California Charter Schools Archives

As the year progresses the education community, including charter school leaders, in California is coming face-to-face with two propositions that will appear on the November ballot. Construction and business leaders are pushing a $9 billion school bond while the teachers union is championing a measure to continue the Proposition 30 tax increases that Governor Jerry Brown sponsored several years ago. Several weeks ago the fear was that if both measures appeared on the ballot it could hurt either effort to attract votes but now it appears that voters favor passage of both measures.
The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) released a recent survey which showed support for the two initiatives. PPIC tested other subjects as well, including knowledge of the Governor’s Local Control Funding Formula, the Governor’s job approval and other K-12 areas. Below, are some key findings of the survey:

Although state spending on schools has increased, 61 percent of adults and 60 percent of likely voters say the current level of funding is not enough.
64 percent of adults and 62 percent of likely voters favor extending Prop 30 tax increases for 12 years for those making over $250,000 a year to fund education and health care.
76 percent of adults and 63 percent of likely voters would vote yes for a state school facilities bond.
For parcel taxes, less than the two-thirds (62 percent) of likely voters (needs two-thirds vote) would support, and only 52 percent or likely voters would support lowering the two thirds majority threshold.
76 percent of adults say state government should fund voluntary preschool programs in CA, and 63 percent of adults would support using the surplus for preschool, while only 34 percent would prefer to pay down the state debt and build up a reserve.

To see the full results of the poll go to PPIC’s website at www.ppic.org.
Though the election is months away this poll gives a boost to the education community who has shown strong support for the school bond measure (which includes $500 million for California charter schools) and could see overall charter school funding reduced if the Proposition 30 taxes are not extended.

When Emily and Ian McVey decided to open a charter school, their primary focus was to bring an innovative education approach to their hometown. As they worked to turn their dream of Foothill Leadership Academy into a reality, they faced the same challenge many new or expanding charter schools face – a funding gap. They had to open the school’s doors before receiving state per pupil funds needed to operate. They immediately turned to Charter School Capital to accelerate their PENSEC funding to aid in growth.
“We wouldn’t be here without Charter School Capital. That’s really the bottom line,” says Emily McVey, founding director of Foothill Leadership Academy.
As a new school based in Sonora, California, Foothill Leadership Academy had access to California’s Pupil Estimates for New or Significantly Expanding Charters (PENSEC) reporting program, which allows new or expanding charter schools to gain access to expedited federal and state funds. But even this program required them to prepare for opening months before they would receive charter school funding. Using Foothill Leadership Academy’s PENSEC report, Charter School Capital was able to step-in and deliver working capital to the school well in advance of California’s release of available funds.
“Without Charter School Capital, we would’ve never been able to open our doors because we weren’t getting any funding,” McVey says of her 130-student charter school. “As such a small school, the amount of funding we get is so small compared to other schools, but that funding made all the difference.”
Foothill Leadership Academy draws on a few innovative educational techniques, which combined make for a wholly unique educational experience for their students. “We’re a Leader in Me school, with a curriculum based off of Stephen R. Covey’s Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,” McVey explains. “We’re also an arts integrated school, so our students are fully engaged, not just sitting and listening.”
This approach has been so effective that Foothill has been operating at capacity since opening nearly three years ago, with a waitlist nearly as long as their attendance sheet.
The McVeys believe that operating a smaller school, with high teacher-to-student class ratios and small class sizes is a major component to Foothill’s success. As such, their charter school growth path includes opening additional locations, while keeping the footprint of each individual school fairly small. To keep their organization on this track, they’re going to continue to rely on PENSEC funding and an ongoing partnership with Charter School Capital.
With Charter School Capital, “it’s not just about the charter school funding,” McVey says, “It’s about the relationships I’m creating, and how I feel safe, and that what I’m doing is important to Charter School Capital. It’s very important to me, to feel that I can trust that relationship.”
Are you with a new charter school in California? Existing charter school expanding grades? Give us a call about your growth needs and we can help you tap in to accelerated PENSEC funding to fuel your growth. Email us at GrowCharters@charterschoolcapital.com or call 877-272-1001. Our team is waiting to learn more about your school!

We’re having a party and you’re invited! Our team is heading to the California Charter Schools Conference in Long Beach next week and we’ve teamed up with Kevin Carroll for an evening of catalytic conversation and cocktails. You can RSVP here!
Tuesday, March 15 from 6:30 – 8:30 p.m. in The Empire Ballroom at The Sky Room. 40 S. Locust Street in Long Beach just a few steps away from the convention center.

Kevin is an author, speaker, mentor, and an agent for social change. He has inspired organizations and individuals — from CEOs and employees of Fortune 500 companies to school children — to embrace the spirit of play and creativity to maximize their human potential and sustain meaningful growth.Tonight Kevin will be helping us launch a program series for charter leaders to focus on four key themes – Storytelling, PLAY Matters!, Delivering/Enabling the Unexpected, and Got GRIT?!

Join us as we journey through these themes and learn more about how we will capture and embody these themes throughout 2016.

RSVP

When:
Tuesday, March 15
6:30 – 8:30 p.m.

Where:
The Empire Ballroom at The Sky Room

40 S. Locust Ave
Long Beach, CA 90802
(One Block from the Convention Center)

Several initiatives have been filed with the Secretary of State that could affect charter schools. A few weeks ago we gave you a school bond update; there is a school bond that will be on the ballot in November and also there were legislative efforts to place a school bond on the June ballot. The legislative and administrative effort to place a school bond on the June ballot collapsed without either party able to reach agreement on the size of the bond and what would be included in the bond. That leaves only the November school bond measure which totals $9 Billion and includes $500 Million for charter schools. That measure has continued to gain support from the business community, local school districts and elected officials. However, in a major blow the Governor has come out opposed to that bond measure. With the California Teachers Association the Governor has an interest in extending the taxes that were passed in Proposition 30 which is on the November ballot and having other propositions on the ballot will only complicate those efforts. It remains to be seen how this will play out during the year but it will be a lively discussion.
Another measure affecting charter schools has received a summary and title and is out for circulation. If passed it would eliminate all charter schools throughout the state on July 1, 2017 and revert all charter school property and resources purchased with public funds to the local school district. Additionally, all charter schools would either be shut down or revert to traditional public schools. The measure has received a title and summary from the Attorney General and now the proponents have 180 to gather the 365,880 signatures needed to place it on the ballot. We will keep you updated on the signature gathering process as it moves forward. The title of the initiative is the Elimination of Charter Schools Initiative.
To see either initiative in its entirety go to the Attorney General’s website at oag.ca.gov hit the initiative tab on the right hand side and search for either school bonds or charter schools. Then look for the title of the initiative.

One of the big policy fights that has been simmering around the Capitol over the last year is whether to place a school bond on the Primary or General election ballot this year. Education advocates and builders have been consistently saying that the state needs new dollars for school construction and modernization while the administration has been opposed on several fronts.
First, the administration does not want the state to incur new debt, as the Governor has worked hard to reduce the state’s past obligations and get the state back on a sound fiscal track. Second, the administration believes that there should be a new building program because the old state school facility program is not effective. As this tug of war has played out a coalition of builders, education advocates and architects have moved forward and qualified a ballot measure for the general election in November. Fearing that this ballot measure could endanger the prospects of extending the taxes (which will also be on the November ballot) the administration and the California Teachers Association are currently working with legislative staff to craft their own competitive measure that would be placed on the June primary ballot. To get it onto the June ballot the legislature must pass it with a 2/3 vote by February 16th (if they do not find a way to extend the deadline). We will keep you updated as the process moves forward. Below are some points from both proposals:
Bond on the November ballot:

$9 Billion total
$3 Billion for K-12 New Construction
$3 Billion for K-12 Modernization
$2 Billion for Community Colleges
$500 Million for Charter Schools
$500 Million for Career Tech
Funds under the current state facility program requiring a 50% local match

Current administrative/legislative proposal being drafted:

Dollar figure has not been set yet (rumored amount $4-5 billion)
Funds the True Unfunded List ($375 million)
Changes the state building program only for this bond
Local match is a sliding scale (33/50/66 percent) based upon a formula of per pupil AV
A CSFA loan program will be funded if a district is out of local funds
Authorizes County Offices of Education to issue bonds
Precludes New Construction dollars for portables or determining district capacity
Requires a 5 year Master Plan that will feed a formula for eligibility
Threshold for requiring DSA review increased from $40,000 to $100,000
Raises bond indebtedness cap
Accountability would be through an annual audit
Eligibility based upon 5-year projection allowing a supplemental projection with valid final
subdivision maps
Would establish Charter School apportionment process that parallels that established for
school districts
Includes Community Colleges

Assemblywoman Marie Waldron has introduced AB 1652 on behalf of her constituents in San Diego. AB 1652 attempts to give charter schools with a strong track record a longer renewal period; specifically stating that the first two charter renewals shall be for a period of 5 years and subsequent renewals shall be for a period requested by the charter school not to exceed 15 years. This is a policy change that charter school advocates have requested for a long time. It will provide charter schools greater flexibility and stability over a longer period of time. Including being able to grow and seek facility options knowing that their futures will be secure.
AB 1652 will first be heard in the Assembly Education Committee in a few weeks where it will face opposition from traditional public school advocates. Assemblywoman Waldron has reached out to the charter school community and asked that we assist her in her efforts. So when the hearing nears we will post a draft letter of support that you can use to send into the committee members to demonstrate the difference that this piece of legislation will make to the field.
To see AB 1652, go to the California Legislative Information website.
Photo of Assemblywoman Marie Waldron via her assembly website.

This week California Governor Jerry Brown released his proposed budget that invests significantly in K-12 education. The California budget update contains very good news for the education community while also storing away money in a healthy reserve. This begins the budget deliberation process, next the legislature will begin to hold hearings on the various proposals in the budget and the Governor will submit revisions to his budget in May. In this proposed budget the Governor wants to continue to restrain spending and increase budget reserves, and these dire economic predictions support his proposal to add about $3.5 billion to the Rainy Day Fund in 2016-17. This proposal seeks to transfer $2 billion more to the Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) than what is required under Proposition 2, and would bring the BSA total to just over $8 billion.

Continued Growth in K-12 Spending and LCFF Implementation

The Governor estimates that the Proposition 98 guarantee for 2016-17 will be $71.6 billion, which he compares to the pre-recession guarantee of $56.6 billion in 2007-08 and the deep recession guarantee of $47.3 billion in 2011-12. The increase in the guarantee for 2016-17 is sufficient to provide a fourth year investment of about $2.8 billion for LCFF implementation. The Department of Finance calculates that this funding will eliminate about 49% of the remaining LCFF funding gap, and when combined with the roughly $12.8 billion provided over the prior three years, will bring total LCFF implementation to about 95%. The budget proposal also provides a very modest $1.7 million increase to the county office of education LCFF to cover COLA and ADA adjustments.

One-Time Discretionary Funding

Upward adjustments of the Prop. 98 Guarantee in 2014-15 and 2015-16 allow the Governor to again propose an allocation of fully flexible, one-time funding to school districts, county offices and charter schools. The amount proposed for 2016-17 is $1.2 billion, and builds on the $3.6 billion provided over the last two budgets. Note that all of these funds count toward offsetting any mandate reimbursement claims filed by the LEAs receiving the funds.

California School Facilities

The Governor continues to cite “deficiencies” with the existing school facilities program and emphasizes the need for a new state program that is less complex and focuses on districts that have less local capacity to build or modernize schools. He observes that the $9 billion bond proposed for November 2016 does not reform the existing program but, in response to a question at his press conference this morning, did not state that he is currently opposed to that measure. The budget proposal, however, makes fairly clear that he intends to work with the Legislature and stakeholders to provide some sort of alternative to the November school bond measure.

Early Education Block Grant

The Administration proposes to consolidate Prop. 98 funding for the State Preschool Program, transitional kindergarten, and the Preschool Quality Rating and Improvement System Grant into a $1.6 billion Early Education Block Grant. The Governor suggests that the block grant will provide greater local flexibility to address community needs and focus on the most at-risk children. The proposal does not include many specifics, but promises further detail by the May Revision. Many legislators, including Speaker of the Assembly Anthony Rendon, have stated that expanding early education opportunities is their top priority. Stay tuned.

Career Technical Education

The Governor proposes to continue the commitment made in the 2015 Budget Act to provide $900 million in one-time funding over three years for competitive matching grants to support high-quality CTE programs. Funding for 2016-17 will be $300 million.

Proposition 39 Energy Efficiency

The budget proposes $365.4 million to support school district, county office and charter school energy efficiency projects in 2016-17. This is an increase of about $50 million over what was provided last year.

Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLA)

The COLA is calculated at 0.47%, and the budget proposal includes $22.9 million to provide COLAs to categorical programs that remain outside of the LCFF, including Special Education, Child Nutrition, Foster Youth, Preschool, American Indian Education Centers, and the American Indian Early Childhood Education Program.
Any questions on how this may impact your charter school? Let us know at GrowCharters@charterschoolcapital.com

Late last month, the California legislature adjourned for the year, ending the 2015-2016 legislative session. The session saw a flurry of legislative activity, some related to charter school operations in the state.
We’ve invited Branché Jones, California Legislative Consultant, and Barrett Snider, Partner at Capital Advisors Group, to join our President and CEO, Stuart Ellis, for a California Budget and Legislative Update webinar that will provide high level updates and commentary around the most recent budget and legislative cycle.
California Budget and Legislative Update, Tuesday, October 27, 9:00 – 10:00 a.m. PST.
Branché, Barrett, and Stuart plan to cover the following:

Political Updates
Legislative Updates
Budget Updates
2016 Prospectus

Please join us by registering for the webinar. We look forward to seeing you there!

This weekend the Governor vetoed AB 787. The measure would have prevented a charter school from operating as a for-profit or being operated by a for-profit corporation. It was sponsored by the California Teachers Association and targeted a number of charter schools in the state. Additionally, the language was vague and brought in to question contracts that several charter schools have with numerous providers and vendors. The Governor’s veto message was strong and pointed out the ambiguous language in the bill. Once again he has shown himself to be a strong proponent of parent and student choice.
See his veto message below by clicking on the message.

Over the next few weeks, our team at Charter School Capital is following the California Charter School Association’s (CCSA) campaign to provide information that dispels the myths and misinformation about charter schools. And, let’s face it, there are a lot of myths out there about charter schools.
One of the biggest myths: charter schools aren’t public schools. Simply not true. Charter schools are:

Tuition-free and open to all students
Non-sectarian, and do not discriminate on any basis
Publicly funded by local, state, and federal tax dollars based on enrollment, like other public schools
Held accountable to state and federal academic standards

Along with being public schools, charter schools are free public schools of choice that:

Do not engage in selective admissions policies
Must accept all students, including students with disabilities and English Learners (ELs), regardless of previous academic performance
Use a process to randomly select students, oftentimes a lottery system, if there are more interested students than available seats

We hope you’ll join the team at Charter School Capital in supporting CCSA, California charter school advocates, and school choice advocates across the country and online via #chartertruth, to shed light on the truth about charters.
Spread the Truth!
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook