Table of Contents
The contrast between supporters and opponents of expanding education freedom in Kentucky was starkly evident during the recent Kentucky Supreme Court hearing on the constitutionality of legislation funding public charter schools.
On one side, the Council for Better Education (CBE) and the Kentucky Board of Education (KBE) – whose members were appointed by Gov. Andy Beshear largely because of their opposition to parental empowerment – argued against allowing Kentuckians access to public charter schools, an option available in 44 other states, Washington, D.C., Guam and Puerto Rico.
Control and money drive their arguments. They resent the autonomy of charter schools, including their independent boards’ ability to tailor curriculum, staffing and resources to meet students’ needs.
CBE and KBE lawyers claim this autonomy equates to a lack of accountability to local school boards, despite the fact that these boards are the only charter-schools authorizers and charters must comply with state testing, teacher certification, transparency laws and a host of other requirements – just like traditional public schools.
Justice Michelle Keller from Northern Kentucky questioned, “Who's going to be accountable and how are we going to know ... whether the promises of the charter schools are being met?” State Solicitor General Matthew F. Kuhn, representing Attorney General Russell Coleman’s office, provided the pivotal response: “Parental choice is the ultimate accountability. Parents don’t have to send their kids to charter schools. Their kids only go there if they choose. And our submission would be that's the best form of accountability given that we presume that parents know best for their kids.”
A ruling against this bill would suggest that Kentucky’s highest court believes the state constitution’s ratifiers, over 130 years ago, intended to deny parents the right to choose better public schools for their children. This contradicts the court’s 1989 Rose v. Board of Education decision, which declared it the General Assembly’s “sole obligation to provide for an efficient system of common schools.”
Justice Keller’s great concern regarding charter school accountability is commendable given none have even opened in Kentucky. But where’s that same unease for holding the traditional K-12 system accountable? Since 1990, in inflation-adjusted dollars Kentucky’s per-pupil funding has surged by 122%, yet teacher compensation has declined, bureaucratic costs have ballooned and two-thirds of students overall – along with barely two in 10 minority students – fail to reach proficiency in math and reading.
If we genuinely believe in Rose’s mandate for efficient resource use, closing achievement gaps and improving education, charter schools – which have proven effective in checking all those boxes in other states – should be embraced, not shunned.
Yet Justice Keller dismissed these successes, stating, “Yeah, whatever's happening in the other 45 states, I don’t know,” then worried about diverting funds from traditional public schools. But funding school choice – charters included – hasn’t hurt Florida’s public schools at all. Kentucky can only dream about Florida’s public school NAEP scores.
Justice Pamela Goodwine claimed that November’s vote against Amendment 2 rejected publicly funding charter schools, wondering “Should that impact our decision, or should we ignore the nearly two-thirds of the voters who do not wish to have taxpayer funds used in this manner?”
But University of Kentucky law professor Paul Salamanca corrected her.
“The referendum asked whether the people of Kentucky supported the idea of the General Assembly appropriating money for schools outside the system of common schools,” Salamanca instructed. “We are not outside the system of common schools.”
Could Goodwine’s perspective be clouded by $200,000 in campaign ads from the Jefferson County Teachers’ Association (JCTA) during her Supreme Court bid, as reported by Louisville Public Media?
Gov. Beshear also gave her a rare endorsement during the nonpartisan judicial race, prompting criticism from the Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee for its potential to “further blur the line between judicial and partisan elections.”
Both the JCTA and Beshear strongly oppose education freedom.
Will such ties affect Goodwine’s ability to rule impartially on charter schools’ constitutionality? Can we ignore this potential bias?
Short-term political considerations must not be allowed to deny Kentucky parents the option of public charter schools, which promise to enhance the state’s education system by fostering innovation, accountability and better outcomes for students.
Jim Waters is president of the Bluegrass Institute.
This column was previously published in newspapers statewide.
