Opinion ID: 2509859
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The 2008 Charter Schools Commission Act

Text: This case involves the Charter Schools Commission Act of 2008. See OCGA § 20-2-2080 et seq. Experience under the 1998 Act led to concerns that local school boards would not approve charter school petitions and that funding for the alternative, the state charter schools, was too limited. See Review of Selected 2008 Georgia Legislation, 25 Ga. St. U.L.Rev. 47, 51-52 (Fall 2008) (noting that 26 of the 28 charter school petitions submitted in Georgia were denied in 2007). After extensive hearings, floor debate, and amendments, the 2008 Act passed by a vote of 114-40 in the House of Representatives and 30-21 in the Senate. See id. at 50-67. The 2008 Act opens with the following legislative findings and statement of intent: (a) The General Assembly finds that: (1) Charter schools are a critical component in this state's efforts to provide efficient and high-quality schools within this state's uniform system of public education; (2) Charter schools provide valuable educational options and learning opportunities while expanding the capacity of this state's system of public education and empowering parents with the ability to make choices that best fit the individual needs of their children; and (3) The growth of charter schools in this state has contributed to enhanced student performance, greater efficiency, and increased parental satisfaction. (b) It is the intent of the General Assembly that: (1) There be established a state-level commission whose primary focus is the development and support of charter schools in order to better meet the growing and diverse needs of some of the increasing number and array of charter schools in this state and to further ensure that charter schools of the highest academic quality are approved and supported throughout the state in an efficient manner; and (2) New sources of community support from cosponsors should be authorized to participate in developing and supporting charter schools, with the goal of maximizing access to a wide variety of high-quality educational options for all students regardless of disability, race, or socioeconomic status, including those students who have struggled in a traditional public school setting. OCGA § 20-2-2080. The act created the seven-member Georgia Charter Schools Commission, appointed by the State Board of Education from recommendations by the Governor (for three commissioners), the President of the Senate (two), and the Speaker of the House (two). See OCGA § 20-2-2082(a), (b). Commissioners must hold at least a college degree and should be a group of diverse individuals representative of Georgia's school population who [have] experience in finance, administration, law, education, public school teaching, and school governance. OCGA § 20-2-2082(b). The Commission's primary function is to develop commission charter schools. A commission charter school is expressly defined in terms of the 1983 Constitution's special schools provision as a charter school authorized by the commission pursuant to this article [of the Education Code] whose creation is authorized as a special school pursuant to Article VIII, Section V, Paragraph VII of the Constitution. OCGA § 20-2-2081(2). The Commission is charged with, among other responsibilities, approving or denying petitions for commission charter schools according to rules and regulations established by the State Board of Education. See OCGA § 20-2-2083(a)(1). The funding mechanism for commission charter schools is set forth in OCGA § 20-2-2090; it is much less favorable for local school systems than the funding mechanism for the state charter schools created under the 1998 Act, as the local systems receive reduced state and federal funding in proportion to the number of students residing in their districts that choose to attend commission charter schools. Because the same special school arguments can be made, but have not been made, against the 1998 Act as against the 2008 Act, it is apparent that this funding difference is what motivated this lawsuit and the efforts of the local systems to have the Commission Charter Schools Act deemed unconstitutional. But as the trial court held and I fully agree, there is nothing unconstitutional about the funding scheme set up by the 2008 Act. Because the majority evidently can find no traction in the local systems' attack on the funding scheme (or in the many other arguments the appellants raise) as the ground for striking down the statute, the majority must rely on the special schools argument, which has the consequence of also nullifying any state charter schools established under the 1998 Act.