Unlike every-other-week columnist Richard Davis, I’m limited to 250 words per month. So, to refute his position on a lawsuit against I-1240, (Wednesday column, “Dorn should lead, not fight charters”), I can do little more than point readers to charter school discussion on saveseattleschools.blog.
Please visit the blog a time or three to read articles from states that have experience with charter schools. Then consider information local commentators have added about I-1240. Investigate blog participants via their comments on other subjects related to education. Then, if you feel misleading ads swayed voters into false impressions about charter schools, contact OSPI/Randy Dorn to support a lawsuit against I-1240.
Remember California investors paid $6 per signature to put I-1240 on Washington’s ballot. Then five investors put some $10,000,000 into advertising to pass I-1240. They also spent $500,000 to defeat two local legislators opposed to charter schools. Then they advertised this as an initiative by Washingtonians. Really?
Why would out-of-state investors bankroll I-1240 when schools in their own states are failing at a greater rate than ours? Washington schools, after all, have had the nation’s highest SAT scores for the past nine years. Similarly, our dropout rates are lower than those in the investors’ home states.
Supporters of I-1240 claimed 14,000 Washington students drop out each year. This, they said, proved our schools are failing. But supporters didn’t note that transfer of military and business families to other states accounts for many “dropouts.” Nor did they say charter schools would or could be located to specifically serve potential dropouts or students in “failing” schools. Backers left voters to infer that charters are intended to serve failing students.
Perhaps you were fooled into a yes vote on I-1240. You now have a chance to reconsider and rectify that vote. Please take the time to inform yourself and do so.