Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2011 Senate Bill 618: Eliminate charter school cap

Public Act 277 of 2011

  1. Introduced by Sen. Phil Pavlov (R) on September 7, 2011, to eliminate the cap of 150 on the number of charter schools that can be chartered by universities, and allowing all community colleges to authorize charters outside their regular district. Also, to allow regular school districts to contract-out the employment of teachers meeting the same qualifications as regular teachers to a nonprofit or for-profit business. The bill would also eliminate a provision mandating union collective bargaining for charter schools chartered by regular school districts; allow charters to operate the same grade levels at multiple sites; eliminate some restrictions on where charter schools may be located; require more transparency by charter schools; restrict conflict of interest relationships between charter authorizers and school managers; exempt charter schools from property tax; streamline various chartering procedures and regulations, as well as the process for revoking a failing charter school’s charter; and more.
    • Referred to the Senate Education Committee on September 7, 2011.
      • Reported in the Senate on October 4, 2011, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
    • Substitute offered in the Senate on October 6, 2011, to strip out the provision allowing school districts to contract out the employment of teachers. The amendment was to a committee substitute revising various details, also adopted with this vote. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Sen. Rebekah Warren (D) on October 6, 2011, to prohibit charter schools from being run by a for-profit educational management company. The amendment failed 13 to 25 in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Hoon-Yung Hopgood (D) on October 6, 2011, to require charter schools to post their management contracts, service contracts and facility leases and deeds online. The amendment was reconsidered and failed to get a majority in a second vote. The amendment passed 20 to 18 in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Moved to reconsider by Sen. Phil Pavlov (R) on October 6, 2011, to reconsider the vote by which the Hopgood amendment was adopted. The motion passed by voice vote in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Sen. Coleman Young (D) on October 6, 2011, to strip out a provision exempting charter school property from property taxes. Note: Under current law, regular public schools also do not pay property taxes, but their property is not owned by private persons. The amendment failed 18 to 20 in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Glenn Anderson (D) on October 6, 2011, to essentially insert into the bill the contents of Senate Bill 45, which would require schools to adopt a policy prohibiting harassment, intimidation, or bullying based on an enumerated list of factors, including "religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, disability, height, weight, gender identity, socioeconomic status, or any other distinguishing characteristic". The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Hoon-Yung Hopgood (D) on October 6, 2011, to require charter schools to demonstrate student acheivement at least 20 percent higher than regular public schools in the school district where the charter is located. The amendment failed 12 to 26 in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Tupac Hunter (D) on October 6, 2011, to tie-bar the bill to Senate Bill 137, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. SB 137 would require schools to adopt a policy prohibiting harassment, intimidation, or bullying which meets standards specified in the bill, including banning conduct that “motivated by animus or by an actual or perceived characteristic”. The amendment failed 15 to 23 in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

    • Amendment offered by Sen. Hoon-Yung Hopgood (D) on October 6, 2011, to require charter schools to post their management contracts, service contracts, facility leases and deeds online. The amendment failed 19 to 19 in the Senate on October 6, 2011.
      Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  2. Passed 20 to 18 in the Senate on October 6, 2011, to eliminate the cap of 150 on the number of charter schools that can be chartered by universities, and allow all community colleges to authorize charters outside their regular district. The bill would also eliminate a provision mandating union collective bargaining for charter schools chartered by regular school districts; allow charters to operate the same grade levels at multiple sites; eliminate some restrictions on where charter schools may be located; require more transparency by charter schools; restrict conflict of interest relationships between charter authorizers and school managers; exempt charter schools from property tax; streamline various chartering procedures and regulations, as well as the process for revoking a failing charter school’s charter; and more.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  3. Received in the House on October 6, 2011.
    • Referred to the House Education Committee on October 6, 2011.
      • Reported in the House on November 30, 2011, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-4) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
    • Substitute offered in the House on December 14, 2011. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to not eliminate the current charter cap, but exclude from it charters created in a district with one or more failing schools (in the lowest 5 percent). The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to require a public entity that authorizes a charter "cyber school" to annually submit a report "detailing the operation of the cyber school, providing statistics of pupil participation and academic performance, and making recommendations for any further statutory or rule change related to cyber schools and online learning". The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to impose additional restrictions on charter authorizers, and on allowing a charter school to operate more than one facility for students in the same grade. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit raising the charter cap unless two thirds of the legislature and a majority of voters statewise approve a constitutional amendment that would strip-out language in the current constitution allowing tax revenue earmarked to the state “School Aid Fund” to be used for “higher education, and school employees' retirement systems” (House Joint Resolution U). The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. George T. Darany (D) on December 14, 2011, to reduce the "cut" of state school aid funds provided to a charter school that goes to the institution that authorized them and provides oversight for the school. Under current law this is 3 percent, and the amendment would reduce it 1 percent. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. George T. Darany (D) on December 14, 2011, to revise a provision allowing a form of "parent trigger" that potentially forces a conventional school district to authorize a charter. The bill would reduce the number of parents who must sign a petition to trigger this from 15 percent to 5 percent. The bill would leave the current 15 percent in place, unless "at least 10 percent" of the conventional schools the district runs are in the bottom 5 percent performing schools statewide. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Douglas Geiss (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit new charter schools except within one mile of a conventional school that is in the bottom performing 5 percent of schools statewide. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Douglas Geiss (D) on December 14, 2011, to strip-out a provision that repeals a current requirement that employees of charter schools which are authorized by a regular school district automatically fall under the collective bargaining agreement of the district's conventional school employees. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Rudy Hobbs (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit a private education management company contracted to run a charter school from walking out on the contract during a school year. Companies that do would be placed on a state “banned” list and prohibited from getting another charter contract. This is the same as House Bill 5099. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Rudy Hobbs (D) on December 14, 2011, to require more reporting by charter schools that contract with education management companies to run a charter school, and ban a company from walking out on the contract during a school year. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa L. Howze (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit a charter school from operating a second facility for students in the same grades that is more than 20 miles from the first. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa L. Howze (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit charter schools from offering gifts or prizes to encourage students to be present on the "pupil count day" upon which per-student school aid amounts are based. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. David E. Rutledge (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit for-profit education management companies from entering into contracts to manage charter schools. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. David E. Rutledge (D) on December 14, 2011, to make the bill contingent on receipt by state authorities of a report that a "governor’s council on educator effectiveness" is required to submit. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. David E. Rutledge (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit new charter schools from being authorized in a school district with an average graduation rate of at least 75.5 percent. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. David E. Rutledge (D) on December 14, 2011, to strip out a provision that would allow charters to operate more than one school building for students of the same grade. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Thomas Stallworth, III (D) on December 14, 2011, to impose additional restrictions and performance thresholds on which education management companies can be contracted by a charter school board to operate the school. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Thomas Stallworth, III (D) on December 14, 2011, to not exempt a charter school from property tax unless it occupies a building that was previously vacant. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to require charter schools to provide bus service if the regular school district they are in provides it. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to require an authorizing institution to give priority to charter school applicants that plan to operate all high school grades within three years. That is the current law, but the bill would extend it to five years. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to impose restrictions on the use by charter school authorizing institutions on the fees they collect to authorize and oversee the schools' operations. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Rudy Hobbs (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit charter school boards from hiring a private education management company running another charter school that is in the bottom 5 percent of all public schools. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. John Walsh (R) on December 14, 2011, to require a legislative "work group" to be created to make recommendations on improving public schools. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Frank Foster (R) on December 14, 2011, to require that when when deciding whether to allow a new charter school, authorizing institutions must consider (but not necessarily take any action on) additional factors, including the local population, the number of poor-performing conventional schools nearby, and the number of students on nearby charters' waiting lists. Reps. Walsh, Pettalia, Outman and Forlini cosponsored the amendment. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Rogers (R) on December 14, 2011, to impose addtional restrictions on allowing a charter to operate more than one school. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on December 14, 2011, to require charter schools and conventional public schools to post on a website their accredidation status and their "Adequate Yearly Progress" status as defined by the 2001 federal "No Child Left Behind" law. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Deb Shaughnessy (R) on December 14, 2011, to revise the timing of additional reporting requirements the bill would require from institution that authorize public "cyber schools". The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Kurt Heise (R) on December 14, 2011, to allow a charter school in a "designated economic redevelopment area," with a charter that requires it to "foster population density and economic stabilization," to give placement priority to children who live in that area. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Kenneth Kurtz (R) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit new charters in counties of less than 50,000 except in a school district with a miserable student performance record (bottom 5 percent).
      • Amendment offered by Rep. Kate Segal (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit new charters in very small counties, except in a school district with a student performance record (bottom 5 percent). The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Tom McMillin (R) on December 14, 2011, to clarify details of a provision exempting charter schools (which are a form of public school) from property tax. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Tom McMillin (R) on December 14, 2011, to also eliminate a cap on the number of "school of excellence" type charters (which was essentially a device created in the 2010 "Race to the Top" legislative package to very slightly expand the number of charter schools). The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Tom McMillin (R) on December 14, 2011, to phase-in the elimination of the charter cap, with 300 schools permitted through the end of 2012, 500 schools through the end of 2013, and no cap on the number beginning in 2014. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on December 14, 2011, to prohibit members of a charter school's board or their relatives from having a financial interest in a management company hired to run the school. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 14, 2011.
  4. Passed 58 to 49 in the House on December 14, 2011, to eliminate the cap of 150 on the number of charter schools that can be chartered by universities, starting in 2015 (with 300 allowed in 2012 and 500 in 2013 and 2014). The bill would also eliminate a provision mandating union collective bargaining for charter schools authorized by regular school districts; allow charters to operate the same grade levels at multiple sites; eliminate some restrictions on where charter schools may be located; require more transparency by charter schools; restrict conflict of interest relationships between charter authorizers and school managers; exempt charter schools from some property tax; streamline various chartering procedures and regulations, as well as the process for revoking a failing charter school’s charter; and more.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  5. Motion by Rep. Jim Stamas (R) on December 14, 2011, to give the bill immediate effect.
  6. The motion failed 56 to 51 in the House on December 14, 2011, to give the bill immediate effect. This vote means the new charter school provisions won't go into effect until the start of April, 2012.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  7. Received in the Senate on December 15, 2011, to concur with the House-passed version of the bill, which phases-out over three years the cap of 150 on the number of charter schools that can be authorized by state universities. Up to 300 charters would be allowed in 2012, 500 in 2013 and 2014, and the cap would disappear completely in 2015. Passed 22 to 16 in the Senate on December 15, 2011.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  8. Signed by Gov. Rick Snyder on December 20, 2011.

Comments

Re: 2011 Senate Bill 618 (Eliminate charter school cap; allow “privatized” teachers )  by MichiganVoter on December 21, 2011 

ItMatters,


First of all, charter schools do not threaten me. Nor did I suggest that they were not public schools. However, here are some facts from my experience. 1. Charter schools do not have to operate under the same rules as regular public schools. They do not have to accept everyone who shows up like regular public schools nor do they have to keep them. Charter schools also do not have to do the same amount of documentation regarding student progress that the regular public schools do nor do they have to do much about proving what they are doing to improve student progress. 2. I work in special education so I routinely get IEPs from the schools the kids are coming from. I have yet to find an IEP from a charter school that is even halfway toward being well written. 3. There have been several families that have left the district to go to charters and, guess what, about 75% of them return. 4. I have no problem with "competetion" if it is a fair one. Make the charter schools follow the same rules, prove their results, take everyone who shows up and keep them like the regular public schools do and provide the same services.



Re: 2011 Senate Bill 618 (Eliminate charter school cap; allow “privatized” teachers )  by lsloan on December 19, 2011 

After the bill has passed, I've learned that high-performing charter schools were never subject to the cap anyway.  If a charter school could demonstrate that they were giving their students the best education possible and the students in that school received good grades (presumably that's judged by their scores on standardized tests), then the state would allow the school to open additional locations, etc.


I feel that organizations like MAPSA gave very little information about this issue on purpose, so that they could urge everybody to contact their representatives about it.  I just wonder why MAPSA would do this.  Why would they want the cap removed from poorly performing schools?  Is it truly to promote competition?  I think the real purpose is monetary or political.  Look at the vote results.  Only Republicans voted for it, yet education is something that I wouldn't expect to be polarized along party lines.  Something is wrong here.


My representative pointed out that 75% of Michigan charter schools are performing below average.  The charter school my son attends has always been excellent, so I assumed all charter schools would be.  I can see now that I was wrong.


I hope Gov. Snyder vetoes this bill.  If it passes, I hope legislators will work to make charter schools and public schools equally accountable for the quality of education they offer their students.



Re: 2011 Senate Bill 618 (Eliminate charter school cap; allow “privatized” teachers )  by sammyv on December 19, 2011 

You have some good points here but we need to see the whole picture. The new bill will encourage a better quality of education and we do need better quality by all means. Our students pay so much to go through college and at the end of this cycle they have a really hard time to find the jobs they were trained for. My daughter recently got her online degree business administration, she went for this option because she found it more affordable and I realize now that she made a good choice since the quality of her education is up to the current standards.



View More pre-2013 Comments.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.