State board approves controversial Worcester charter school proposal

A SPLIT Board of Elementary and Secondary Education approved a controversial new charter school in Worcester on Tuesday – the first new charter given the go-ahead during Commissioner of Education Jeff Riley’s five-year tenure.  

After a stormy public process in which Worcester education officials and the city’s entire state legislative delegation opposed the Worcester Cultural Academy Charter Public School, which would be operated by the Old Sturbridge Village historical museum, the board voted 7 to 4 to award the charter following a recommendation from Riley in support of the application.

Education Secretary Patrick Tutwiler, offering the first glimpse of the new Healey administration’s approach to charter schools, voted against the proposal, but said his stand should not be taken to “signal a position on future charter applications.”  

The school, which is expected to open this fall, would ultimately enroll 360 students in kindergarten through 8th grade, but would begin with kindergarten through 4th grade classrooms. Proponents pitch the school as a partnership between the school, the national educational nonprofit EL Education, and Central Massachusetts cultural intuitions, providing “a unique learning experience for our proposed student body to access the collections, experts, and resources to provide an engaging learning environment for all students that pushes the boundaries of the four walls of the classroom.”

Worcester Mayor Joe Petty told the board he has serious concerns that charter school’s enrollment will not mirror that of the district school system. 

“My city opens its arms to children from all over the world. Ninety languages are spoken in the Worcester Public Schools by children, staff, and teachers from over 100 different countries,” Petty told the board on Tuesday. “We know this proposed school will not educate the students of our city, it will not educate our English language learners or our special needs students. Our students with autism, Down syndrome, and physical disabilities will not be attending or welcome at this school.”

In explaining his vote, Tutwiler echoed Petty’s concerns, saying the proposal seemed out of step with his educational values of “equity, access, and excellence.” Without experience serving multilingual students or specific research evidence on how the model Worcester Cultural Academy plans to use would serve Worcester’s 30 percent multilingual student body, Tutwiler said, “I do not believe this community is best served by this particular school.”

Charter schools have been lightning rods in Massachusetts since legislators authorized the independent public schools as part of the 1993 Education Reform Act. Charters operate autonomously from district systems, while funded with public dollars at the same level of per pupil spending as the districts where they are located. 

Proponents say they are a valuable school choice option and offer room for innovation in public education. Opponents argue that they are a financial drain on public school systems and often don’t enroll the students with the greatest educational challenges. 

In 2016, voters roundly rejected a ballot question to raise the statewide cap on charter schools, but there remains room under the existing limit to add schools in many communities. 

Stacey Luster, a founding member of Worcester Cultural Academy, testified that the city’s public schools have “taken a turn in the wrong direction,” leading to low MCAS scores, while “most Worcester families can’t afford” its higher-performing private schools. 

Opponents sounded alarms over what they said was evidence that Sturbridge Village was looking to the new school to help stabilize its finances.

Sturbridge Village CEO Jim Donahue wrote in an introductory letter from the Old Sturbridge Village 2022 annual report that the proposed new school and the existing Old Sturbridge Academy Charter School “will provide reliable, contractual revenue to the museum, safeguarding us against fluctuations in uncontrollable factors that impact admission, such as weather and public health.”

Eric Plankey, a student member of the board from Westford who voted against the proposal, said the document referring to revenue benefits of the charter made him “deeply uncomfortable.”

“We’re the board of education,” he said. “We’re here to provide high quality education for the students of Massachusetts. We are not here to provide a financial lifeboat for a museum.”

Joining Tutwiler and Plankey in opposing the proposal were Darlene Lombos, the labor representative on the board, and Mary Ann Stewart, the parent representative. They cited the strong public opposition, purported lack of outreach to community members of color, and concerns about the financial and managerial entanglements between Worcester Cultural Academy, Old Sturbridge Village, and the existing Old Sturbridge Village Academy charter school. 

Worcester school committee members say the school’s management structure, which includes substantial overlap between its proposed board members and the existing Old Sturbridge entities, and CEO Donahue’s statement about academy revenues run afoul of state conflict of interest laws about independent educational oversight and public purpose laws which limit the way public money can be used.  

Riley said that there would be further probing of any financial questions during the charter opening process. 

In a unanimous vote at a special Monday meeting, the Worcester School Committee called upon the State Auditor, Office of the Inspector General, and State Ethics Commission to investigate the financial arrangement between the Old Sturbridge entities. 

Rep. David LeBeouf, of Worcester, pointing to the roughly $7 million that would be redirected from the Worcester Public Schools to the new charter academy, said approving the school would go against the “legislative intent” of the 2019 Student Opportunity Act, which revamped the state’s school funding formula. The massive funding bill, which Healey pledged to fully fund in her first budget, directs investments toward historically underserved districts and populations like English language learners and special education students.

“The application proposes to drain $7 million a year from our 24,000 students, all for enrollment that maxes out at 360, “LeBoeuf said. “This plainly parasitic proposal is meant to see how far [Old Sturbridge Village] can go in taking public money meant for public education.”

Cliff Chuang, DESE’s senior associate commissioner for educational options, said at an informational board meeting on the proposal on Monday night that most charter proposals face unified opposition from municipal leaders and most elected officials. 

Board vice chair Matt Hills said, with a tone of exasperation, that charter proposals are among “certain topics that are treated as though they are existential crises.” Hills pointed out that despite the frequent focus of opponents on district school finances, the state’s charter school law and regulations don’t include the fiscal impact on school districts as a factor to be weighed in evaluating proposals.

“I don’t know what else to say other than the law is the law, the criteria is set out,” Hills said Tuesday. 

After the board vote, Sen. Robyn Kennedy of Worcester called the outcome “disappointing” and voiced support for a Senate bill that would require a report to the state education board on the financial impact on a district of any charter application that is approved.