After Florida last year passed a new law allowing for the co-location of certain charter schools in underfilled public schools, families and districts flooded the state with concerns.
As that pressure has grown, and bills to address concerns and even repeal the law have been filed in the Legislature, the Department of Education has proposed changes of its own.
The new rule attempts to address concerns over who is responsible for footing the bill of additional costs and how many applications approved charter school operators can submit. The proposal, now open for feedback, will be voted on at the end of February.
While some took heart at the changes, others were still skeptical.
“It definitely doesn’t go far enough,” Damaris Allen, executive director of Families for Strong Public Schools, said. “It’s deeply disappointing.”
The rules would clarify that schools are only eligible to share space with a charter if they are under 75% of their capacity or have space for at least 400 extra students. A school would also need to have been open for at least four years — a nod to concerns that a School of Hope operator could claim space in new schools that hadn’t yet reached their full use.
It also seeks to define who can become a School of Hope operator.
Only six companies are currently recognized as authorized operators, though several of the 690 applications the state received came from unauthorized charter school operators.
The proposal makes it easier to get authorized, requiring the company to meet one of five requirements, instead of all.
The proposal also states that operators cannot submit more than five proposals to co-locate in a 12-month span. They must come up with a “mutual management plan” with the district including “maintenance services, school safety services, student transportation services, custodial services, nursing services, and food related services.”
Bill Montford, CEO of the Florida Association of District School Superintendents, said it appeared the department heard district leaders’ concerns regarding Schools of Hope, particularly when it came to costs. The current law would allow operators to use space and receive services in public schools without paying.
While some revisions might be needed, Montford called it “a good beginning.”
Hillsborough County School Board chairperson Karen Perez said district staff will review the proposed changes but was heartened that the state took feedback into account. Hillsborough’s board issued a proclamation last fall calling on the legislature to clarify the law.
“I’m just encouraged that the matter is under review and that possible revisions are being explored,” she said.
Senate Democratic Leader Lori Berman of Boynton Beach, who sits on the Education PreK-12 Committee, said she was willing to let the State Board take the first steps on improving the Schools of Hope program, which she hasn’t supported.
If the program continues to cause problems and confusion — such as providers refusing to pay for services because the law says they shouldn’t have to — “that would be something the Legislature could look at.”
Montford said he just hoped the issues were addressed.
“Who makes the changes is less important than getting it done right,” he said
The proposal would make it possible for districts to charge Schools of Hope operators for services, something Pasco County School Board member Megan Harding said she liked. But she noted the contradiction, which allows for “no cost” to the charter school, still exists in the law. She wondered if might lead to lawsuits.
Overall, she believed the rule needed more work.
“I’m all about school choice,” Harding said. “But we’ve got to make sure it’s fair across the board.”
Katie Blaxberg, who chairs the Pinellas County school board’s legislative committee, wished for more clarity.
She noted that the proposal’s 75% capacity rule would not limit Schools of Hope to the areas where they might be most needed.
“They would still be able to co-locate within an A school,” Blaxberg said, noting that the intent of the original law was to provide options for children in low-performing schools.
Gov. Ron DeSantis has repeatedly stated that a School of Hope could only go in a high-need urban area and not just anywhere.
“But the way the rules are written, it can,” Blaxberg said.
Blaxberg also had questions about the provisions relating to fees that districts might charge for services after negotiating with Hope providers. She said she preferred the language promoted by the Florida School Boards Association, which has made fixing the law a priority.
Allen, with Families for Strong Public Schools, said she hopes to see the law repealed. She said the way the rule counts utilization is outdated and doesn’t take into account things like the class size amendment or voluntary preschool.
She worries about how the state will handle issues that arise as a result of co-location.
“They have made it clear they aren’t listening to the serious concerns we have based on the way this has been handled,” she said.
Divya Kumar and Jeffrey S. Solochek are reporters covering education as members of the Tampa Bay Times Education Hub. You can contribute to the hub through our journalism fund by clicking here.
