Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This story was originally published by Chalkbeat.
The state attorney general wants to block the sale of two buildings that Indianapolis Public Schools closed this year and hopes to sell.
His effort is the latest development in the argument over how to interpret the newest version of the state’s so-called “$1 law” that requires school districts to give closed school buildings to charters for the sale or lease price of $1. The controversial law is especially pertinent as IPS has closed six schools this year, two of which it currently seeks to sell.
The district’s complaint against Attorney General Todd Rokita and the Indiana Department of Education’s secretary of state and its board members argues that it is exempt from the newly revised state law. IPS asked the court last month for legal affirmation of its position, while also requesting an injunction to prevent the state from enforcing the law with respect to IPS.
The law, revised this past legislative session, exempts districts from having to sell or lease closed buildings to charters if they split funding from certain voter-approved property tax increases with an “applicable charter school.” IPS argues that it is exempt because it previously shared funds from a 2018 property tax increase with charters in its Innovation Network of autonomous schools.
But in its counterclaim filed in Marion County Superior Court on Wednesday, the attorney general’s office cited a new section added to state law this year that requires school districts in Marion County and three other counties to share certain voter-approved tax increases with charter schools. The law requires those districts to share referendum funds for any ballot question approved by a school board after May 10, 2023.
It’s the first time the attorney general has weighed in on the interpretation of the new version of the $1 law. The counterclaim offers the same interpretation as Sen. Linda Rogers, the Republican who authored the changes.
School districts must share referendum funds with charters for any ballot question passed after May 10 in order to be exempt from the $1 law, the counterclaim argues. In all other cases, they are subject to the law, the attorney general’s office noted.
IPS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The legal battle has sparked a complaint with the state’s public access counselor from the Indiana Charter School Network, which argued that the school board violated the state’s public meetings law because it had failed to approve the legal complaint in a public meeting.
The school board voted to authorize its complaint against the state three days after the public access complaint in a public meeting, with board President Venita Moore stressing that the board was seeking clarity over the law’s interpretation.
“We’re not trying to start a fight with anybody,” Moore said. “But rather we’re trying to remove any uncertainty with respect to our legal rights and obligations.”
The vote passed 4-1, with board member Angelia Moore abstaining and board member Will Pritchard voting against. Board member Hope Hampton was absent.
Chalkbeat Indiana is a not-for-profit news site covering educational change in public schools.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
This is total BS, why is the state forcing IPS to give, For-Profit companies, publicly owned buildings and taxpayer money?
Because state legislators get campaign contributions from charter school folks and that money isn’t given with no strings attached.
The state of Indiana does not want Indianapolis Public Schools to exist.
IPS does not seem to be getting the job done with respect to educating our students. It seems to me that we ought to do everything we can do to improve that situation. If that includes assisting Charter Schools to get the job done, why not? We ought to keep our eyes on the objective. I don’t like third graders that can’t read.
I generally don’t have a problem with charter schools when they are properly regulated. I think that they can hold an important place in K-12 education (although I do question whether Indiana properly regulates its charters…).
When IPS (or any other Indiana school district) is forced to sell its properties for $1, it impedes upon the district’s ability to “get the job done”. Districts should be able to sell old school properties to developers for the market value of the land. Many old school district buildings are inappropriate for small charter schools anyway; they’re often old and require a lot of maintenance, while being entirely too large for a charter school to fully occupy. And because Indiana law doesn’t specifically mandate that schools are leased to charter operators for $1 (rather than leased or purchased for $1), the system is ripe for abuse by charter “schools” that are more interested in real estate than acting as a school.
If Indiana wanted to maximally support charter schools and school districts, it would use surplus money to build surplus classrooms onto operating schools and to expand the scope of new school construction/expansion projects such as to include surplus classrooms. By law, such surplus space should be considered to be “community space” that allow charter school use during school hours; community college and extracurricular use after school hours; and miscellaneous community use during weekends and holidays. At the end of the day, classrooms are classrooms. There is no reason why charters should be given sweetheart deals to acquire their own building; it adds unnecessary overhead to charters and kneecaps school districts. The $1 law is terrible for its intended purpose.
That has 0 to do with Indiana giving away taxpayer owned property for $1 to these for profit companies
I haven’t heard what happens with the $1.00 school building sold to the for profit charter school that couldn’t be profitable and suddenly shuts down mid school term leaving students and their families stranded and scrambling for a replacement school.