City Academy came into existence as a result of Minnesota's historic 1991 Charter School legislation, the first in the nation. The pioneering charter law called for up to eight teacher-created and -operated, outcome-based Charter Schools across the state that would be free of most state laws and state and local education rules. Renewable Minnesota charters would be granted for three years.
In 1993, new Minnesota charter legislation authorized existing public schools to become charters if 90 percent of a school's teachers supported the action. A 1993 amendment now allows the state board to approve Charter Schools without local board approval in some situations.
The idea of Charter Schools arose, in part, out of the statewide debate over school choice. Between 1985 and 1988, Minnesota began to enhance its reputation as an educational innovator when it became the first state to pass statewide public school choice legislation. Minnesota legislators hoped that Charter Schools would expand the number of real educational choices available to students and their parents. Charter Schools were intended to complement Minnesota's parental choice system to create a choice option not dependent on vouchers.
In spring 1993, Minnesota Governor Carlson sent legislators a letter urging them to "take the cap off" charter schools and authorize an unrestricted number. The legislature expanded the number of available statewide charters from 8 to 20. With this limit, the choice options still will not directly affect the vast majority of Minnesota students, but the legislation has opened the way for a school board on its own initiative to convert an existing school from administered to charter status.
"The people who come together to form a charter are extremely committed." Peggy O. Hunter
By spring 1993, more than 20 Minnesota Charter School proposals had been designed by groups of teachers and their supporters. The first 8 slots allowed by law were approved by local school boards and the state board of education. Other than City Academy, the Charter Schools are:
"The people who come together to form a charter are extremely committed," says Peggy O. Hunter, Enrollment Options Coordinator for the Minnesota Department of Education and Director of the state charter program. "They have overcome many barriers and have been very persistent and resourceful. Some have remained part of a Charter School network even after their charter requests were turned down by the local school board. They show commitment and tenacity for improving the learning environment for learners. They have an incredible excitement about learning and are so student-centered. It is wonderful to work with people who are determined to improve the education opportunities for children."
One of the legislative purposes of charters is to stimulate competition between public charter and traditional schools. Critics charge that several strong charter proposals were denied by local Minnesota school boards who hold the power to block charters and reputedly feared this competition.
Local boards may block new charters because they do not want state funds to be diverted from their existing public schools on an average daily per pupil basis to the Charter Schools. In these cases, school boards can vote to block the new charters. In one case, the state board of education denied a charter request by a group of rural parents and teachers who were trying to save their small school from closing.
"The school boards are not really ready to let go of mainstream kids they want to keep," explains Kolderie, "so they tend to kill proposals for Charter Schools that move toward mainstream kids. However the boards are not reluctant to let others try with kids with whom they haven't succeeded."
Minnesota legislators want a variety of Charter School models that will influence change in existing public schools. But the majority of the first wave of Minnesota charters went to schools that, like City Academy, want to educate children and teens who have not been well-served by traditional programs. Approximately half of the original charter proposals were targeted toward these youngsters.
Some of the characteristics of the Charter School idea are now being extended to other schools. In spring 1993, the Minnesota state board of education and the state legislature decided to free an entire school district that applies for waivers from all but the most basic state regulations. The waivers are from state board rules - not state or federal law; therefore, health, safety, civil rights, and special education regulations have not been waived. The state board can revoke the waivers at any time. Districts can take actions such as altering class sizes, the school day, and teacher work rules. The state board actually has been waiving rules for several years, but more schools and districts are beginning to ask for waivers.
One district experimenting with this new freedom is North Branch, approximately 40 miles north of Minneapolis-St. Paul. After petitioning for waivers in response to the Charter School legislation, the district was granted three-year waivers to prompt innovation. The school district argued that it could compete with any Charter School, but needed a level playing field. Other districts are watching the results closely.
Some Minnesota legislators want to find additional ways to authorize charters so that local school boards cannot block innovation. In states that are considering charter legislation, central issues of debate include the number of charters that should be granted, types of charter sponsorships, and appeal processes for blocked or rejected charters.
Two additional changes have been made in Minnesota with the 1993 amendment:
For an update on Charter Schools issues in Minnesota, see "Minnesota Update," from Policy Briefs, "Charter Schools Update" (Report 2, 1994).
Posted on March 6, 1995
URL: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/go/93-2MN.HTM