New Battle Between Unions and Charter Schools Emerges in RI

New Battle Between Unions and Charter Schools Emerges in RI

Recent votes by two union representatives on the Rhode Island Board of Education against a number of public charter school expansions have critics questioning if there is a conflict of interest -- and the unions are staunchly defending their actions. 

Larry Purtill, President of the National Education Association Rhode Island (NEARI) and Colleen Callahan with the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals (RIFTHP), voted down adding seats to Highland, the International Charter School in Pawtucket, Kingston Hill Academy, and Times2 Academy in Providence at a Board of Education meeting on Monday. 

"For budgetary reasons, the two of them have in the past filed conflict of interest forms," said Board of Education Chair Eva Mancuso.  "If that logic applies, when we were having this discussion, two superintendents came and testified against the expansion for budgetary reasons."

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

"I'm a pro-union person, that's not an issue," continued Mancuso. "I'm pointing out the fact that when you're voting on it, it shouldn't be a vote you have a financial stake."

The expansion proposals of the charter schools listed above were approved by the Board of Education to add in total 700 new seats, to the opposition of superintendents at the meeting saying their districts couldn't absorb the costs -- and subsequently the opposition from the unions. 

"There is a clear conflict of interest when unions are allowed to have a vote in the general financial decisions of public school districts," said Mike Stenhouse with the Rhode Island for Freedom and Prosperity, who has been a strong proponent for private school choice in the state. 

Order of Business

"I went and read all the statutes after the meeting," said Mancuso. "Nowhere does it say that we have to look at the financial impact on the sending district to decide whether a charter school should be expanded or not.  We're supposed to look at if it's high performing, if there's a demand -- and there a long waiting lists.  The legislature has explicitly dictated what I am supposed to look at for criteria for expansion."

Callahan, the RIFTHP Issues Director, said that financial implications should part of the decision making process -- and defended the role of the unions, who have two slots on the 17 member board, to vote on such a matter. 

"As charter schools grow and expand in RI, the fiscal implications on school districts are becoming more and more apparent and, as a Council, we must carefully consider the concerns raised by school committees, city and town councils, teachers, administrators, parents and community members when making these important decisions. We should also respect the diverse perspectives of our board members and recognize that they are gained through education and professional and personal experience and add value to our deliberations and decisions," said Callahan.  "My perspective is shaped by 40+ years experience in education, an advanced degree in educational leadership and my work with the RIFTHP. I am proud to bring a teacher's perspective to my service on the Board of Education and find it unfortunate that, unlike many other professions, educators' voices are often not valued in making educational policy decisions."

"Specifically related to the charter issue, over my many years on the BOE I have, when I believe warranted, voted in favor of charter approvals and renewals and it is certainly interesting that the question of recusal was not asked at those times," added Callahan.  "As I stated at the meeting, this is an issue of timing and a need for more information on the very real implications for all children and all districts of these decisions."

NEARI President Purrtill, who is currently secretary treasurer of the Institute for Labor Studies and Research, also weighed in on the matter.  

"I follow legal council’s advice on when to recuse myself, such as when discussing the contract of members I represent. There is absolutely no reason to recuse from this current discussion," said Purtill.  "It is a real shame that some want to silence the voice of educators on the Board of Education. Education is a profession, unlike others, say the legal or medical, where decisions are made by people outside the field; frankly educators are weary of the constant attacks on their expressing what they believe should be happening to make public education successful for all students."
 
"The next question is, is anyone asking the two sitting members of school committees and the one member of the council who sits on a charter board the same question. Unfortunately, it was more about what I was saying than any type of procedure and just because you don’t agree with how a member votes is no reason to call in to question a conflict when one doesn’t exist," continued Purtill.  "The issue of funding raised by the two superintendents the other evening and brought up in discussion by Colleen and myself is real and some don’t want the topic out in the open apparently."

Big Questions

When I first came on board, I was against Mayoral academies,  and charter schools," said Mancuso.  "I then came around on the whole idea, but olny after I saw the whole mentality.  The fact is most of the charter schools are high performing.  The law is clear -- if they're high performing, we don't look at financial impact.  If that's going to be a new criteria, the General Assembly would have to take that up."

A list of current charter schools - and years served -- can be found here.

And while some are calling for increased public school options, Stenhouse is part over the Bright Today coalition -- looking to increase private school choice in state

"We're advocating for additional forms of parental choice that open up options outside of the government-run school monopoly, by which I mean traditional public schools and public charters," said Stenhouse. "Under a tax credit scholarship or voucher program, families would be empowered with the choice to send their children to schools where this conflict does not exist.