Supreme Court for failing to fully fund education, known as the McCleary lawsuit. Some proposed amendments to the charter school bill to prioritize fully funding K-12 education.
Senator Pramila Jayapal expressed concerns about the systemic divestment in public education and argued that the Senate needs to address its paramount duty. Senator Rosemary McAuliffe agreed and advocated for smaller class sizes, which charter students testified as beneficial, to be accessible to all 1 million children in the state’s K-12 system, not just the roughly 1,000 students in charter schools.
Senator Andy Billig proposed amending Litzow’s charter bill to give local district boards control over charter schools. Billig himself sponsored a competing charter bill that did not pass the Senate education committee. He believed that a middle ground solution is necessary to provide certainty to charter students.
On the other hand, policymakers like Litzow and Senator Mark Mullet argued that local school board control over charters may not work well in Seattle, as the area is less charter-friendly. They expressed concerns that districts opposing charter schools could hinder existing ones and prevent future expansion. Mullet, who is also a sponsor of Litzow’s charter bill, believed that a local school district-only passage would effectively kill charter schools.
Litzow’s and Mullet’s bill proposes the reinstatement of the state charter commission established by the 2012 voter referendum that approved charters. This commission’s board members are appointed by the governor, President of the Senate, and Speaker of the House.
The composition of the school governing board is a critical issue because one of the reasons why the Supreme Court ruled charter schools unconstitutional is that they do not meet the definition of a "common school" under a 1909 state law. The court argued that the appointment of board members instead of their election by the public makes charters ineligible to receive taxpayer dollars.
To address this concern, the charter bill passed by the Senate draws funds from the State Opportunity Pathways Account, which is financed by lottery revenues. However, the Senate approved an amendment on Wednesday to ensure that the bill does not reduce funding for early learning and financial aid for higher education, as these groups also rely on these funds.
"This bill repeats the same actions over and over again, which I believe is irrational," expressed Senator Jamie Pederson, a supporter of charter students but ultimately voted against the bill. "If we don’t address these constitutional problems, the Supreme Court could once again shut down the system."
Senator Bruce Dammeier emphasized that the vote was not about other educational issues in the state, but specifically about the fate of charter schools. "We should not abandon these children who are receiving a successful education," Dammeier argued. "This bill is the only solution for these schools."
During the recent legislative session, parents, teachers, and students from charter schools testified at hearings. For instance, ninth-grader Jadynn Isabell from Summit Sierra shared her story, stating that if she had attended a traditional public school, she may have faced disciplinary issues. Now, she has aspirations of attending college and supporting her alma mater.
Rosebell Komugisha, a teacher at Green Dot Destiny Middle School, provided success statistics to the senators. Despite having a student body consisting of predominantly low-income and students of color, one-third of the students had already surpassed their reading goals within the first three months of school.
Destiny sixth-grader Anngel Dillard questioned why schools like hers would be closed if the goal is to develop educated leaders for the future. She pleaded with the senators, "It’s unfair to take away a quality education. We hope we can count on you."
The Washington Education Association expressed its lack of support for the bill during Monday’s public hearing. They urged legislators to prioritize fully funding public schools as mandated by McCleary. However, they did not comment on whether they would initiate another lawsuit against charter schools if the legislation passed.
Some testimony at the hearing criticized the bill proposed by Litzow for the lack of local control. Dan Steele from the Washington Association of School Administrators stated concerns about using public funds for charter schools that are not accountable to locally elected school board members.
Steele did mention that his association members would be open to supporting Billig’s charter bill, which would give oversight to elected school boards. However, this bill has yet to make progress in the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Education Committee.
The other bill will now be considered in the House, where sufficient votes are expected to pass it. However, the process of getting charter legislation to the floor may pose challenges, as some House leaders have a history of rejecting such legislation.
Maggie Meyers, spokesperson for the pro-charter group Act Now for Washington Students, acknowledges that getting the legislation through the House will be a process. She remains hopeful that the testimonies of parents and students will have a significant impact on the representatives, just as they did on the senators.
"I suppose this is just Part One," said Natalie Johnson, a parent from Summit Sierra charter school. "I’ve heard that the House is more challenging, and I already felt that the Senate was difficult. We’re not celebrating just yet. It seems like it will be harder to convince the House. But I am grateful that they listened to us and our kids."