Overview
With a final vote on the Vikings stadium bill pending, the legislative session will wrap up in the next few days. For charter and ed-reform advocates, the shortened session was somewhat mixed and difficult to get one’s arms around as there were a plethora of controversial bills passed by the Republican legislature and subsequently vetoed by Governor Dayton. Particularly disconcerting to ed-reformers was the Governor’s veto of LIFO (“last in first out”) provision, a bill that would require consideration of teacher performance when making layoff decisions, rather than just seniority. Also vetoed was a GOP proposal to use the surplus to pay back a portion of the shift in school funding.
K-12 education omnibus policy bill: The consensus K-12 education omnibus policy bill, HF 2949, included a lot of disparate provisions including:
- an idea advocated by Joe Nathan at the Center for School Change that would expand PSEO options to encourage 10th graders to take a career and technical course;
- a fix in state law that would require school districts pay teachers on military leave their full salary and other military award modifications;
- a provision for early graduation scholarships;
- a requirement that 35% of a school principal’s evaluation be based on student academic achievement;
- an individualized learning initiative authored by Education Evolving that could serve as the foundation to encourage a Rocketship Education, School of One, or more home-grown schools that are focused on individual learning to launch in Minnesota.

Senate Education Chair Gen Olson, who will be retiring after this legislative session, shepherded her final omnibus education bill.
Charter related items in the bill included:
- a district-charter collaborative provision, strongly supported by CSP, which would potentially create a powerful incentive for school districts and charter schools to work closer together in a collaborative fashion with the goal of increasing student achievement. Minneapolis Superintendent Bernadeia Johnson and CSP Executive Al Fan published an op-ed on Thursday, May 3rd outlining the possible impact of the new legislation.
- Changes in the initial term of authorizer/charter contract from three to five years
More technical or minor charter provisions included:
- Additional charter assessment data on a school’s website.
- Department approved vendors for board training eliminated (board training still required). Must add training info in annual reports.
- Authorizer not allowed to charge more for any other services except those in the contract.
- Technical changes relating to affiliated building corporations.
Several provisions proposed by the Minnesota Association of Charter Schools (MACS) were controversial and did not make it into the final bill — provisions which observers suggested that if implemented, could have diluted the authorizer’s authority and ability to close down chronically low-performing schools or allow the replication of mediocre or poor-performing schools. Specifically, MDE referenced the provisions of changing ‘approval’ to ‘review and comment’ as it related to a supplemental affidavit and change of authorizer, as well as language around dispute resolution (a final version of proposed language would have included any dispute resolution as part of the charter contract with authorizer, however, it was still not included in the omnibus bill). Here is a link to the MACS language.
Charters 2.0: Separately, Charter School Partners introduced Charters 2.0, a bold series of legislative initiatives, which would increase the number of high-performing charter schools in Minnesota. Authored by Rep. Kelby Woodard (R-Belle Plaine), HF 2714, was heard in the House Education Finance Committee and was ‘held over for possible inclusion in other bills’, an action which would have allowed any of the provisions of HF 2714 to be included in other education ‘vehicles’ as the legislative session moved along. Here’s a MinnPost article on Charters 2.0.
Shannon Blankenship, Hiawatha Academies and Eric Mahmoud of Harvest Prep/Best Academy testifying in support of Charters 2.0/HF 2714 at the House Finance Education Committee. Bill author Kelby Woodard also present.
A lively debate was held on the bill’s automatic closure of low performing charter schools provision (Al Fan op-ed) and increasing the pipeline of teachers who have experience in teaching in schools with high populations of poverty in other states to more easily teach in Minnesota’s charter schools. Most notable were the strong letters of support for HF 2714 from both major national charter groups, the National Alliance of Public Charter Schools and the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA), particularly surrounding the auto-closure provision and the charter board election option. Other supporters of Charters 2.0 included MinnCAN, Students for Educational Reform, Students First, the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, the Minnesota Business Partnership, Action for Equity as well as many of CSP’s own Partner Schools.
The one Charters 2.0 issue that got some legs at the end of the session was the option to eliminate the charter board election. Eric Mahmoud’s powerful testimony included remarks that this provision remains a barrier for some of the nation’s top education-reform foundations and funders to invest in the replication of successful charter models like Mr. Mahmoud’s four new Mastery Schools which just received approval from the Minneapolis School Board. In addition, the charter board election is a barrier to attract to the state innovative charter groups like Rocketship Education, who utilize a successful blended-learning model that is closing the achievement gap in communities it serves.
Interestingly, the Minnesota Association of Charter Schools (MACS) opposed and testified against most provisions of Charters 2.0 except for the increased funding provisions. They also opposed the district-charter collaborative language in the K-12 education omnibus policy bill.
As the legislative session wound down and the stadium, tax and bonding bills were front and center, it became clear that except for the consensus omnibus bill, few additional education bills would move forward this session.
However, Charters 2.0 introduced some new and bold concepts that when implemented, will positively impact the quality of charter schools in the state and will help close the achievement gap. As one legislator put it: “Charters 2.0 is a little bill with some very big ideas”. We look forward to continue the discussion of Charters 2.0 over the next eight months and then into the 2013 legislation session.
New coalition of ed-reform/charter-reform groups: Another important development of this year’s legislative session was the coming together of a new coalition of ed-reformers, meeting on a regular basis to discuss and strategize about various legislative initiatives. This loosely knit group that initially galvanized around the alternative teacher certification issue in 2010-2011, really coalesced in a more formal way this session.
In other states, charter advocacy groups play a pivotal role in improving all of public education given the key role charters play in helping close the achievement gap. Similarly CSP’s advocacy mission includes helping shape the discussion statewide on larger systematic reform initiatives, including improving teacher quality, collaboration between districts and charters, mayoral involvement with schools, and more focused efforts to address chronically low-performing schools. We look forward to continuing to be a part of this ongoing discussion.