In a victory for schools with Los Angeles Charter, a judge canceled a unified policy in Los Angeles who would have prevented the charters – the school of choice for 1 out of 5 public pupils – from using the class space in nearly 350 campuses.
Politics, which should come into force when the new school year opens in three weeks, had indeed prevented schools from Charter from going to campuses with certain designations – including those with a special program for black students, unprofissed “priority” schools and community schools, which have enveloping services to meet the needs of students and families inside and outside the class.
In total, some 346 campuses – out of approximately 1,000 – would have been prohibited from the charters, which are public schools managed in private.
The decision invalidated the key elements of a high -level school district policy that was supported by a majority of the board of directors “But was vigorously fought by charters who declared that she had refused them access to the state to space in public school installations.
“This is a victory for all families of public schools and a critical assertion of the rights of public school students in Charter in Los Angeles,” said Myrna CastrejonChairman and chief executive officer of California Charter Schools Assn., Who filed the dispute against Los Angeles Unified and his board of directors.
“We are grateful that the court recognized that the blatant attempt of Lausd to exclude the students of the public school in Charter to learn alongside traditional students of the district schools in the communities which they share the Californian law violent,” said Castrejón.
There are 235 charters at the Unified, more than any other school system in the country.
The judge of the Stephen I. The unified will always be able to restrict the location of the charters according to safety or capacity problems.
“We are very satisfied with most aspects of the court decision,” the statement said. The Charter Association “considerably Malfrère the clear language of the policy and the decision of last month. We remain firmly determined to serve the best interests of all the students of our school communities while continuing to comply with our legal obligations. ”
The school district has not decided to challenge the decision.
The battle on access to schools lasts decades – with a trace of prosecution. However, in the 1990s, before this legal acrimony, the schools in Charter offered the Unified an escape valve for traditional overcrowded public schools. But Charters met the Union and other political oppositions when they have exercised their legal right to use these crowded public school campuses. The charters are mainly non -unionized and receive public funding by student as traditional students of the California public school.
The growth of the charter, the affordability of the housing, the lower birth rates and the drop in immigration have Pushed down the unified inscriptionThis decreased by around 50% compared to its peak. Theoretically, the space in class should be available for everyone, but the competition for a smaller number of students remains intense.
And, supporters of traditional schools say that their campuses need more space to use a wide range of programs that help students succeed. They say that the old formula to determine what can be given to the charters is unfair and undermines their work – in particular the important efforts of the Black students success planPriority schools and community schools.
But many charter schools are also designated by the state community schools And the unified has taken no action to protect their special status and mission.
Although registration has decreased more quickly in schools managed by the district, the charters have also closed or consolidated with fewer students to go around.
The decision arrived at a particularly difficult period for charters and campuses operated by the district.
The Trump administration – although it is pro -Charte – has scrambled the equation. Charter schools and the school district linked arms to defend immigrant students and their families. And federal budget cuts affect all public schools.
“You are looking at federal funding … probably disrupted, which has an impact on some of our highest children,” said Amy Held, executive director of the Larchmont Charter School. And the federal immigration application “Impacted attendance. It’s touched graduation ceremonies. There is just a palpable fear, I think, which is not healthy for anyone. »»
In this shared crisis, said the vice-president of the Charter Association, Keith Dell’quila. “The district was a good partner of our schools and our families … if it helps to share and amplify resources, [or] be ready to make calls and consult. »»
What the law says
California Law gives schools to Charter the right to public school facilities which are “reasonably equivalent” to those available for other students of the public school. The law also sets up a process by which charter schools can request a space and pay rent in school districts.
The Unified’s policy, which the Board of Education approved from 4 to 3 in 2024, “prioritizes the district schools from schools to Charter and is too vague,” concluded Goorvitch in a decision of June 27. “As far as possible, the needs of the school in Charter must have the same consideration as those of schools led by the district.”
The charter leaders feared that, with so many restrictions, they would be expelled from the communities and forced to bring their schools out of two or more district campuses, rather than keeping their body student in the same place.
An analysis of school staff has validated some of these concerns.
“This could considerably limit the number of TK-12 school sites which could potentially be twinned to fulfill the legal obligations of the district,” said the analysis. “It is likely that there will be more multi-site offers … This can also result in an increase in costs associated with renovation work to prepare sites for colocation, and would probably make more difficult for the district during” reasonable efforts “to locate the school with a” near “charter where he wishes to locate”.
Critics of the Charter are opposed to the legal obligation imposed on public school districts to share the campus space, which was created by proposal 39 approved by voters in 2000. They note that compulsory campus sharing was an incited provision to proposal 39, which was presented mainly to reduce the threshold to adopt school obligations approved by voters.
Under proposal 39, the charters cannot be excluded from campuses or simply offered to the campus space.
The sharing process is heavy and must be restarted each year. Over time, most charter schools have taken other measures. Some have negotiated multi-year sharing agreements with the unified.
For the 2015-2016 school year, the unified Received 101 requests. For the 2025-2026 school year, the district received 38 requests – a huge drop, but still a number representing more than 9,300 students. Six of these charters will have to operate on more than one district site.
