Negotiating a Steady Course With Charters.

Pioneer contracts between districts and charter schools try to balance the quest for autonomy with the need for accountability

Aboard the Discovery, a ship no bigger than a school bus, 21 adventurers crossed the Atlantic nearly 400 years ago and chartered America's first successful colony: Jamestown, Va. They and their 123 crew mates from two other vessels had come to lay the foundations of independence, autonomy and the opportunity to choose their own destiny--that is, if their pioneering spirits could survive the hardships of hunger, disease and harsh climatic conditions and if they could overcome the conflicts not only with the natives but also those that were sure to erupt amongst themselves.

Today, another charter movement is spreading across the land. Its first pioneers herald from Minnesota in 1991: a group of parents, city officials, private donors and teachers who opened St. Paul City Academy, the nation's first charter school. Since then, about 1,200 charter schools have been created, and another 300 or so are expected to begin this fall.

Charter school authorization laws in 36 states, along with federal funding and bipartisan support in the Congress, have enabled the expansion of charter schools to give families, educators and students greater choice.

Similar to the early colonists, charter school pioneers have overcome numerous challenges, including lack of adequate facilities and funding, great expectations from their sponsors and advocates and conflict from within their own ranks as well as from those who dominated the landscape before their arrival--the teachers' unions. In the 15 states where local school districts carry some measure of sponsoring authority, district leaders and charter school founders have found themselves boarding a common vessel, each with their own baggage but limited navigational aids to weather the often choppy waters of negotiating a strong contract.

What have district leaders learned about developing productive processes and relationships for negotiating successful contracts? How do they balance demands for autonomy from charter founders with the district's need to hold them accountable? What issues threaten to capsize their best efforts? What strategies keep them afloat?

The experiences of school districts in three different states and the navigational tools they have used offer clues on charting a sure and steady course for those involved with existing and future charter schools.

Colorado's Experience

Two years after Colorado passed charter school legislation in 1993, 24 charter schools were operating, almost half of the cap of 50 imposed by the state. In 1997, the legislature removed that limit and by last fall 61 charter schools had opened their doors.

The Douglas County School District, based in Castle Rock, Cob., didn't have a policy or process in place when it received its first charter school application the day after Colorado's charter school law passed. "We did, however, have our values and belief statements in place and a core value was diversity," says Laura Harmon, the school district's liaison for charter schools.

To show support for charter schools, the district funded the first charter school groups at 100 percent of per-pupil operating revenues, even though the state required districts to turn over only 80 percent of the per-pupil aid to charter schools. The district also passed along a portion of capital and insurance reserves so that the first charter schools were operating at a funding level of 105 percent, according to Harmon.

Since then, state law revisions require districts to fund charter schools at 100 percent, but they can withhold up to 5 percent to cover administrative costs. Because of shortfalls in state funding, the district's funding level for charter schools dipped to 103 percent last year.

While charter school and district negotiators sailed fairly smoothly through the funding straits, they encountered rough seas in the area of governance. District…