An open letter to state Rep. Paul Takac, D-College Township:
Dear Representative Takac,
Last Tuesday on this very website you shared your opinion about the state’s funding of Pennsylvania’s schools. I could nitpick a few items in your comments, such as:
You mentioned underfunding, sufficient funding, fair funding and equitable funding for PA schools, yet nowhere in those 560 words did you mention exactly how much funding was needed. What is your monetary goal? Otherwise, how will we know when we are sufficiently, fairly and equitably funded?
You also state that rural school districts represent the majority of Pennsylvania, which is true in terms of the number of districts, but not by population. Traditionally, the Democratic party’s line of thinking when it comes to elected representatives is that population rules, not the number of red or blue voting precincts. If precincts represented the majority of Pennsylvania, many in your party wouldn’t have jobs.
But those are little quibbles compared to the one major criticism you leveled toward a minority group of your constituents who choose a non-traditional educational opportunity and attend charter schools.
I would suggest that, as the Democratic Party platform states, every American is equal, their civil rights should be defended, and we should expand opportunity for all Americans. Yet, you seem to disagree. In your missive you wrote this:
The current system inevitably results in economically and historically disadvantaged school districts. While they struggle to keep pace, charter schools make things even worse by siphoning tens of millions in local tax dollars away from our public schools to fund often underperforming and unaccountable charter schools.
For a decade I’ve served on the Citizens Advisory Committee for Finance to the State College Area School District – which sits partly in your legislative district – so I’m conversant in the topic you’ve chosen to write about.
Let’s start with your second statement first – that charter schools are unaccountable. According to Pennsylvania Charter School Law (“CSL”), charter schools are required to be accountable to parents, the public and the Commonwealth. They are approved by a local school board. They are overseen by a local school board. And if they don’t operate according to their charter – as determined by the local school board – the local school board will close them down (as State College’s school board has done). Not to mention they operate according to all other applicable laws in addition to the CSL. If anything, charter schools are more accountable than traditional district schools.
Then we’ll go back to your first statement where you wronged a minority with this: charter schools “siphon” tens of millions in local tax dollars away from our public schools. I’m unclear how that’s possible, because according to the CSL, a charter school is a public school. One of the intentions of the General Assembly (of which you are a member) when they created the CSL was “to provide parents and pupils with expanded choices in the types of educational opportunities that are available within the public school system.” So, how can they take money away from “our public schools”? They are our public schools!
But even worse, the language you chose, “…siphoning tens of millions in local tax dollars away…”, sounds to me like a backhanded way of accusing those children who attend charter schools – and their parents – of being tax-wasters. Scofflaws. You might as well have called them public enemies. That doesn’t sound at all like a defense of an American’s civil rights, that sounds like you want to restrict opportunity for that minority group of Americans.
What’s sadly humorous about your contention is that it’s completely backwards. Charter schools are an outstanding way for public schools to reduce costs. Let’s use State College Area School District as an example. SCASD’s income this year will be $187 million. That $187 million is to educate 7,400 young people across all options – homeschooling, charters, cybers, religious, private and public. Quick division shows that equals $25,270 that the district receives to educate each youngster. And as you know, homeschoolers, and religious and private schools don’t receive any funding from SCASD. SCASD keeps the $25,270 for each youngster in those options.
Now, according to SCASD, in a recent school year it had 351 charter students that cost a total of $5.8 million to educate. That’s $16,524 per student. Meaning, each charter school student is being educated for around $8,500 LESS than a student in the traditional schools. In other words, if every kid in the State College district attended a charter school, the district would save tens of millions or more. (We could eliminate the local income tax.) Charter schools are not siphoning tens of millions of local tax dollars, they’re giving us the opportunity to SAVE tens of millions in local tax dollars.
Education is a wonderful gift, and charter schools and the CSL in Pennsylvania were created to, among other things: improve pupil learning, increase learning opportunities for all pupils, and encourage the use of different and innovative teaching methods. Education is not a one-size-fits-all endeavor and trying to make it so just severely shortchanges those who thrive in a different setup than the traditional classroom. It’s discriminatory.
On a personal note, our two wonderful kids utilized a combination of homeschooling, charter schooling, and public schools to navigate their K-12 education. Both graduated from college with honors – magna and summa cum laude — from universities whose academic rankings are better than Penn State’s. We know many people who have utilized educational opportunities outside the traditional classroom and every single one was thrilled that the opportunity existed. In addition, we’ve had the privilege to meet a number of highly respected people in the education sector, and again, every single one was a strong proponent of these educational options.
All of which is to say, if you believe schools are underfunded, that’s great, but how about putting up a number as the goal line? And as for the minority of your constituents who are trying to expand educational opportunities for all, I encourage you to defend them, rather than restrict their rights.
