Over the weekend, the superintendents of Autauga County Schools and Elmore County Public Schools authored a guest opinion column in which they called for the Alabama legislature to “level the playing field” between traditional district schools and public charter schools by giving districts some of the same flexibility as charter schools and by rejecting the $10,300,000 line item for charter schools that passed 31-0 in the Senate’s supplemental education budget last Thursday.
Where We Agree
Our organization, New Schools for Alabama, is a 501c3 nonprofit organization that supports the growth of excellent charter schools in Alabama to ensure that every child has access to a quality public education. We work with districts and public charter schools alike to provide innovative solutions that meet the needs of today’s students. And we agree with the superintendents’ bold contention that the state should make it easier to convert district schools into public charter schools. Families in Alabama clearly want and need more opportunities to attend the school that works best for them, and public charter schools have proven to be an excellent option that remains in high demand.
It is worth noting that Elmore County has been a leader on charter schools among districts in Alabama, having authorized Ivy Classical Academy as the first public charter school to open in Prattville. Today, over 600 students attend Ivy Classical Academy with even more projected next year. And while the authors’ own districts have not yet taken advantage of the state’s conversion charter school opportunity, other districts have.
In 2019, Montgomery Public Schools approved the conversion of three historically underperforming schools in the district into public charter schools, all of which are overseen by the Montgomery Education Foundation, which serves as a local, independent governing board.
And last week, Macon County Schools approved the conversion of D.C. Wolfe Elementary School to D.C. Wolfe Charter School, which will re-open as a conversion charter school in the fall of 2026 in partnership with Tuskegee University.
Where We Disagree
Despite the rapid growth of the charter school movement, over 2,000 students in Alabama remain on waitlists to get into charter schools today. By law, charter schools are open to all on a first-come, first-served basis, but they can only enroll as many students as their charter contract allows. Given the excess demand among Alabama families, we must give charters what they need to continue their success, not starve them of resources.
That is why we strongly disagree with the superintendents’ call for the legislature to reject the supplemental line item for public charter schools.
As the superintendents noted in their column, public charter schools in Alabama do not receive local tax revenue. As such, they are at a grave disadvantage financially. When combining state and local education dollars, every charter school receives less than its local district. On average, charter schools in Alabama receive approximately $2,700 less per student.
Here in Birmingham, the gap between charters and the district is over $4,000 per student due to the absence of local
revenue.
For the last two legislative sessions, the legislature has recognized this disparity and allocated additional resources to help. The line item that passed out of the Senate last week—while critical for charter schools—makes up only a portion of that gap.
When we divide the $10,300,000 line item by the 7,781 students represented in the average daily membership of the charter schools that are included in the supplemental budget, we get a sum of $1,324 per student for each charter school. There is not a single case in the state of Alabama where that line item results in a charter school receiving more money than their local district.
What’s more, the difference in the amount of money charter schools receive is not their only disadvantage—the type of money charter schools receive also puts them at a disadvantage. For districts, local tax revenue is the primary source of unrestricted funds. These unrestricted funds are often used to pay for necessary facility upgrades or for student services that state and federal dollars cannot support.
But because charter schools in Alabama only receive state and federal dollars—which are almost entirely restrictive in nature—they ultimately have even less flexibility in how they spend their money than traditional districts. Therefore, they are utterly dependent on philanthropy to cover such needs. This is neither sustainable nor equitable.
If the goal is truly to “level the playing field,” we must be clear-eyed about how far the scales are currently tipped in favor of traditional districts.
Public charter schools are in increasingly high demand among parents in our state, and they are showing promising early results. Despite being comparatively underfunded, and despite having existed on average for just over 3 years, most charter schools are already outperforming their local district in reading on the state test. This year, 3 of the Top 25 most improved schools in the state were charter schools, even though charters schools make up only 17 of the roughly
1,500 public schools in the state. Until we identify a long-term solution for the absence of local revenue, we need our legislative leadership to continue filling the gap.
Even if it does not completely level the playing field.
Tyler Barnett is CEO of New Schools for Alabama and Russell Raney is CFO of New Schools for
Alabama.