Inquirer Editorial: Keep tabs on charters

A dispute over the Philadelphia School District's authority to restrict enrollment at a charter school sheds new light on an old problem.

The inherent competition for students and the state funding that comes with them makes it difficult for local districts to objectively oversee charter schools.

The Philadelphia district and the Walter D. Palmer Leadership Learning Charter School are at odds over a crucial issue in the charter movement: expansion. Charters already enroll more than 30,000 city students.

In a lawsuit, the Palmer School has asked Commonwealth Court to force the district to fork over $1.7 million in tuition payments for students it did not get permission to add to its enrollment.

The district has refused to pay up because the school exceeded the enrollment limit of 675 students specified in its charter. The school has nearly 900 students.

State Sen. Jeffrey Piccolo (R., Dauphin) is backing the charter's enrollment-cap challenge. But their case looks weak.

Charters should not be subject to arbitrary enrollment caps that limit opportunities for students who want to flee failing regular public schools. But neither can charters be allowed to grow without supervision and simply demand payment for extra students.

In the best of worlds, the charters and their host districts would cultivate a cooperative relationship that allows them to mutually weigh the impact of a charter's expansion on nearby schools.

That obviously didn't happen in the Palmer School case - yet another sign that charter-school oversight should be shifted to the state Department of Education.

A similar battle erupted in the Chester-Upland District several years ago. A court ruled the district's enrollment cap illegal, but the law has since been changed to give districts more authority.

Pennsylvania is one of the few remaining states that vests charter-school oversight in the host districts. Some critics compare it to requiring Burger King to get permission from McDonald's to open a new restaurant.

If the state doesn't want to get more involved in such decisions, another model would be to place oversight of charters in the hands of an independent entity, perhaps a college or university.

Charters with proven results of excellence should be allowed to expand, and not just when it's time for their licenses to be renewed, which could take years.

Taking charter oversight out of the hands of the local districts could lead to more accountability and more frequent assessments of the charters' academic performance, management, and financial practices. Too often, the level of scrutiny needed has not occurred under district oversight.

There are many good charter schools, but others are rife with mismanagement and corruption. The charters need oversight, and the district must be involved. But it doesn't have to be the overseer.