Cyber charter schools in Pennsylvania would see funding cut under bill passed by the state House
The 104-98 vote, with only two Republicans in favor, sets down a marker on the perennially contentious issue of school funding as state lawmakers work to complete the coming year's state budget for the fiscal year that starts in July.
The bill's $8,000 limit on how much public school districts would have to reimburse the cyber charters was the central piece of the sprawling legislation and would be a boost to the districts and the property tax payers who bear much of the cost of public education in Pennsylvania. There currently is no cap for the districts' payments to cyber charters, an amount now linked to how much districts spent on their own students in the prior year.
Supporters said changes to the cyber charter rules are widely backed among the state's 500 school boards and that cyber school spending has been the subject of critical reviews, including recently by Republican Auditor General Tim DeFoor.
But opponents defended the existing system as a critical lifeline to the students and families that for various reasons have sought alternatives to traditional schools.
The bill's main provisions
The bill would set annual tuition payments from school districts to cyber charters at $8,000 per student, with potential yearly increases. Special education funding would also see changes.
Cyber charters would not be able to maintain cash balances above 12% of their spending and would not be able to provide payments or gifts to parents as incentives to enroll their children.
The bill would bolster disclosure requirements regarding cyber charters' policies, instructional materials and budgets.
It would bar the state Education Department from approving any additional cyber charter schools through the 2029-30 school year. A new Cyber Charter School Funding and Policy Council would be set up to make recommendations concerning enrollment, governance and funding.
What did lawmakers say about it?
During floor debate Wednesday, Rep. Martina White, a Philadelphia Republican, said the measure will 'close real schools, displace real students, strip families of the very choices that they depend on to give their children a chance at success.'
The moratorium would be highly damaging to cyber charters, said Rep. Craig Williams, a Delaware County Republican.
'You limit the number of cyber charters now in existence, you choke off its funding, and eventually you can kill cyber charter. Sixty-plus thousand students in our school system, finding another way to learn, and we're going to choke it off with this bill,' Williams said.
The chair of the House Education Committee, Lehigh County Democratic Rep. Peter Schweyer, enumerated cyber charter spending issues raised in the auditor general's report, including staff bonuses, gift cards, vehicle payments and fuel stipends.
'Gift cards?' Schweyer asked his colleagues. 'We would all get in trouble if we were taking gift cards as part of our compensation.'
The money at stake
Leaders of existing public cyber charter schools say the measure would cut their funding by about $450 million or more across the state, with a third of the total reductions targeting special education student reimbursements.
A Democratic analysis put the figure at more than $600 million.
What are public cyber charter schools?
About 65,000 Pennsylvania students currently attend the state's 14 public cyber charter schools, which are public, nonprofit corporations. They do not have to follow all of the requirements mandated of public schools under state law.
Cyber charter school are considered independent public schools, approved to operate with a 'charter' issued by the Education Department. They use technology to provide much of the teaching. Students usually do not need to attend a physical location beyond certain events, such as standardized testing.
What happens now?
The proposal was sent over to the Republican majority state Senate for its consideration. The bill becomes part of a wider negotiations to determine the budget before lawmakers recess for the summer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
4 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
California Republicans push Democrats on transparency, timeline for redistricting
SACRAMENTO — California's push to redraw the state's congressional districts to favor Democrats faced early opposition Tuesday during legislative hearings, a preview of the obstacles ahead for Gov. Gavin Newsom and his allies as they try to convince voters to back the effort. California Democrats entered the redistricting fray after Republicans in Texas moved to reconfigure their political districts to increase by five the number of GOP members of Congress after the 2026 midterm elections, a move that could sway the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections. The proposed map of new districts in California that could go before voters in November could cost as many as five Golden State Republicans their seats in Congress. In Sacramento, Republicans criticized Democrats for trying to scrap the independent redistricting process approved by voters in 2010, a change designed to remove self-serving politics and partisan game-playing. GOP lawmakers argued that the public and legislators had little time to review the maps of the proposed congressional districts and questioned who crafted the new districts and bankrolled the effort. In an attempt to slow down the push by Democrats, California Republicans filed an emergency petition at the California Supreme Court, arguing that Democrats violated the state Constitution by rushing the bills through the legislature. The state Constitution requires lawmakers to introduce non-budget bills 30 days before they are voted on, unless the Legislature waives that rule by a three-fourths majority vote. The bills were introduced Monday through a common process known as 'gut and amend,' where lawmakers strip out the language from an older pending bill and replace it with a new proposal. The lawsuit said that without the Supreme Court's intervention, the state could enact 'significant new legislation that the public has only seen for, at most, a few days,' according to the lawsuit filed by GOP state Sens. Tony Strickland of Huntington Beach and Suzette Martinez Valladares of Acton and Assemblymembers Tri Ta of Westminster and Kathryn Sanchez of Trabuco Canyon. Democrats bristled at the questions about their actions, including grilling by reporters and Republicans about who had drawn the proposed congressional districts that the party wants to put before voters. 'When I go to a restaurant, I don't need to meet the chef,' said Assembly Elections Committee chair Gail Pellerin (D-Santa Cruz). Democrats unveiled their campaign to suspend the independent redistricting commission's work Thursday, proposed maps of the redrawn districts were submitted to state legislative leaders Friday, and the three bills were introduced in the legislature Monday. If passed by a two-thirds vote in both bodies of the legislature and signed by Newsom this week, as expected, the measure will be on the ballot on Nov. 4. On Tuesday, lawmakers listened to hours of testimony and debate, frequently engaging in testy exchanges. After heated arguing and interrupting during an Assembly Elections Committee hearing, Pellerin admonished Assemblymembers Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) and David Tangipa (R-Clovis). 'I would like you both to give me a little time and respect,' Pellerin said near the end of a hearing that lasted about five hours. Tangipa and the committee's vice chair, Assemblywoman Alexandra Macedo (R-Tulare), repeatedly questioned witnesses about issues that the GOP is likely to continue to raise: the speed with which the legislation is being pushed through, the cost of the special election, the limited opportunity for public comment on the maps, who drew the proposed new districts and who is funding the effort. Tangipa voiced concerns that legislators had too little time to review the legislation. 'That's insanity, and that's heartbreaking to the rest of Californians,' Tangipa said. 'How can you say you actually care about the people of California? Berman dismissed the criticism, saying the bill was five pages long. In a Senate elections committee hearing, State Sen. Steve Choi (R-Irvine), the only Republican on the panel, repeatedly pressed Democrats about how the maps had been drawn before they were presented. Tom Willis, Newsom's campaign counsel who appeared as a witness to support the redistricting bills, said the map was 'publicly submitted, and then the legislature reviewed it carefully and made sure that it was legally compliant.' But, Choi asked, who drew the maps in the first place? Willis said he couldn't answer, because he 'wasn't a part of that process.' In response to questions about why California should change their independent redistricting ethos to respond to potential moves by Texas, state Sen. Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach) was blunt. 'This is a partisan gerrymander,' she said, to counter the impacts of Trump administration policy decisions, from healthcare cuts to immigration raids, that are disproportionately impacting Californians. 'That's what we're talking about here.' Her comments prompted a GOP operative who is aiding the opposition campaign to the ballot measure to say, 'It made me salivate.' California Common Cause, an ardent supporter of independent redistricting, initially signaled openness to revisiting the state's independent redistricting rules because they would not 'call for unilateral political disarmament in the face of authoritarianism.' But on Tuesday, the group announced its opposition to a state Senate bill. 'it would create significant rollbacks in voter protections,' the group said in a statement, arguing that the legislation would result in reduced in-person voting, less opportunities for underrepresented communities to cast ballots and dampens opportunities for public input. 'These changes to the Elections Code ... would hinder full voter participation, with likely disproportionate harm falling to already underrepresented Californians.'
Fox News
5 minutes ago
- Fox News
The Political Battles Over Redistricting and Mail-In Voting
Texas Democrats have returned after fleeing the state earlier this month to prevent the passage of a new Republican-backed redistricting plan, which could add more GOP House seats in next year's mid-term elections. The fight over redrawing congressional maps in the Lone Star State didn't just spark a national debate over gerrymandering but has also motivated California to retaliate with its own redistricting plan that would favor Democrats. Chuck Devore, a Republican executive with the Texas Public Policy Foundation and former California State Assemblyman, joins the FOX News Rundown to discuss the redistricting battles in Texas and California and how they may impact other states' actions and the 2026 Trump has announced plans to issue an executive order aimed at eliminating mail-in voting to 'bring honesty to the midterms.' His statements have reignited the debate over election integrity. Daron Shaw, a member of the Fox News decision desk and polling team and a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, joins the rundown to discuss how mail-in voting in America compares to other countries, the extent of federal government power over elections, and how the issue has become increasingly partisan. Plus, commentary from the Vice President of the Lexington Institute and Military Analyst, Dr. Rebecca Grant. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Bill 180 targets 'home rule,' limits building back stronger after hurricanes
A new hurricane recovery law limits the ability of local Florida governments to control development, even when they're not directly impacted by a storm. Senate Bill 180 is dubbed the 'Emergencies' act, but it has broad implications for development, conservation and storm resiliency. The bill was intended, in part, to support homeowners recovering after disasters by reducing permitting requirements. The law prevents counties, cities and towns from limiting growth in a way that might be seen as 'burdensome or restrictive," and it allows residents and developers to sue local governments if they feel inhibited by growth restrictions, according to the bill. This provision has already played out in many communities around the state, including Stuart, which voted to pause most development last December so it could restructure its zoning codes. SB 180 reversed those changes. 'Totally handcuffing local government leaders from addressing local land use and planning needs is egregious and undermines local government efficacy at its roots,' Stuart Mayor Cambell Rich wrote in a May 14 letter to the governor. What is Senate Bill 180? State lawmakers and Gov. Ron DeSantis approved SB 180, with a single dissenting vote in the Florida House. It went into effect July 1. 'After a storm, Floridians need a clear path to recovery,' the bill's sponsor, Sen. Nick DiCeglie, R-St. Petersburg, said May 2 on the House floor. 'We're fighting for families to focus on rebuilding without additional delays or burdens, especially for those who sustained damage or lost their homes.' However, groups such as The Republican Liberty Caucus decry the bill as 'an attack on Home Rule and local democracy,' and conservationists worry the law prevents communities from building back stronger after hurricanes. One provision prevents local governments from limiting development for a year if a hurricane struck within 100 miles. Another restricts cities and counties from requiring structures to be rebuilt up to flood code if they were severely damaged by multiple natural disasters over time. If a building is damaged up to 50% of its fair market value from a single storm, it must be rebuilt up to code. Under SB 180, if 50% of the structure is damaged from multiple storms over a few years, it doesn't. That would mean a home flooded by Hurricane Ian in 2022 and again by Hurricane Debby in 2024 may not be required to rebuild stronger. 'Governments are responding to what their constituents are asking them to do, which is to help them rebuild after storms so they don't flood again,' said Kim Dinkins, policy and planning director of 1000 Friends of Florida, a nonprofit conservation thinktank. Among its many provisions, SB 180 also: Increases disaster management planning Enhances emergency resource coordination Promotes financial transparency Limits local governments from requiring structures be rebuilt up to code Allows residents and developers to sue local governments over growth restrictions Senate Bill 180 affects hurricane preparedness The 2024 hurricane season devastated many parts of Florida with a trio of hurricanes: Debby, Helene and Milton. Their combined storm surge and intense winds left the entire state under a disaster declaration, with most counties needing individual or public recovery assistance for at least one storm. The Treasure Coast was battered by record tornadoes spurred by Milton, especially in the Spanish Lakes neighborhood. Many buildings not up to code or in flood plains were damaged or destroyed during the storms. However, SB 180 allows some homeowners to rebuild to previous standards without accounting for modern flood codes, such as elevating the building. This has already played out in In Volusia County, where Deltona was issued a pre-suit notice by developers who objected to the city's restrictions on growth as it addressed flooding issues lingering after Hurricane Milton. 'SB 180 hamstrings local governments just as we're seeing more frequent and intense hurricanes and tornadoes,' Dinkins said. Florida law affects controlled growth Orange County spent eight years planning to limit suburban sprawl, conserve undisturbed rural lands and promote affordable housing and walkable areas. The comprehensive plan, titled Vision 2050, was touted as a blueprint for a 'smarter, more sustainable future' by the county. Then, the Florida Department of Commerce sent a letter to the county stating the plan was 'null and void' under SB 180. Multiple counties, including Manatee, Pinellas and Pasco, plan to present at the Florida Association of Counties conference in September to challenge the 'more burdensome or restrictive' amendments in SB 180. 'By undermining local authority, SB 180 puts Floridians at greater risk from flooding, pollution, and unchecked sprawl,' said 1000 Friends of Florida president Paul Owens in a news release. 'We urge lawmakers to act swiftly to repeal these harmful provisions in 2026.' Jack Lemnus is a TCPalm enterprise reporter. Contact him at 772-409-1345, or follow him on X @JackLemnus. This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: 'Attack on home rule': Florida SB 180 law limits local growth planning Solve the daily Crossword
